Freak Dance and Civilization
Last week a student wrote anonymously in a school publication to complain that adults had stopped students from “dancing the way we want” at a school dance. In response, the writer says, the students refused to dance at all and pouted away.
Here is why adults should stop students from freak dancing:
It reduces girls from dance partners to sex toys;
it reduces boys from artful dancers to public masturbators;
it reduces dancing from multi-dimensional art—the celebration of spirit in form—to one-dimensional sensuality;
it reduces a school dance from the civilized celebration of the mystery of Eros at the heart of any community to a spiritless mass sensual self-indulgence.
The young are not to blame for this reduction. They are enslaved to it by the ubiquitous bad art of their favorite entertainments. Adults who neglect to draw them out of the pleasant mud are the ones to blame.* So bravo to those proctors who set a limit on public human animality.
And if you are one who can enjoy no kind of dancing except freaking, you might take a good look at male-female dance forms from waltz to swing and then inquire what has so impoverished your imagination.
_______________________
*Adults are up against four heavy obstacles in trying to preserve youngsters from their own self-indulgence:
One is the overwhelming quantity of titillating poison to which the young are addicted that goes by the name of popular entertainment (music videos, rock/pop/rap songs, TV, movies, and—all too often—school dances).
The second is the lack, in many school communities, of adult moral support for a principled stand against such entertainment.
The third is the adults’ own fear of not being liked by the young in their charge (arising from a fatal supplanting, in their own psyches, of the principle of duty by that of good feeling).
And the fourth is the erroneous belief in the natural goodness of man, an inheritance from the Romantic revolution of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, which replaced the venerable doctrines of free will and moral responsibility with that of natural impulse as the principal guide to right mental and social life.
If the young are naturally good and it is society that corrupts them (as Rousseau argued), then to let them follow their impulses without interference from adult society is to let them remain innocent and good. Believers in this doctrine, whose memories usually reach no further back than the 1960s, argue that they themselves were once young and outrageously rebellious in their parents’ eyes too and yet turned out ok, that the present-day youth will no doubt turn out ok too. (“Ok” seems not to include the notion that a well-turned-out adult is one who can properly educate the next generation of youth.)
The problems with this doctrine are two: The first is that it ignores the fact that the youth of today are already being corrupted by society—in the form of the entertainment poison mentioned above.
The second is that the doctrine isn’t true. Human beings may be well or badly influenced by society, but man is not now and (since Eden) never has been naturally good. Man either is born morally neutral or is fallen into depravity; in any case he requires labor to resist evil and become good, labor directed at achieving right reason (Plato’s formulation), right habit (Aristotle’s), or right will (the Bible’s).
Hence, those adults who stand by and watch as the youth indulge in the reductions of freak dancing listed above are themselves guilty of some combination of the following: titillation at watching what they would never permit themselves to do in public; fear of losing the easy affection of young people whom they ought rather to be teaching how to earn adults’ respect; and worship of unconsecrated feeling as the god of their (one hopes unconscious) idolatry.
When such feelings, beliefs, and behaviors reach a critical mass in the community or the culture at large, look for one of three events: a sweeping movement of take-no-prisoner fundamentalist religious or personality-cult fervor, a fall like that of Rome, or the rebirth of a genuine vision of the nature and meaning of man. Hope springs eternal, but the two-to-one odds against the last possibility ought to worry us.
Here is why adults should stop students from freak dancing:
It reduces girls from dance partners to sex toys;
it reduces boys from artful dancers to public masturbators;
it reduces dancing from multi-dimensional art—the celebration of spirit in form—to one-dimensional sensuality;
it reduces a school dance from the civilized celebration of the mystery of Eros at the heart of any community to a spiritless mass sensual self-indulgence.
The young are not to blame for this reduction. They are enslaved to it by the ubiquitous bad art of their favorite entertainments. Adults who neglect to draw them out of the pleasant mud are the ones to blame.* So bravo to those proctors who set a limit on public human animality.
And if you are one who can enjoy no kind of dancing except freaking, you might take a good look at male-female dance forms from waltz to swing and then inquire what has so impoverished your imagination.
_______________________
*Adults are up against four heavy obstacles in trying to preserve youngsters from their own self-indulgence:
One is the overwhelming quantity of titillating poison to which the young are addicted that goes by the name of popular entertainment (music videos, rock/pop/rap songs, TV, movies, and—all too often—school dances).
