The "future" of bhangra (stage dance)?

[siddyp]

Bhangra is a spectacular activity/dance, but just like everything else in life, the interest towards it will eventually diminish unless new ideas and thoughts are constantly being created. As long as there are people striving to make things more interesting and new, bhangra will always have a future.

This wont happen if clean is the only thing that gets placings...

 

[Gabbah Shareef Bhalwan]

Unless people keep coming up with new ideas/thoughts of how to do bhangra or how to make it more interesting, then there is a future. Bhangra is a spectacular activity/dance, but just like everything else in life, the interest towards it will eventually diminish unless new ideas and thoughts are constantly being created. As long as there are people striving to make things more interesting and new, bhangra will always have a future.

Very interesting! I think if one had polled most dancers in India in the past, and also in North America for much of the history, those people would have said something of the opposite. For them it was all about "preserving" bhangra by trying to keep things the same. In fact, one of the whole motivations behind dancing bhangra in the first place would have been the idea that, in doing so, they kept a practice from the past alive...although indeed that past reference point kept shifting.

 

[Gabbah Shareef Bhalwan]

Pao bhangra was one of my favorite events that I ever got to be a part of. Bhangra in the Heights going on this next weekend aims to do the same exhibition focused performances. Pao, a longstanding cornell tradition, provides every team participating with a 700 dollar stipend (not sure if heights does). I absolutely love this paradigm! These events are a celebration of the dance and not competitive and give opportunities to younger and experienced teams alike.

Audience deciding winners? Sadly (or not so sadly) would never work.

Interesting, as well. One of my questions would be, do these non-competitive events reflect bhangra that is appreciably outside a world of competitive bhangra? Or do they just/mainly showcase bhangra as teams would probably dance in (as derived from) a typical competition?


This is what I mean by "vision." If we see the changes to how bhangra is danced that have been caused by, necessitated by the competition system...if we see the constraints put on it by that system, and the very particular vision of what bhangra performance looks like that competitions engender.... can we envision bhangra without that?


Alternatively, can competitions be imagined that don't require the formal trappings of a panel of judges, rubrics, and other formalities?
I agree that having the audience decide the results of the competition is problematic, but that is mostly the case if we're thinking the same sort of competition and just replacing panel judges with audience.


I am suggesting that a different sort of competition could use the audience. Dancers would have to relax their expectations of every little thing they do being acknowledged and given "credit". They would have to be prepared to accept the audience's decision and suck it up...same way as they accept the panel judges' and suck it up (or don't, lol). But maybe they'd get back that "joy" expressed in the video earlier.


Incidentally, as an example of something judged by audience, I can think of Jamaican sound clash (competition between sound system performers). They are winning trophies and everything. The main thing there is that audiences in that scene have cultivated a very keen sense of fairness. They feel shame (and shame each other) over any appearance of bias. I know it might sound incredible, but these are people that have managed to behave in a democratic way on their own!...


Are people dancing for an audience, or for judges? How you answer that question and what you decide to do would have a huge effect on how bhangra is danced. So I'd say that one of the very big things that is keeping bhangra a certain way in this "phase" of its development is the phenomenon of judging panels, of a certain composition, and the attempts to please them. Remove that element and we enter a whole new phase of bhangra.


Govind, your one statement that I don't get (I may be reading too far into it) is:
"These events are a celebration of the dance and not competitive and give opportunities to younger and experienced teams alike. "

What is a "celebration" of the dance? If non-competitive events are a celebration of the dance, what are competitive events? Business? I don't get this "celebration" concept. Seems like there is just the dance, bhangra (which can be done as celebration...but people are celebrating something else). And if exhibitions give opportunities to the inexperienced, that implies that the competitions contain what is best. Do they? I am under the impression that competitions contain bhangra that is not at its best because people have to make concessions to the competition format.


I read this all as implying that bhangra by its very nature is a competition (like the 100 yard dash), rather than -- what some would like to think -- bhangra is a cultural practice, an expression, an "art form", etc. that has been placed into a framework of competition.


I think bhangra was originally placed in that framework of competition to inspire people (STUDENTS) to learn it better/well. That was during the time when people were concerned with PRESERVATION. They were worried that "culture" (if not bhangra itself) was waning, dying... and to inject life into it and ensure students felt motivated to "preserve" it and have enthusiasm for it, they made competitions. Competitions continued from there, but have people stopped to think about WHY?


Maybe the time of competitions has come and gone.

