by Henry Alford
Thank you for downloading this Simon & Schuster ebook.
* * *
Get a FREE ebook when you join our mailing list. Plus, get updates on new releases, deals, recommended reads, and more from Simon & Schuster. Click below to sign up and see terms and conditions.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP
Already a subscriber? Provide your email again so we can register this ebook and send you more of what you like to read. You will continue to receive exclusive offers in your inbox.
CONTENTS
Introduction
Social Entrée
Politics
Rebellion
Emotion and Release
Pure Physicality
Religion and Spirituality
Nostalgia
Intimacy and Socializing
Healing
Epilogue
Acknowledgments
About the Author
INTRODUCTION
CAN YOU REMEMBER THE FIRST time you ever danced? Most of us cannot.
I mean, it’s entirely possible that you or I boogied down while we were still in the womb, as Isadora Duncan claimed she did, maybe gently roiling our mother’s amniotic fluid with a tiny, Fosse-esque shoulder isolation.
Or maybe it was more high-minded. Maybe, like Fred Astaire, we speculatively put on a pair of ballet slippers at age four to kill time while waiting for our irritatingly talented older sister to finish her dance class.
Or maybe we used a gardening implement to stun a small visitor—as Twyla Tharp did a rattlesnake at eleven or so, creating what she considers her first “dance”—and thus yielded a densely layered critique of man’s effort to achieve dominance in the face of unnecessary slithering.
But it’s all a little hazy.
However, I can remember the first time that I actively enjoyed dancing. Come with me now to suburban Worcester, Massachusetts, to a sunshiny Saturday afternoon in 1975. Behold my thirteen-year-old self, all boyish enthusiasm and buckteeth as I whiz past you on the street; savor the utter awesomeness of my bright orange Schwinn and its Naugahyde banana seat. That single bead of sweat on my brow? It may not be purely the result of strenuous bicycling. You see, I’m going to a girl’s house and, anxious to convince myself that I’m heterosexual, have seemingly rendered my stomach a breeding ground for gossip-dispensing hummingbirds. Indeed, I had recently trimmed the plastic tassels hanging down from my bike’s handlebars from five inches to two: a bold attempt to advertise my startling masculinity.
My classmate Carolyn had just bought the groovetastic Earth, Wind & Fire single “Shining Star,” and she and our mutual friend Dorothy had invited me over to listen to it.
On arrival, I was surprised to learn that, while listening to the song, the girls had been practicing something I’d never heard of, a “line dance.” Lion dance? Lyin’ dance? My head teemed with possibilities, all of them potentially injurious to my air of short-tasseled machismo.
What alien forces allowed me to enjoy this session with Carolyn and Dorothy in a way that I’d not enjoyed previous dancing? I’m not 100 percent certain; I’m still working my murder board. But I’ve got two suspects. First, here was dancing proposed by a peer, not by a parent or teacher. Second, here was irresistible music.
The opening of “Shining Star” is an inviting tangle of what some would call “wet” bass notes: they’re so reverberant and fuzzed that you can almost see them twist out of your speakers like a strand of DNA. This exciting jumble is followed by a sudden jagged rock face of horns. Then, before the lyrics proper begin, we get a string of invocations and greetings (“Yeah! Heyyy? Huh!”), the effect of which is to make the listener feel like he or she has arrived at the most honey-soaked, superfunkadelic part of the universe.
The line dance that Carolyn and Dorothy taught me was that conglomeration of mid-seventies grapevining and hand clapping, the Bus Stop—an assembly line of fun that features less flapping than the Funky Chicken but more dignity than the Bump.
It did not look like anything I had ever seen at a bus stop. Also, it felt like a shit-ton of choreography to me. But the fact that we stood shoulder to shoulder while dancing meant that we didn’t have to look at one another, which hugely reduced the potential embarrassment. Dance is often a form of sexual sublimation, particularly if you are thirteen and in the darkish basement of a cute person whose hair smells like strawberries.
