Israeli Folk Dances as an Industrial Product Do Our Dances Fit the Definition of “Folk Dances”? Written by: Yaron Meishar Translated by: Dvora Berlinger Gurit Kadman the mother of the modern Israeli Folk Dances Movement, defined folk dance as follows: “A folk dance is a dance that has been created by the people, for the people and a large part of the public should be dancing it”. We all agree that the term “Folkdances” relates to dances done by a large and diverse population over a period of years. We would probably also agree that these dances express the tradition, values, and lifestyle of the nation that dances them. Israeli folk dances, therefore, are dances to Israeli songs that express in their movement, rhythm, music and lyrics our culture in the past and in the present; our way of life and our social values. In according to this, and in spite all the claims being made against the nature of the dances that are being taught today in the classes, the dances (those of them which will survive into the future) indeed fit the definition of folk dances. In the past, dances and the songs that accompanies them, were a mirror of the important values of that age, such as working the land, the Bible, holidays and tradition, the ingathering of the Jewish people, social unification and the superiority of the group over the individual. The dances of today express the values important to us here and now, such as aesthetics, romantic relationships between the sexes (love), our love for Israel and its landscapes, self-expression and the importance of the individual in relation to society. They all so express the negative side of today’s Israeli reality by displaying superficiality, cultural shallowness, social division, struggles for power and contempt for others. Therefore, it is not the character of the dances that create the problem in defining them as folkdances, and also not the large numbers of dances or the songs upon which they are created; but rather the following two factors are the cause, in my opinion, the question mark in this article’s title and are likely to cause that in the future these dances will not be considered “folk dances”: 3. The improper use of songs and composition in creating the dances. 4. The goal of creating the dances and their method of distribution. The improper use of songs and composition A folk dance has no life of its own without the music and lyrics it was composed to. In the past choreographers made a point of keeping close contact with the songs’ creators, mainly their composers. Many dances were born thanks to such co-operations (Rivka Sturman with Nira Chen and Tzvika Katze; Shlom Hermon with Amitai Ne’eman; Lea Bergstein with Matityahu Shelem; Shlomo Maman with Uri Cohen and many more). These choreographers matched the steps to the original pure tune before it was arranged for the performance or recording of a particular singer. At that time the right way was also crystallized to record the dance-steps – at the head of the page appeared the choreographer’s name alongside the composer’s name but never the name of the musical arranger. Today most of the dances are being created to songs that are being played in the radio, after these songs undergo musical arrangement and recording. The variety of singers and musical arrangement make the dance session more interesting and varied and therefore, in my opinion, it is preferable to live accordion accompaniment of the dance sessions of bygone days. Using sound-tracks from records or CD’s is the easiest, cheapest and most convenient way, especially when these are the songs best-loved by the audience, and they, in my opinion, best express our values and our culture. The problem is that this way demands the creator to have a wider musical education in order to distinguish between what belongs to the original tune and what belongs to the musical arrangement. The recorded songs have undergone a process known as “musical arrangement” in order to suit it to the singer - his character, his voice and his musical and financial possibilities (number of backup musicians and types of musical instruments). The music arrangement establishes the song’s tempo, the introduction and the ending of the song, and the transitional parts between the song’s verses which give the singer a rest during the performance and might even gives the musicians an opportunity to display their virtuosity. All these are not a part of the song created by the lyricist and the composer. This is the “costume”, the unique clothes that the musical arranger “wove” for this specific recording. A different singer would certainly perform the same song with a different arrangement; and when we sing it together with friends or alone “in the shower”; we sing the original song without this special musical arrangement played on the radio. In this musical context, we should mention also the essential difference between choreographing a stage dance for performing troupes and creating a dance for folkdance groups. Choreography for a dancing troupe is created for dancers with superior skills, who study dance technique. They hold many rehearsals in order to memorize the order of the steps and to perform them in the most perfect and synchronized form. Dances are created for stage with the viewing audience in mind, for whom the choreographer tries to create tension and interest in the dances by frequently varying their form and structure. For these dances a suitable entrance is created, followed by a series of movements undergoing variation and development and at the end, a finale. The soundtrack for the performance is edited according to these needs, and is special and unique, fitting only that particular dance. In contrast, folkdances for the public are created for anyone to be able to perform naturally and easily, without investing long hours of rehearsing and without demonstrating extraordinary dancing ability. Dances for the people should be simple to perform so as to allow relaxation of mind and body and to allow us to remember the steps, also in the future, without many rehearsals. Therefore such dances should be constructed from repeating parts that repeat themselves like