 

[Saab]

Pao bhangra was one of my favorite events that I ever got to be a part of. Bhangra in the Heights going on this next weekend aims to do the same exhibition focused performances. Pao, a longstanding cornell tradition, provides every team participating with a 700 dollar stipend (not sure if heights does). I absolutely love this paradigm! These events are a celebration of the dance and not competitive and give opportunities to younger and experienced teams alike.

Audience deciding winners? Sadly (or not so sadly) would never work.

Interesting, as well. One of my questions would be, do these non-competitive events reflect bhangra that is appreciably outside a world of competitive bhangra? Or do they just/mainly showcase bhangra as teams would probably dance in (as derived from) a typical competition?


This is what I mean by "vision." If we see the changes to how bhangra is danced that have been caused by, necessitated by the competition system...if we see the constraints put on it by that system, and the very particular vision of what bhangra performance looks like that competitions engender.... can we envision bhangra without that?


Alternatively, can competitions be imagined that don't require the formal trappings of a panel of judges, rubrics, and other formalities?
I agree that having the audience decide the results of the competition is problematic, but that is mostly the case if we're thinking the same sort of competition and just replacing panel judges with audience.


I am suggesting that a different sort of competition could use the audience. Dancers would have to relax their expectations of every little thing they do being acknowledged and given "credit". They would have to be prepared to accept the audience's decision and suck it up...same way as they accept the panel judges' and suck it up (or don't, lol). But maybe they'd get back that "joy" expressed in the video earlier.


Incidentally, as an example of something judged by audience, I can think of Jamaican sound clash (competition between sound system performers). They are winning trophies and everything. The main thing there is that audiences in that scene have cultivated a very keen sense of fairness. They feel shame (and shame each other) over any appearance of bias. I know it might sound incredible, but these are people that have managed to behave in a democratic way on their own!...


Are people dancing for an audience, or for judges? How you answer that question and what you decide to do would have a huge effect on how bhangra is danced. So I'd say that one of the very big things that is keeping bhangra a certain way in this "phase" of its development is the phenomenon of judging panels, of a certain composition, and the attempts to please them. Remove that element and we enter a whole new phase of bhangra.


Govind, your one statement that I don't get (I may be reading too far into it) is:
"These events are a celebration of the dance and not competitive and give opportunities to younger and experienced teams alike. "

What is a "celebration" of the dance? If non-competitive events are a celebration of the dance, what are competitive events? Business? I don't get this "celebration" concept. Seems like there is just the dance, bhangra (which can be done as celebration...but people are celebrating something else). And if exhibitions give opportunities to the inexperienced, that implies that the competitions contain what is best. Do they? I am under the impression that competitions contain bhangra that is not at its best because people have to make concessions to the competition format.


I read this all as implying that bhangra by its very nature is a competition (like the 100 yard dash), rather than -- what some would like to think -- bhangra is a cultural practice, an expression, an "art form", etc. that has been placed into a framework of competition.


I think bhangra was originally placed in that framework of competition to inspire people (STUDENTS) to learn it better/well. That was during the time when people were concerned with PRESERVATION. They were worried that "culture" (if not bhangra itself) was waning, dying... and to inject life into it and ensure students felt motivated to "preserve" it and have enthusiasm for it, they made competitions. Competitions continued from there, but have people stopped to think about WHY?


Maybe the time of competitions has come and gone.

I really wouldn't mind doing this, I just think that audience at these events are so diverse (the crowd is catered towards competitions bringing in monetary benefit rather than respect for the art being done) that it would take a systemic education of the populace about what bhangra is etc as a well as a grassroots education program that would be running parallel to the competition to fully remove the audience of said bias and placate teams. I am fine with people preferring a style over another, but the best performance shouldn't be dictated or predicated on a certain style.


Secondly, someone brought up judging teams... Judging, I think, should be more comparative in the feedback process rather than monologues on a teams own set. You competed against other teams, and the rubric, while assigning points, basically differentiated you from other teams via comparative judging. Please use feedback in the judges meeting that compares certain teams to other teams and highlights points that you were making. Rather than talking about the pro's and con's of a set and spending eons of time on general ideas/themes/etc, you have the basis for an argument as why you didn't place( i.e. team A had better execution of steps highlighted by this, Team B had better cleanliness than you, but that difference was marginal and that is why you placed etc).