The second is the lack, in many school communities, of adult moral support for a principled stand against such entertainment.
The third is the adults’ own fear of not being liked by the young in their charge (arising from a fatal supplanting, in their own psyches, of the principle of duty by that of good feeling).
And the fourth is the erroneous belief in the natural goodness of man, an inheritance from the Romantic revolution of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, which replaced the venerable doctrines of free will and moral responsibility with that of natural impulse as the principal guide to right mental and social life.
If the young are naturally good and it is society that corrupts them (as Rousseau argued), then to let them follow their impulses without interference from adult society is to let them remain innocent and good. Believers in this doctrine, whose memories usually reach no further back than the 1960s, argue that they themselves were once young and outrageously rebellious in their parents’ eyes too and yet turned out ok, that the present-day youth will no doubt turn out ok too. (“Ok” seems not to include the notion that a well-turned-out adult is one who can properly educate the next generation of youth.)
The problems with this doctrine are two: The first is that it ignores the fact that the youth of today are already being corrupted by society—in the form of the entertainment poison mentioned above.
The second is that the doctrine isn’t true. Human beings may be well or badly influenced by society, but man is not now and (since Eden) never has been naturally good. Man either is born morally neutral or is fallen into depravity; in any case he requires labor to resist evil and become good, labor directed at achieving right reason (Plato’s formulation), right habit (Aristotle’s), or right will (the Bible’s).
Hence, those adults who stand by and watch as the youth indulge in the reductions of freak dancing listed above are themselves guilty of some combination of the following: titillation at watching what they would never permit themselves to do in public; fear of losing the easy affection of young people whom they ought rather to be teaching how to earn adults’ respect; and worship of unconsecrated feeling as the god of their (one hopes unconscious) idolatry.
When such feelings, beliefs, and behaviors reach a critical mass in the community or the culture at large, look for one of three events: a sweeping movement of take-no-prisoner fundamentalist religious or personality-cult fervor, a fall like that of Rome, or the rebirth of a genuine vision of the nature and meaning of man. Hope springs eternal, but the two-to-one odds against the last possibility ought to worry us.
posted by G.Rap | 10:38 PM
16 Comments:
Thank you. I too am disgusted by freak-dancing and I cannot understand why it is considered 'dancing'. I'm glad someone took the time to respond to that DU article, because several of my friends and I found it ignorant to the point of embarassment.
To the students who feel unfairly constrained in their preferences for style of dance:
To become a contributing member of society, and to experience a deep and meaningful life, are probably, both things that have some appeal for you. At least at some level. Even if your immediate public reaction among your friends would be to deny it, each one of us hopes that we will be respected by the community at large and feel satisfaction with the lives we build for ourselves.
So, presuming that these are things that hold interest for you, too, here's the bad news: To achieve those things—or any goal in life, really—takes intention, effort, and requisite knowledge.
Right now, you are in the early middle stage of gaining "requisite knowledge." To do anything. The degree to which you have "intention" and are willing to exert "effort" will define the success you can achieve.
Sometimes while we're stockpiling "requisite knowledge," we can just memorize a fact. That's pretty easy. But sometimes the "requisite knowledge" is more arcane and abstract, or, worse, relates to a way of "being" rather than a way of "doing." That type of knowledge is a bit harder to digest. Especially if it runs counter to natural preferences.
Of course, you can, if you choose, ignore the teaching you've been given here about the inadvisability of giving yourself over to the attraction you feel for this behavior.
But would ignoring it be the wisest thing to do? Would it be in your own best long-term interests? I don't think so. In fact, the teaching you've been given, that is, not to dance in this way, sounds as if it would be entirely consistent with a person who grows to be respected and happy. Whereas, the opposite is not necessarily true. So there’s a risk to be assumed by doing it. But, more importantly, ask yourself this: Is this a behavior I would be proud of ten years from now? Would I be proud to have my prospective boss see me doing this? To have my mother and father see me doing this? To have my daughter see me doing this? Would I want to see my own daughter to copy my behavior?
So the question is, will you accept this teaching or refuse it? Will you have intention and exert effort leading to the achievement of long-term goals? Or will you give in to your own preferences?
You're right again. I will never forget one of last years all-school dances when I witnessed a tiny seventh-grade girl trapped in the middle of a mass of pelvic thrusting senior boys. She clearly didn't want to be there. Just the sight literally triggered my gag reflex.
