|
|
 |
| |
Burlesque show must go on
Proud Gallery and other Camden venues have been told to drop burlesque acts. Here showgirl Miss Vicky Butterfly admits to being baffled as to how she could be breaking the law
I AM a burlesque showgirl and performance artiste. You could say that, like many girls, I am naturally drawn to the aesthetic, and that it’s been a source of joy for me to be able to explore ideas, costume and story in any way I see fit as long as it’s entertaining.
So I was very pleased when a couple of years ago I was asked to curate and perform at a club night in Camden held in an art gallery. It felt as if others also appreciated my performances in the manner in which they were intended: entertainment (hopefully), sensual (possibly), risqué (probably) and art (certainly)!
So I was surprised when I received notice for myself and performers to cease: it seemed that although my performance art form is deemed eligible for Equity membership, Camden Council deem it suitable only to be performed in “Sex Encounters Legislated”' venues only.
I read and reread the relevant legislation, but nowhere could I see anything that looked like it might be applied to our work. So I was baffled as to why I was being told I was contravening this law. The law classifies an “adult” display and nudity as the exposure of genitalia, including nipples, and this is not even considered an option in burlesque. In America burlesque even has an official rating. PG-13. I did offer to make sure that all routines by all performers were covered to a degree as agreed with the council. I was willing to make sure that all performers wore full lingerie, clothing or bodysuits at all times, an offer which was rejected.
The council took the view that any removal of clothing to any degree, they considered to be “adult” in nature: suited only to a “sex encounter” establishment. Although risqué, the roots of burlesque lie firmly within theatre, satire and art.
Striptease can be an element that’s included, but is by no means all there is to it. Personally, I don’t feel that my work can be considered sexual in theme or execution. I say striptease, and I mean striptease, not stripshow.
It feels like we are being judged on what we are in fact not showing, in a way that a theatre production like Guys and Dolls wouldn’t be.
It has been many, many years since the government has deemed it their duty to censor what is and is not acceptable within art. The naked body is one of the most frequent motifs in western art, and certainly a recurring theme of performance art.
Why, in an entertainment context, are we seen to be violating the law even if we don’t show as much of the body? Is art and theatre not allowed to be sensual or erotic as well as improving and interesting?
The human body is a thing of beauty, and a tool for dance, drama and satire: and we seek to celebrate it, not exploit it. Many women have started performing as amateurs for fun and as a means of empowerment.
It makes me sad to feel that it seems to be suggested that we should be ashamed of performing with our bodies as we see fit.
Burlesque has a long tradition of comedy, variety and provocation (whether that be sensual, political or intellectual).
It can be argued that some may find any possible level of striptease involved (its whole purpose often a way of showing layers of story, character or a peculiar sort of paraphilia [fetish] enjoyed mainly by women) neither amusing, grotesque or beautiful but solely sexy. Each to their own. My work is not designed expressly to arouse: but many people find even fairly ordinary things arousing - from bridges to rock music! But no one bans rock music just because it turns a few people on. It’s an irrelevance. And sensuality and eroticism are different from sexual display or vulgarity. Overt sexuality is everywhere, so perhaps the implied is held to have a more dangerous pull?
One of the objections given was that we would be sending out aroused men to roam the streets where they might pose a threat to women.
Given that my fans tend to be 71 per cent female, and many of the males who attend my shows (and indeed most burlesque events) are either gay or there with their partners, this is a strange claim!
Some of my acts can be seen performed in their entirety in music videos on MTV, a body well known for its censorship on many issues from cigarettes to alcohol to, yep you’ve guessed it, nudity and sexual implication. Doesn’t seem fair does it?
True, it may seem to be a grey area, but it would be a shame for a council that has always prided itself on supporting the arts (and indeed paid for my training) to let performers with so much to give slip through the cracks because they refuse to recognise us as artists.
Camden has a long history of supporting burlesque and Vaudeville: A young Charlie Chaplin cut his teeth at the Palace Theatre (now Koko), where the Goon Show was also recorded for some time. And it’s been back in a big way for some time with elaborate productions such as Miss Behave’s Variety Nighty at the Roundhouse and The Tease Show at Koko.
In most other countries there seems a more natural distinction between, say, the showgirls of the Moulin Rouge (far more naked than myself and my colleagues) and the strip-bars, so it baffles me why we here in London cannot make a similar differentiation.
It seems a shame that an often thought-provoking form that you can see celebrated in shows such as La Clique, now seems to be faced with being limited to an environment that is not appropriate for it within the borough of Camden, or seen only in élite members clubs.
And the solution?
Well, I don’t feel that there should need to be one, as we do keep to the letter and spirit of the law.
Perhaps we may return to the Victorian “fleshings” or the 1950s triangle bra? If we are allowed even that.
Or perhaps we should be given a licensed venue that is appropriate to our art so we can continue developing our craft to an even higher standard and greater audience, and perhaps even enhance Camden’s reputation as “the Arts council”?
|
 |
|
|
|
YOUR COMMENTS:
Nice! I'm gonna make my own blog
Tusyhads |
| |
|
|
|