On top of that - Judges, when saying things about execution, please bring up specific steps or instances where the team might have perpetrated these misdeeds. Rather than say execution was missing or cleanliness was not there throughout the set and put the onus on teams to find out where(which is ridiculous), you should meet them half-way and point out specific steps or instances where issues occur. For instance, if your back aren't straight on betkas, point out a specific part where that happens. Most teams, I agree, lose points for cleanliness because it seems that similar steps such as multiple betkas, dhamaka/fataka arms, etc are not performed correctly, so accurately pointing out an issue at a time and place and looking out for it would be better than saying "hey, it happened somewhere". Essentially, what judging is missing is the causality that causes the feedback to be given in the first place. If you can't accurately point out things, especially when it relates to specifics and not a like vs. dislike comparison, you need to have concrete evidence that highlights your case.

 

[J-Skeet]

On top of that - Judges, when saying things about execution, please bring up specific steps or instances where the team might have perpetrated these misdeeds. Rather than say execution was missing or cleanliness was not there throughout the set and put the onus on teams to find out where(which is ridiculous), you should meet them half-way and point out specific steps or instances where issues occur. For instance, if your back aren't straight on betkas, point out a specific part where that happens. Most teams, I agree, lose points for cleanliness because it seems that similar steps such as multiple betkas, dhamaka/fataka arms, etc are not performed correctly, so accurately pointing out an issue at a time and place and looking out for it would be better than saying "hey, it happened somewhere". Essentially, what judging is missing is the causality that causes the feedback to be given in the first place. If you can't accurately point out things, especially when it relates to specifics and not a like vs. dislike comparison, you need to have concrete evidence that highlights your case.

I'm pretty sure this is easier said than done. Imagine judging a performance and then having to jot down specific times, moments, segments along with notes all while still making sure you don't miss anything in the set. Seriously imagine it...take your eyes off for one second and you risk missing a crucial part in the set. Saab I totally agree with your standpoint, but it just wouldn't be practical....it's hard to find solutions to these problems especially when judges are given limited time to evaluate etc etc (how antsy does the audience get when a comp drags).

 

[siddyp]

Unless people keep coming up with new ideas/thoughts of how to do bhangra or how to make it more interesting, then there is a future. Bhangra is a spectacular activity/dance, but just like everything else in life, the interest towards it will eventually diminish unless new ideas and thoughts are constantly being created. As long as there are people striving to make things more interesting and new, bhangra will always have a future.

Very interesting! I think if one had polled most dancers in India in the past, and also in North America for much of the history, those people would have said something of the opposite. For them it was all about "preserving" bhangra by trying to keep things the same. In fact, one of the whole motivations behind dancing bhangra in the first place would have been the idea that, in doing so, they kept a practice from the past alive...although indeed that past reference point kept shifting.

I agree, BUT! are these people thinking about the 'growth' of bhangra in their countries/area of residence?

in my opinion, bhangra will stay alive forever. but if we want bhangra to continue to 'grow' or keep it at the level it is now, the only way that will be possible is through innovation, and bringing something new to the table.

Traditional bhangra to someone who has no idea about bhangra or what it is will watch it for 3-5 mins and think, "oh that's cool" and move on. someone will watch NJ at elite 8 2010 and say "i want to do bhangra." -- to me, that's the difference.

 

[siddyp]

On top of that - Judges, when saying things about execution, please bring up specific steps or instances where the team might have perpetrated these misdeeds. Rather than say execution was missing or cleanliness was not there throughout the set and put the onus on teams to find out where(which is ridiculous), you should meet them half-way and point out specific steps or instances where issues occur. For instance, if your back aren't straight on betkas, point out a specific part where that happens. Most teams, I agree, lose points for cleanliness because it seems that similar steps such as multiple betkas, dhamaka/fataka arms, etc are not performed correctly, so accurately pointing out an issue at a time and place and looking out for it would be better than saying "hey, it happened somewhere". Essentially, what judging is missing is the causality that causes the feedback to be given in the first place. If you can't accurately point out things, especially when it relates to specifics and not a like vs. dislike comparison, you need to have concrete evidence that highlights your case.

I'm pretty sure this is easier said than done. Imagine judging a performance and then having to jot down specific times, moments, segments along with notes all while still making sure you don't miss anything in the set. Seriously imagine it...take your eyes off for one second and you risk missing a crucial part in the set. Saab I totally agree with your standpoint, but it just wouldn't be practical....it's hard to find solutions to these problems especially when judges are given limited time to evaluate etc etc (how antsy does the audience get when a comp drags).

Also, on a side note, do people feel like judging in the "cleanliness" aspect seem to revolve around formations and synch or is it cleanliness as in posture...execution of moves?

its not hard. i did it. judges do it. and cleanliness/execution encompasses all of that. its more of how the rubric is written and the details for what the judge is asked to judge.