Moreover, the part of the Bus Stop where you tap your heels together twice was hilarious to us: it was so dorky and awkward-looking that any thoughts we might have developed about looking good were quickly siphoned off into a beaker called Comedy. Months later, when we ran into one another in the hallway at school, we’d each do the heel tap in the manner of a secret handshake. Like the signature move from the Hustle that John Travolta would immortalize in Saturday Night Fever two years later (point right index finger to left of left foot, then point same as far up and to the right of your head as possible), the heel-tapping was the part of the dance that you could really make a meal of. It was the part through which you could let the world know that your orientation was primarily ironic. If you crooked your elbows while tapping heels, you rendered your body particularly poultry-like, as if your feathers had been plucked and now your margarine-yellow carcass was dangling from some car’s rearview mirror.
Yes, please.
* * *
I bring all this up not because I’m interested in smothered teenage sexuality (well, maybe a little), but rather because I’m intrigued in an anthropological sense by how the function of our Bus Stopping shifted. While boogying in Carolyn’s basement, our movement was a way for the three of us to mediate in an unthreatening way the tangle of hormones swirling through our bodies: dance moves as flirtation. But at school when we three—and, gradually, three or four other classmates joined us in this—did the heel tap and the poultry arms, we were forming a group or private club: dance moves as insiderism. Then, thirdly, I remember later sitting on a bench at school one afternoon for a top-secret consultation with a classmate, and him signaling to me the oncoming presence of our teacher by tapping his heels together: dance moves as baby cam.
Of all the arts, dance is the most porous and adaptable. If words are the way that humans pinpoint and define experience, then it makes a certain kind of anti-sense that pure, wordless movement is a universal language. With the exception of certain gestures that some cultures find impolite or wanton, most physical movement is readable around the world: if, while standing in a busy intersection in Boston or Beijing or Abu Dhabi, you put your hands up in the air and start shimmying your shoulders and clapping rhythmically, most bystanders can figure out that you’re not having trouble hailing a taxi.
Even better, though, is the fact that this universal language has crazy range: dance can relax you or whip you into a frenzy; it can be wholly instinctive or utterly self-conscious, fancy or down-and-dirty, mild or strenuous, communal or private. For some people, it’s a spaceship: “To dance is to be out of yourself. Larger, more beautiful, more powerful,” wrote Agnes de Mille, who changed American concert dance with her “cowboy ballet,” Rodeo, in 1942 and who changed musical theater with her choreography for Oklahoma! a year later. For others, dance is a battle cry. As Gillian Lynne, the British ballerina who went on to choreograph Cats and Phantom of the Opera, puts it, “Nipples firing!”
Sometimes dance is a few different things at the same time. Consider the viral Running Man Challenge videos of 2016. Started by two New Jersey teenagers and then made popular by a pair of University of Maryland basketball players, the Challenge saw groups of people filming themselves doing variations of the street dance the Running Man to the song “My Boo” by Ghost Town DJ’s. The meme spread to the NFL and the NBA, where it
proved a winningly madcap way for groups to bond with one another, and maybe also to flex their collective muscles so as to psyche out the competition.
But when the Challenge then spread to police departments—who, at the time, were under fire for their treatment of minorities, with several controversial killings being much discussed in the media—the dance was working on a political level, too. “Yes, we’re occasionally malignant, possibly racist defenders of justice,” you could almost hear these uniformed officers telling us, “but we’re not immune to the charms of precision choreography!”
* * *
“Dance is less easily pigeonholed than the other arts,” Richard Powers, the Stanford University dance historian, told me in September 2016. I was sitting at his dining room table, high on a hill about ten minutes north of Palo Alto, and the boyishly handsome Powers had grown reflective. He told me, “But I don’t think we can afford to sit in an ivory tower and talk about abstract ideals of the art form when we have such pressing problems and such a high degree of intolerance in the world right now.”