the verses of the song, without special introductions and endings. In this way every dancer can enter the circle at any stage of the dance – beginning, middle or towards the end, knowing naturally what the next steps should be. Finally, and most important, “folk dances”, in my opinion, should be able to be performed to all kinds of musical accompaniment, in a diversity of versions (orchestral, our own singing, or the singing of any performer to record it in the future). Creating steps for folk dances (as opposed to performance dances) must express the original song and not the special “costume” – as pretty as it may be – which was woven for a particular performer. For anyone who still does not understand what we are talking about, let me mention what the Israeli Folk Dance instructor frequently says, after finishing teaching a new dance and before beginning to dance it: “After you do the entire dance once, do ‘part one’ again without ‘section two’. The second time around, do ‘part two’ only once instead of twice, then go straight to ‘section two’ of ‘part one’. At the end of the dance don’t do ‘section two’ of ‘part two’, but instead skip directly to ‘section three’, which you repeat four times instead of twice, and after that end the dance with a stomp on the right foot, at an angle to the center of the circle while raising hands upward and shouting ‘ho’! Got it, Clyde?” The Purpose for which Dances are Created and the Manner in which they are Disseminated Kobi Oz, member of a band called Tipex who composed many songs, was once asked on the radio whether he knew that one of his songs, called “Anana”, was being used for folk dancing. His answer was: “From the moment I bring a song into this world I have no control over it and it is public property. Everyone may perform it and enjoy it, and everyone may teach it in every place for every purpose. It was created for just this purpose. The reward of the dance creators was and always will be the very fact that the people are performing their dances. The same goes for the lyricists and composers. The law allows the creators to be compensated through royalties on their work on sales and public performances. The lyricists and composers get those royalties through ACUM, who collect from the users and pay to the creators according to the popularity of their creations. That’s their main income and therefore they have an interest that their songs will be recorded and disseminated in any possible way. The creators, on the other hand, do not get the royalties due them from the hundreds of Israeli Dance Instructors who make a living from the dances they create (in the future this apparently will also change) and also not from most of the distributors. They are happy to disseminate their dances but are not compensated for them. Some dance creators support themselves by instructing Israeli folk dance in Israel and abroad and mainly by selling music cassettes and videotapes featuring their dances and dances of others. This fact pushes them to create dances as a “products for sale”, and less interests them in creating “a dance for the people”. They want to market this product in quantity, quickly and exclusively, but more than anything, they must compose, in the shortest time possible, new dances – additional products to sell under the banner “new” which enables them to continue supporting themselves, mainly through trips to workshops outside Israel. Because these dance creators do not enjoy royalties for sales of others and from public use by hundreds of instructors, they object to disseminating their dances through video and audiocassettes. They even try to prevent other instructors travelling outside Israel from teaching their new dances (if they could only do so legally, they would also demand instructors in Israel to invite them against payment, to teach their dances in all the Israeli dance group). Thus was created within them a conflict of interests between the desire to make a living and the natural desire of every creator to see his creations be disseminated to the masses so that everyone can enjoy them (folk dances, remember?) In this conflict the economic interest is winning, and thus many dances are created like a product which must be marketed at maximum profit and not as a national cultural asset. Nevertheless, if many people are enjoying these dances, there is no doubt that their creators should benefit from it. The unavoidable conclusion to be drawn is that royalty payment should be established for public use of the dances (in the same was as for public broadcasts of the songs). Every instructor making a living from instructing Israeli folk dances would pay royalties, and a formal body would be established to collect these royalties and divide them among the dance creators according to the relative use of their dances (the way ACUM does with the composers and lyricists). This is legal, this is ethical and this is just. And furthermore, don’t forget that creating Israeli folk dances and bestowing them to the public, is not only a livelihood, it is a cultural mission and as such must be treated with the greatest responsibility and caution. The Responsibility of the Workshop Organizers and Creators Every instructor is responsible, in his group, for teaching the dances correctly and faithful to the way the creator composed the dance. He should also give suitable credit to the creators (the composer, lyricist and creator). In accordance with this, in a much greater scale of responsibility, the producers (of videotapes and workshops) must be faithful and responsible to their task, and to present the dance in the correct original form, and to give credit the above mentioned creators in writing, in a seemly manner. The workshop organizers are responsible (by authority of a certain reality that evolved) for the final form of almost all-Israeli folk dances. They reached this “official” status as a result of “marketing power” and not as a result of any special education (I don’t see this as a flaw). Because of their unique status they must behave with great responsibility towards the dances they bring to the workshops… It is forbidden for them to help promote