It is important, though, to keep in mind that up until very recently, the vast majority of the music that has been played at school dances is designed specifically for freaking. In fact, most of the lyrics of these songs actually direct and promote sexual acts on the dance floor. (For example, just check out the lyrics to "Get Low" by Lil' Jon & the Eastside Boyz. You may need to use www.urbandictionary.com to understand some of it.) I believe that of the administration really wants this behavior to stop, it makes more sense to alter the music selection than to have teachers with flashlights wander through the crowds of hormone-overloaded teenagers.
Griffin brings up a great point - people are going to freak to songs about "junk in the trunk" no matter what you tell them.
Griffin and Mark are quite right. Adults ought to see to it that the music played at school functions is appropriate. I wish some student would start a blog for parents and teachers that simply wrote out the words of the songs kids are listening to. Maybe that would move the adult world to start taking more responsibility for interrupting the destructive effect that the music industry is having on kids and on the nation. (That's assuming a world in which an adult is more than just a self-indulgent kid with a mortgage.)
I agree with vik and griffin too - the music has to change. The lyrics to a lot of the songs played at dances are pretty profain, but it's not only the lyrics that should change. What about playing something other than rap? Honestly, the songs at dances all sound the same and it would be nice to have some variation - plus maybe it would educate some of the people who are obsessed with this one genre of music.
While I agree that freak dancing is not appropriate for a school dance, I would have to disagree with the position that the music industry is corrupting our youth just because I personally do not think music corrupts me. I would hope that our youth have the mental ability to not just act out what they hear without giving it a second thought. Now, in regard to not playing this music at school dances: Sure, thats the administration's perogative, but to put out a blanket statement fingering the music industry bothers me. I have found that stupid, self-indulgent kids turn into stupid, self-indulgent adults.
Alex M seems to think that stupidity and self-indulgence are inborn and inescapable. I, being a teacher, think that culture and upbringing can have an effect on what kind of adults children will become. Music may not corrupt Alex because he has been inoculated by parents, schools, values. He's one of the lucky ones. But how many kids are there who have nothing to go on in figuring out how to live BUT the music they listen to?
Well I believe that by the age of 17 or 18 a person's personality is basically set, that the nurturing is done and it is time for those who nurture to see what beast or beauty they have created. It is indeed harmful for those neglected, left to be raised by popular culture, but I do not believe that the answer lies in censoring or limiting that same popular culture. My parents have raised me, not my music. I find entertainment in its beat, nothing more, nothing less, as it should be. I find fault in the role that music plays in certain people's lives, not in the music itself.
Art is powerful. Just ask the advertising executives of the world. Whether we realize it or not, the art we are exposed to affects our imaginations and thereby our lives. Art includes things like Chartres Cathedral, The Communist Manifesto, The Getteysburg Address, the latest Coke commercial, The Simpsons, the evening news, Mein Kempf, my blog, Alex M's comment, and every bit of music we listen to. What the work of art is has everything to do with the effect it has on us. To find fault in music's role but not in the music itself is like finding fault in the fact that you crashed the car but not in the fact that you chose to go speeding at 80 mph on a rain-slick road at midnight just for fun. Like the rest of us, Alex M judges art all the time--my blog, for example. Not to be willing to judge the quality and value of a work of art is not to be a fully human being, and we WILL do it, whether we admit we are doing it or not. The real challenge is to do it well.
I agree regarding Art's power. Shouldn't we, as people who recognize this power, who realize the necessity for proper judgement, teach the innocent/ignorant to judge instead of removing the 'threat' alltogether? Your job is to teach, not protect, is it not? I would think that someone with the reputation that you indeed have would champion the cause of awareness not censorship (awareness of the potential negative influences of music and the world, and the ways of identifying those influences).
If you do not play rap music at the dances no one will come. Since the beginning of the Dean of Student's stay in his position the percentage of people attending the dances has been decimated. The dances are a social event that everyone at the school should be able to enjoy. If by becoming stricter about the dancing and decreasing the percentage of music that is rap, the administration is thus halving the numbers who attend then the administration has failed to attend to the purpose set forth for these dances. Now some may say that the administration is not changing anything, at least not anything that should not be changed. They are of the opinion that the dances have become a twisted cesspit of public masturbation. So if we are to do anything to change the dances we must first realize what it is that people want and come to a fair compromise,. This may mean becoming more lenient to this form of dancing to increase the student participation, but also at the same time decreasing the percentage of the songs that inevitably lead to dancing of this kind. There should be a midpoint that we can come to that will allow the school to serve the populations of both parties while still feeling morally correct. Yes the media is indeed influencing our generation and the music that is popular these days does effect people, but I feel that it has less affect on the generations that are past ninth grade. I do not believe that this is because we have achieved a certain level of competence, but because we have already been numbed towards this style of music and dancing because we have grown up a generation raised on television and sensationalism and therefore take the words of the box over the words of our parents, sometimes. The only blame that can be assigned is to either the people who allow us to grow up watching these television programs, our parents, or the people who produce the television programs.