We were two months away from the presidential election, and it was not uncommon to fall into conversation with strangers about police brutality or Donald Trump’s proposed ban of Muslims.
I asked Powers to explain his comment.
Powers, who has taught historic and contemporary social dancing for forty years all over the world, started telling me that he sometimes lures potential dancers into the fold by emphasizing to them how social dance can make its participants succeed in the marketplace. “It’s a good entry point,” he told me. “They think, Okay, this is something I need.”
In his book, Waltzing, cowritten with Nick Enge, Powers cites a 2010 scientific study which showed that NBA players who touch one another more in the early season subsequently score more baskets than players who touch less. Testing for causation, the authors of the study concluded that physical touch leads to cooperation and bonding.
Powers told me that to gracefully pull off one of the waltzes or polkas he specializes in, dancers need certain things. “They need to have respect for others on the team—they need to want their dance partner to win. Also, deep listening. And quick adaptability. All three of those are key in social social dancing, not competitive social dancing. And all three build empathy. Then, after practicing for weeks and weeks, all this stuff starts to become second nature to you. Dancers start to value one another’s differences—they find difference and think, This is good, I can learn from this.”
I tried to imagine Donald Trump looking at a dance partner’s chador and thinking, Modesty. The only quality missing from my quiver of charms is modesty.
Powers looked out his living room window at a low-flying bird.
When he returned his gaze to me, he unpinned his grenade: “This is what our future leaders can take out into the world to defuse aggressive intolerance.”
* * *
There’s that ever-shifting nature of dance again: an unsuspecting Stanford student enrolls in one of Mr. Powers’s classes, perhaps hoping to become more graceful or to find a mate or to learn what in hell a “progressive twinkle” is, and then, months later, Powers sends that student off into the world, a silent warrior with an invisible lightsaber that defuses aggressive intolerance.
What’s going on here? Not to go all grandpa on you, but it’s tempting, if admittedly a little far-fetched, to note that dance is one of the oldest arts, and thus to surmise that maybe all those extra years of existence have somehow enabled dance to become increasingly porous, to take on more meanings. But maybe a more fruitful tack to take here is to acknowledge that dance, and the reasons that we dance, are usually a reflection of the environment we’re situated in. At your neighbor’s eighty-fifth birthday, you might do some delicate touch-dancing, perhaps prompted by a desire to celebrate a life or by a desire to work off some cake-derived calories. But when you shimmy at a rock concert, you’re more likely a slave to the rhythm, or someone looking to reap the maximum amount of fun from a $100 concert ticket.
The dynamic is even more pronounced with professional dancers. Take, for instance, Katherine Dunham, the dancer-choreographer and anthropologist who’s been called “the matriarch and queen mother of black dance.” In 1924, when she was growing up in the suburbs of Chicago, for her Methodist church Dunham organized a cabaret, complete with dance numbers, as a fundraiser: dance as community-building. A few years later, while a student at the academically rigorous University of Chicago, she decided to major in anthropology and focus on the dances of the African diaspora: dance as intellectual endeavor. In the 1940s and ’50s, while touring with her eponymous dance company, she had frequent run-ins with racial discrimination which prompted her to become an outspoken activist: dance as political prism.
Or look at Louis van Amstel, the Dutch ballroom champion and Dancing with the Stars regular. “Dance has meant so many different things to me in the course of my career,” he once told a fitness magazine. “At first, all dance meant to me was nothing, because my grandparents wanted me to dance. It wasn’t my choice.” Then, another color: “After doing my first competition a while later it lit up a fire for me which made me see dance as a sport. It became about winning.” A third: “Because of my growing up with alcohol abuse from my parents and their unhappy marriage, I used dance as therapy. I could express my feeling through dance, but didn’t have to share my personal feelings with anyone. If it weren’t for dance I probably would have ended up becoming an addict myself.”
