But that is not at all what I intended to write. What prompted to me to write this post, kind of ironically considering the few convictions I do have, is a television show. I just watched the first episode of this season of So You Think You Can Dance, and it was such a heartening experience. My family loves shows like Survivor and American Idol. In fact, they watched the finale of American Idol last night (along with the rest of the world). I caught about two minutes of it before I couldn't handle anymore and retreated to my room to watch a fantastically awful movie with Mark Wahlberg from his Marky Mark days. I am constantly astounded and disgusted with the American public (myself included) when I see the hype surrounding things like this. When it boils down to it, these shows are not about real talent and love of the artist's craft, but about spectacle and that ugly desire for fame inside each of us. That's where So You Think You Can Dance is different. Maybe I would see things differently if I were a dancer instead of a musician, but this show (and the discipline of dance, with some exceptions) seems to truly appreciate and reward subtlety and sincerity. I think the reason it comes out so much in dance is that it's something you can't fake. It is nearly impossible to audition for So You Think You Can Dance without years of training and dedication. And not just a half-hour voice lesson once a week, which is what some people I know would consider "training" for a singer, but hours every day. You can see in these dancers that dance consumes their lives. They literally put every ounce of themselves fully into their craft and their passion. It is immediately clear to everyone watching when a dancer does not have training or does not take their art seriously. Subtlety and sincerity come along almost as a result of the sheer dedication it takes to train to be a dancer. In contrast, anyone with "pipes" can audition for American Idol and "make it." It's not about a lifestyle or an art, it's about entertaining and spectacles. I think the key difference here is that dance, by its nature, must be for the dancer. Not the attention that it draws, but the dance itself. As much as I hate to say it, as a singer, singing as a profession is usually for the crowd, not the singer. We are told and shown that the reward in the arts comes from the response to the work, not the work itself, which I think is a load of world-destroying bullshit, frankly.
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that I'm incredibly saddened when I see what is becoming of the arts as the world globalizes and technology makes cultural icons universal. I really hope that the discipline of dance never loses its inherent sincerity and beauty. I really think that the greatest boons of all the arts are the same, but manifest in different ways: sincerity and subtlety. Whether it's dance, the fine arts, music, or writing, the most sublime work is always the work in which the artist fully commits every bit of himself. That is what I strive for in my disciplines of music and writing, and it's incredible and really inspiring to see these things in so many dancers. I think dance is the only art left where you can't really "sell out" to "make it big," and I hope it always stays that way.