It's nice to see that Bushi finally comes around to agreeing with me: Music affects people; parents and music producers are responsible; children have become numbed to the style of music, and (I would add) numb to its moral implications; the generation is being brought up on sensationalism.
What I don't agree with is that there is a "middle ground"--a midpoint compromise between perverse self-indulgence and full participation.
First of all, I see no reason to set up quantity of attendance at school dances as an unquestioned good. The school provides dances to offer opportunities for healthy fun. If students can have fun only in unhealthy ways, the school is not obligated to provide them.
Secondly, Bushi wouldn't argue that a moderate amount of illegal drug use or a moderate amount of stealing from others' wallets is a reasonable compromise with those who like drugs or stealing. If freak dancing is bad for kids and permitting it implicates adults in their corruption, then the number of freak dances per evening is irrelevant. Compromise would really be surrender of the moral position.
If students boycott dances, so be it. They will get the message that there are acceptable and unacceptable ways of having fun, and that their school, at least, while willing to provide for the former, will stand firm against the latter.
Absence from non-freak dances is not the school's fault but the students' choice, and pandering to the low impulses and bad taste of its charges is not in the school's mission statement.
"the erroneous belief in the natural goodness of man"
That makes me so sad. What a pessimistic view. I never read this one, but I don't even know what to say really. I'm probably just confused, but shouldn't that mean that when you get a new batch of students you trust none of them. You would expect them to lie steal kill cheat and otherwise sin until they've proven you otherwise. Haha I do think I'm mistaken sorry. Will you explain what you mean? The goodness of man is one of my primary beliefs and I don't understand how it's so easily dismissed. I automatically trust people and believe they will strive toward good until they disprove me. And even if they do disprove me, I still have hope for them.
I would point out that at the Prom this past year there was not, as far as I can recall, any rap music played. If there was, it escapes my memory. The DJ chose to focus on different genres of music. There was no issue whatsoever with freak dancing. I think that everybody had a good time, and nobody left with feelings of "oh man, that was so lame. Why could there not have been more freaking and rap?!" It was good clean fun for all, or at least that is the impression that I got.
Now, it's tough to say what exactly this lack of freak dancing was a result of. I would argue that there were probably a number of factors. The tone of the dance was more sophisticated than school dances. Featuring a sit-down dinner among other things, it was clear that the prom was not your typical school dance, and that certain behaviors are meant to accompany that. The dance was limited to older students. This is not to say that older students are not guilty of freak dancing, of course, but I do think that the maturity level required to recognize the more formal atmosphere can be attributed in part to the age of the students attending. There was also, I imagine, a sentiment amongst the students who were seniors that this was sort of one of their last hurrahs at this school, a milestone in ones high school career, and that it would be a shame to cheapen that. I do also think that the music selection played a role in the absence of freak dancing.
Now, how much of a role each of these things actually played is tough to say, but I do remember that it was a very good time, and I remember it as a much classier event than most school dances, including the recent Winter Formal.
Just one other note. Speaking as someone who does not typically enjoy much of this genre we call rap, I think that there is an important distinction to make. I've found that there is some rap I enjoy, or at the very least appreciate. Most of it is not in the mainstream of American pop culture. I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that I think that when most people on this blog (or anywhere) refer to rap music, they refer to the trash that has polluted our mainstream and bombards us all daily with its sexist, racist, etcetera-ist messages. Whether you enjoy it or not, however, I just think that it's worth noting that not all rap music follows anywhere near this model or subject matter, and that it might not necessarily be fair or (more concretely) accurate to use the broad term "rap," when really one is referring to merely a subgenre (albeit a significant one) that most are more familiar with.
- Sarah
Correction: Gettysburg (not Getteysburg). Thanks to Mr. H. for calling my attention to the error.
Post a Comment
<< Home