 

[Gabbah Shareef Bhalwan]

I really wouldn't mind doing this, I just think that audience at these events are so diverse (the crowd is catered towards competitions bringing in monetary benefit rather than respect for the art being done) that it would take a systemic education of the populace about what bhangra is etc as a well as a grassroots education program that would be running parallel to the competition to fully remove the audience of said bias and placate teams. I am fine with people preferring a style over another, but the best performance shouldn't be dictated or predicated on a certain style.

I think you might be right — although others would argue that there is just as much bias in creating rubrics and in judging styles, and as much being predicated on certain styles, in the current system. Or, they might rather take their chances and be misjudged by "the people" than misjudged by...judges.


Again, I think what you say makes sense, Saab, but mainly from the viewpoint of someone (as the rest of your post evinces) who is interested in refining judging.... in being anal about every little aspect that is put on stage (I am just joking).


A new paradigm would mean "letting go" of the feeling that these minutia are so important, and that the viewer needs an elite education in them. Probably you and some others would not be in favor of the idea, but to submit oneself to the public -- the "folk" as it were -- might make sense. In folk and popular arts, the general understanding is that "the people" DO understand what is going on, that their tastes and opinions are the essence of the style. This is as opposed to "classical" sort of art, which seems to require a special education and only an elite audience can appreciate it.


That, of course, assumes bhangra is an art in the first place. If it is a SPORT, then that is a different matter. If it is a SPORT, then I can see the drive to focus on judging as a matter of course and trying to refine it more and more. But if it is art/culture, and if it is a folk or popular art accessible to the people of that culture at large, then it will go other ways.


Perhaps "Art vs. Sport" will become the new conflict shaping bhangra in the future.

 

[J-Skeet]

its not hard. i did it. judges do it. and cleanliness/execution encompasses all of that. its more of how the rubric is written and the details for what the judge is asked to judge.

+1 to you then. Still...if it were that easy then why don't all judges do it? (Rhetoric)

 

[Cherag]

Perhaps "Art vs. Sport" will become the new conflict shaping bhangra in the future.

Folks its a competition, if your going there strictly for the art form, hats off to you, like actually I think it's great because that's the motivation that I have to keep dancing personally. But if you spend countless hours working on a set/mix, and spend all the money that you have to as a team and initially see your opportunity cost and give up other things to make that money, you should go into a competition wanting to be recognized by all your efforts. I dance for the artform but I compete for my boys, to know that what we do as brothers pays off. If your reward is a trophy, AWESOME, if it's BTF recognition, AWESOME, if it's in order to have a good time with your team, AWESOME! To do all of this haha is the hardest task, but it can be done. I dance for the art, but I compete for my team personally.

I feel like a huge problem that I have seen are the types of competitions that teams go to. I think someone said something about the style of the competition, and how organizers would like to keep the image of their competition a certain way. At the end of the day, if it's a trophy you're after, go to the competition with a rubric that best fits your teams set/execution (not style) period and do it the best at that competition otherwise don't question it. But if you want to be able to show yourself off as a versatile team, which I think is a lot more respectable because it is harder to do, who can win at different comps that have different judging panels, and MOREOVER a rubrics that are different from what you're accustomed to, DO IT. But it still means that there is more difficulty there so you don't know what you're up against, but instead what you're supposed to accomplish. There are big big competitions that everyone loves to watch and and be a part of but at the end of the day, you must make your set fit the rubric that you are being judged by. If you do this the best, with the best dancers, and best set, you can win here too.

 

[Kaur]

The question of will bhangra go folk or modern?

1. I think that there is always a back and forth jump. Teams were modern in 2004-2007ish (ubc , kk, sher, Duniya etc) it won so everyone did it.

2. Then out of nowhere VCU came and started to win, maybe because they stood out amongst all the modern teams who looked the same. VCU transformed the whole east coast, they started to win so a lot of the collegiate teams tried to do the same( 2007-10ish)

3.Then we saw Sgpd/NJ bring this new type of creativity which was 1. Come up with a cool way to do traditional moves (Sgpd) 2. Use props, non bhangra creativity, incorporation of non punjabi music (NJ). This lasted from 2010- 2012. A lot of teams stuck with the Vcu style but majority moved over to this.

4. By mid 2012 pure folk started to win again ( pcbca, shane, cal). Yes these teams have won before but im talking in terms of back to back and beating 'creative' teams. In my opinion it's because it sticks out compared to what the average team does.

