I’ve just seen some clips from the Ultimate Lindy Hop Showdown competition this year (on a french site whose name I can’t remember, sorry) and I’ve noticed some interesting tropes.
What’s the ULHS?
The ULHS is one of the most well-respected lindy competitions in the swinguverse. The emphasis is on hardcore dancing, with a relaxed attitude. Sure, Hellzapoppin’ is still the lindy hop competition, but the ULHS is less about choreography and schmaltz than painful comps like the ALHC (american lindy hop comp/championships?) or the Australian Jitterbug Champs.
A word on lindy comps
I’m not a big fan of comps: I’m all about social dancing. But I also recognise the role comps can play in a dance community. They galvanise dancers, getting them keen and working on dance in a serious way. This of course brings up their dancing ability level, and setting new standards in the community.
The obvious draw-back is related to the type of competition: the VRRDA (victorian rock n roll dance association) comps which obsessed Melbourne dancers for ages about 4 years ago are all about the worst aspects of competitive dancing: 100% tacky, schmaltzy, choreographed rubbish (which is pleasurable, but in a different way of course); the AJC where the organisers would enter their own competition (it took 2 years for them to realise how unethical this was): what kind of cultural example is being set there? And of course, Dancesport: the name says it all.
So what did I notice about ULHS?
everything oldskool is nuskool
This is the age of the first wave lindy hop… or second wave.
The kids are getting hardcore into their old clips. THANK GOD! This has led to some scary second-rate imitations further down the line, but the first rank dancers are doing some seriously awesome shit.
crazy = good
This warms my heart (what with being a crazy dancer by trade).
20s solo charleston is still cooking along
Yay. One day Melbourne will get into it in a big way.
Melbourne is still trying to be the USA, dance wise
Sure, there are good reasons to be inspired by the American example, but imitation… hm. It’s kind of a dilemma, because lindy hop is all about imitation – historical recreation. But my concern is with dancers immitating recreationists, rather than dancers getting out there and exploring the original footage.
How to dress
On the other hand, one thing I did think while watching the clips was how appropriate it is to wear contemporary dress while swing dancing. It’s like Shakespeare: it’s always set in the ‘current day’. So wearing contemporary clothes is very appropriate (especially as we are always ‘wearing’ our contemporary cultural ‘clothes’ when we dance or move or speak or write or….).
It’s a dilemma: everything old is new again, and yet everything new is also very appropriate.
One thing I noted (on this point) was the way performers would wear ‘old’ clothes (vintage or recreationist) for performances, and then ‘new’ clothes when they competed. It strikes me as an example of framing and ‘performing’ identity. When performing in formal Performances, they’re putting on an historic identity, framing their dancing performance as recreation. When they perform in competitions, they’re performing their own identities – their own selves (or another of their own selves?), so they wear their ‘own’ clothes. And of course, the two identities and performances aren’t seperate: they are intended to be read intertextually. So when we see Frida in her crazy modern young person clothes, we are still reading her in reference to her historical recreationist work in the Silver Shadows, and in the Hot Shots. This historical cross-referencing serves to authenticate and justify her authority as a dancer, and her status as a ‘good’ dancer.
And just one more point:
Vaudville and lindy hop
I need to get a hold of Henry Jenkins’ book on early musical cinema (1930s). He discusses the vaudville aesthetic and the shift to cinematic narrative in these films. This issue has caught my interest as well, in reference to swing dancers. The ULHS reinforced the vaudvillian aspect of swing dancing: it’s a matter of sitting down to watch a series of individual ‘spectacles’ which we read intertextually. Just as with vaudville theatre, there’s room for audience participation: being an audience is ‘active’.
I’ve been thinking about vaudville and shows like Dancing with the Stars a bit lately, and how we really like it, as audiences. I’d also hazard a speculation that vaudville didn’t really go away – telly is all about pieces of ‘spectacle’ which we put together in a larger viewing ‘whole’. This of course echoes some of the 80s (or was it 90s?) stuff on telly and the ‘glance’ and ‘segments’ of image/narrative/viewing. It emphasises the ‘active’ viewer. Which is what swing dancers are all about: active viewing. Active spectatorship.