* * *
In the upcoming pages, I’m hoping to canvass some of the more compelling roles that dance plays in this country. There are dozens that I won’t be able to tackle, but rather than try to pick the functions that are the most representative, I’m going to concentrate on those I find the most interesting.
I’m intrigued, and maybe spurred on, by the fact that all the versatility and utility that I’m ascribing to dance flies in the face of some people’s view of the art. Many scholars relegate dance to second-class status among the arts. They usually do this because they think it’s a kind of theater, or because it often relies on music (indeed, dance and music are so intertwined for sub-Saharan Africans that many of the region’s indigenous languages don’t have separate terms for them, though they have a variety of ways to describe specific techniques or styles). This condescension is passed on to generation after generation via cultural osmosis: when I was little, I thought ballet dancers walked on their tippytoes so they wouldn’t wake the audience.
I’m also partly fueled by the idea that dance, unless it’s filmed, is “the art that vanishes.” We tend to overlook this fact today: 2005 saw not only the debut of YouTube, but also of Dancing with the Stars and So You Think You Can Dance. But many dances created before the advent of film or video are lost to us because dance is so notoriously difficult to notate. Which makes me wonder if maybe all the versatility I’m seeing is a hedge against ephemerality. I mean, if you had owned your own indie coffee shop in the mid-nineties and seen glimmers of the Starbucks behemoth on the horizon, your instinct to diversify in the face of opposition might have led you to the thoughts “lending library” or “something really interesting with the bathroom.”
Dance performs another kind of vanishing act, too. Every few decades, tap dancing seems to fade from the national scene; as comedian Louis C.K. says in one of his routines about his nine-year-old daughter, “She takes tap-dancing class. We started her with tap dancing because we figure, by the time she grows up, it’ll be the 1930s again. She’ll have this thing that she can do. That nobody enjoys watching.” When the American appetite for swing dancing started to evanesce at the beginning of the 1960s, the spectacular dancer and teacher Frankie Manning, one of the inventors of the Lindy Hop, was forced to take a job at the post office, where he stayed for more than thirty years until the idiom was revived.
Or look at Jennifer Homans’s Apollo’s Angels. Considered the definitive history of ballet, the 2010 book bodies forth som
e 550 pages of inspiring and beautifully orchestrated coverage of the classical art before Homans inches her proverbial Ford Thunderbird up to the edge of the cliff for this big finish: “After years of trying to convince myself otherwise, I now feel sure that ballet is dying.” Today’s dancers, she writes, “seem crushed and confused by [ballet’s] iconoclasm and grandeur, unable to build on its foundation yet unwilling to throw it off in favor of a vision of their own.”
Thud. Tiny cloud of dust at canyon’s bottom.
* * *
I should admit that I have a horse in this race. As a writer who specializes in participatory journalism, I’m often paid to enter new worlds, to live briefly in them, and then to type up a clear-eyed dispatch chronicling how a fish breathes out of water. So I’m pretty sure that anyone who is at all familiar with my work, on hearing that I’ve written a book about my experiences among the bendy, will think of the expression “To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”
But let me recount a conversation that I had one afternoon in the summer of 2012. A friend asked me if any of the walks of life that I’d written about as a participatory journalist had ever subsequently taken root in my real life. I had to think about this. Then I admitted sheepishly, “One of them has.”
Was it the story for which I’d made an entire dinner for friends using only items bought at a 99-cent store? Was it the one where Greg and I had traveled to Laos so I could ride and swim with a baby elephant? The one where an officious New York City health inspector had visited our kitchen and given me a failing sanitation grade?
No, the story that took root was one about Zumba. Six months after I’d written about taking Zumba classes, I was waking up at six-thirty two days a week so that I could hustle up to 14th Street to shake it shake it shake it like a Polaroid.
Whugh?
* * *
Granted, I had just turned 50, which in gay years is 350. This Giselle was dancing to his death not because a noble disguised as a peasant had betrayed him, but because he worried that his love handles were so shelf-like as to offer suitable support to a collection of decorative thimbles.