a dance created on a song which already has another dance created on it which has already been disseminated publicly. They should guide and direct the creators to act responsibly towards their friends, towards the songs they use and towards the concept of “Israeli Folk Dance”. The excuse “it’s how the ‘creator’ wants it” is not a good enough excuse to harm a song or composition; it doesn’t give a stamp of approval to every random collection of dance steps or legitimization to slap dance steps on musical transitions that do not belong to the original song. The greatest responsibility is demanded from the dance creators. They must honor the creations, which serve as a basis for their dances and to use them in the proper manner for the purpose of folk dance. Do the workshop organizers really understand the heavy responsibility their deeds carry? A dance taught at a workshop is like a butterfly that emerges from a cocoon: Now it is free to reach every corner of the globe and nobody is able to control it any longer, not even its creator. If it emerges distorted and survives – it will live distorted and even disperse this distortion to future generations. I edit on my computer most of the music for dances which are distributed on workshop cassettes, according to the facts established at the workshop (changes in speed and mostly changes in the structure of the song). I am familiar with the original recordings and the changes that were made in them in order to suit them to dances, according to the wish of the “creator”. I often try to save something of the lost honor of a song that has been distorted, but in most cases it’s a losing battle –the dance already exists. I have seen many such deformed “butterflies”, and now want to bring to you attention, dear readers, a list of some types of distortions, in hope that also the dance creators will learn something from it. Out of respect for the dance creators I wont mention any songs by name, but some of you will probably recognize to which ones I am referring. The Name of the Dance : The dance creator uses (usually without asking permission) a song which already has a name given the song by its composer and lyricist. The name is an inseparable part of the song and therefore he has no right to use this song under name of his wife, sister or granddaughter. In this respect, it is worth noting the many dances called “debka…”, “hora….”, where the connection between the dance’s steps and the concept of “debka” or “hora” are purely accidental. The Song’s Content: Every song has content, a logical structure with beginning, middle and end. Sometimes its structure is not suitable for a folk dance, and in this case it is better to “let it go” and not to create a dance to it. Transferring words from one place to another with no logical connection, taking out parts of the original tune (not from the musical arrangement), moving whole parts from one place to another, recording only part of the song in order to make the dance shorter, all these damage a creation that belongs to someone else! Speed: A melody has its own rhythm and speed, which suit to its character and the nature of its words. Speeding it up by many percent damages the character of the song. If a particular recording is not the suitable speed for the dance, this is a hint not to create any steps to it and to search for another recording. Duplication of Musical Notes or Measures: ?Duplication of complete musical measures or even single notes, in order to fit the song to the dance according to the dance creator’s “convenience” are a highly gross offense to the song. On Which Musical Note Should the Dance Begin?: Every tune has musical meter. Usually the dance must start on the emphasized beat (even if the singing has not yet begun). Beginning the dance in a place other than the one demanded by the song’s musical emphasis, points in most cases to ignorance and a lack of creative sophistication (such sophistication can be seen, for example, in Ze’ev Havazelet in his dance “Harimon” (The Pomegranate). Dancers with musical ears do not understand why other dancers start dancing in places where the song’s creator wants them to begin. Identical Names For Different Dances:. Today’s creators do not know the entire “history” of Israeli folkdances (Ho, really! It goes back maximum 75 years), and they give a new dance the name of an already existing dance (to a different melody), causing unnecessary confusion among the dancers. A Dance to A Song That Already Has A Dance: As stated earlier, a dance is like a butterfly. After it is born nobody knows what flowers it visited and where it lives. Double dances on the same song is confusing and definitely attests to a lack of responsibility on the part of the creator and workshop organizer who presented it to the dance instructors. Recently we are witnessing a new phenomenon - creating a dance for children to a song that already has a dance that is popular in adult classes. This is a terrible injustice! Aren’t children human beings, too? Won’t they grow up at some stage? Making Changes after A Dance Has Been Circulated: A dance that has been introduced in a workshop, whose steps have been registered in a booklet and/or recorded in a video, cannot be changed any more…. Even by its creator himself (The butterfly already managed to visit many flowers). Some readers will come and say “If all this is true then why is it allowed to remove the musical transitions and thus to change the musical arrangement, which is also a creation in itself?” So therefore, when making a folk dance to a recorded song, a version in which it is possible to remove the musical transitions without harming the musical arrangement should be used – i.e. the deletion shouldn’t be felt in makeup of musical instruments in the background, in changes in key signature in the voices of the participating singers, in changes in volume etc. If there is no such version available and this is not possible – then don’t use this song to create a dance. * To every rule there is an exception. This article’s aim is to point to general phenomena and not to point out specific individual cases, which are all distinct and individual.