|
|
 |
| |
Burlesque performers outside the Town Hall, from left, Misti Vine, Ruby Rose, Chiquita Bonita and Lola Labelle |
Burlesque dancers in ‘victory’ after march
BURLESQUE performers claimed to have forced Camden’s licensing chiefs into a rethink yesterday (Wednesday) afternoon, as flustered officials came face to face with a pack of raunchy dancers.
There were colourful scenes at the Town Hall as more than 70 corset-wearing performers marched from Covent Garden to the council’s offices in King’s Cross, demanding that officials reversed a decision to class burlesque as “adult entertainment” – putting them in the same bracket as full nude strippers and lap-dancers.
Sam Roddick, daughter of the Body Shop founder Dame Anita Roddick, led the protest with placards proclaiming “Tease not Sleaze”. Ms Roddick was among protesters who demanded a meeting with licensing chiefs and after more than an hour of talking to a senior official, an agreement was reached to re-define the scantily clad art form again.
Ms Roddick called the decision a “massive victory”, adding: “Camden’s job is not to penalise a genre. They ultimately admitted that they didn’t have a clue what burlesque was, that they were uninformed and uneducated, that they hadn’t seen it. We congratulate Camden Council for acting reasonably.”
The U-turn means burlesque dancers will be able to perform “as they mean to” without requiring a special licence if stripping and nudity are not going to be involved in their act. But venues have been ordered to take more responsibility for the acts they book.
Traffic was brought to a standstill on Tottenham Court Road as the march gathered pace. A woman dressed as a vagina posed with police officers and builders appeared at every corner to cheer the protest on as vans honked in appreciation.
Ms Roddick decried the council as “pimps” for making money out of the “adult” classification of burlesque artists – referring to the cost of licences.
Ruby Rose, a burlesque performer and the founder of the Burlesque Women’s Institute, said, “Banning burlesque is as un-British as banning Benny Hill or the bowler hat.”
A Town Hall spokeswoman said: “Our focus is on the premises – not the performers. Burlesque performance in its widest form can include various art forms and this alone would not require a licence.
“The council’s concern is with any performance which may involve nudity.
“The council has met with the burlesque community in response to their concerns and agreed to seek a clearer understanding of what constitutes adult entertainment.” |
 |
|
|
|
Your comments:
|
| |
|
|
|
