Ashveer said:
BRRUAH! said:
Ashveer said:
Not trying to be an asshole, not so much. The farmers of bygone eras didn't have bhangra in the first place. But its fun to think they did.
Please enlighten me, kind sir. Who was involved in the history of bhangra?
Everyone. A lot of the people who helped codify it into "bhangra" post partition were low-caste non-farmers (See Garib Dass). Sure, Punjab is primarily agricultural so obviously a lot of people doing fok dances would be farmers, but they wouldn't be doing bhangra. They'd be doing whatever folk dance was endogamous to their region. Homies in patiala didn't know what sialkot (the "move" not the place) was until after partition.
Sorry ashveer, you lost me way before the sarcasm about wikipedia. Obviously not a resource indicative of truth, but nor are any of your statements (with all due respect). I'm not pretending to have the answer, but please elaborate on how, since bhangra was a nonexistent dance made up of the congregation of a multitude of local dances, it adopted this "farmer" myth? How, all in all, did it originate? maybe not under the name bhangra? maybe looking NOTHING like we have in recorded history? my understanding based on little knowledge is that even if bhangra in its "traditional form" was never performed at length or in consistency as it is today, some elements must have existed, compartmentalized into its different originas. Now if im from pind X and your from pind y, dating back to before when you say bhangra was essentially formed, and, in celebration, revelry, and for the sake of entertainment, i do the "go-to" dance from my region, am i not, in its most basic form, dancing bhangra??? Unless youre saying that people just never danced, in which i'd have to point out the ludicrous nature of such an argument. I guess, in short, i'm asking you to elaborate, because youre one line responses are simply HINTING at a deeper understanding of the roots of our beloved dance, rather than actually demonstrating that comprehension. gratzi.
Now to answer Arjun Barua's "who is with me" question. Dude... you KNOW i am. A. i dont dance to entertain, i dance because i love to dance. The fact that i entertain with my dance is just something that adds pleasure to the experience. B. WHere in god's name does a statement like "modern teams understand that better" come from? Because they go far outside what the traditional borders are to do anything to make a crowd respond? Next time i'm on stage, i'll pull a rabbitt out of a hat! thats entertaining right? magic?... The goal is to entertain WITHIN THE CONFINES OF YOUR CRAFT, PARTICULARLY WHEN YOU ARE USING SAID CRAFT TO... ENTERTAIN. lol circular statement but it still make sense. If i'm going to entertain you with magic, i'm not going to get on stage and start singing/acting... because i'm a MAGICIAN. if i'm a bhangra dancer, i should be entertaining you with BHANGRA... not (insert reference to any modern gimmick that people here love to hate on, i could care less which). Again, i LOVE modern bhangra for alot of what it brings, and have respect for its creativity, performance, everything. But please do not insult me or my taste/performance by saying that those people who choose a certain form REMEMBER to entertain better than i do. Maybe dumb and dumber makes you laugh. It's entertaining. Me? I prefer Extras, Modern Family, or some completely different characterization. And people who have that appreciation as well, WILL BE ENTERTAINED.
wowza. i think that fills my quota for the day. Much love everyone