I have a feeling that bhangra will go folk once again because that's what sticks out at the moment. Only issue with folk is that it's harder in terms of execution. It's very easy to end up looking like a team who is 'trying' to be folk. I see a jump towards folk.

Just my opinion, what do I know anyways lol.

 

[Saab]

its not hard. i did it. judges do it. and cleanliness/execution encompasses all of that. its more of how the rubric is written and the details for what the judge is asked to judge.

+1 to you then. Still...if it were that easy then why don't all judges do it? (Rhetoric)

Overall, I think it's because it's not voiced properly and it's not voiced appropriately - hence the purpose of the thread/dialogue. In the framework of all the judges, you have pointed to one huge thing makes it hard to do: time. With a lack of time, you are looking at feedback that is relegated to general impressions which are followed by feedback. With as many as five judges and five minutes - it is not an adequate amount of time to get the proper feedback. I think ten minutes and an emphasis on comparative feedback is way more appropriate in a competitive setting would fix a lot of these mistakes.


Also, I don't think feedback has been more criticized until now - which hopefully will change the feedback to a much more critical and productive feedback process.

 

[Saab]

I really wouldn't mind doing this, I just think that audience at these events are so diverse (the crowd is catered towards competitions bringing in monetary benefit rather than respect for the art being done) that it would take a systemic education of the populace about what bhangra is etc as a well as a grassroots education program that would be running parallel to the competition to fully remove the audience of said bias and placate teams. I am fine with people preferring a style over another, but the best performance shouldn't be dictated or predicated on a certain style.

I think you might be right — although others would argue that there is just as much bias in creating rubrics and in judging styles, and as much being predicated on certain styles, in the current system. Or, they might rather take their chances and be misjudged by "the people" than misjudged by...judges.


Again, I think what you say makes sense, Saab, but mainly from the viewpoint of someone (as the rest of your post evinces) who is interested in refining judging.... in being anal about every little aspect that is put on stage (I am just joking).


A new paradigm would mean "letting go" of the feeling that these minutia are so important, and that the viewer needs an elite education in them. Probably you and some others would not be in favor of the idea, but to submit oneself to the public -- the "folk" as it were -- might make sense. In folk and popular arts, the general understanding is that "the people" DO understand what is going on, that their tastes and opinions are the essence of the style. This is as opposed to "classical" sort of art, which seems to require a special education and only an elite audience can appreciate it.


That, of course, assumes bhangra is an art in the first place. If it is a SPORT, then that is a different matter. If it is a SPORT, then I can see the drive to focus on judging as a matter of course and trying to refine it more and more. But if it is art/culture, and if it is a folk or popular art accessible to the people of that culture at large, then it will go other ways.


Perhaps "Art vs. Sport" will become the new conflict shaping bhangra in the future.

I think you see my refining of the judging as being anal(with the joking), but it's rather more of a focus on your audience versus judges comparison. In a lot of instances, with the time for feedback and the volume of the feedback, I see generic feedback that is relative to the specific dance you performed, and not in a comparative environment or full detail. I think audiences CAN and WOULD do this, and that is the reason why I think the detail part of it is important. Not be overtly focused on the detail(as you would lose the joy of watching the dance), but because there should be some difference in between a judges viewpoint and an audience members - an audience member who comes to enjoy the dance typically says what they liked or disliked, but that does not always involve the whole performance or set.


I am all for this kind of judging, again, because actually having this happen and its incorporation would force teams to come with realizations and caveats about performances which come from all the variables a large audience would bring. I think your argument and the implementation of the process would be better defined by how the individuals who are performing the art would want to view themselves (this due to the lack of a pure classification for stage bhangra). Also, the usage of that judging would, I think, appeal to the more creative aspects of performances nowadays (audiences seemingly trend toward the wow factor if not preconditioned to do so).

Personally, I think what you have said is more a of a discourse over the pratfalls of viewing stage bhangra as some sort of multi-dimensional cultural entity that can be safely nestled in all three aspects (folk art/classical art/sport) and satisfy everyone. The incorporation of this kind of judging and it's acceptance would be seen as a large shift towards the folk art aspect of the dance and a consistent evolutionary aspect.


Note: For me, personally, I view something like the south indian classical dances as the gold standard for the definition of classical art. I don't see a majority push to make bhangra into something akin to bharatanatyam, kuchipuddi, or other classical forms. Applying the standard of it being a classical dance or a classical art form and it being heavily regulated would be erroneous for me just by that comparison.

 

[vmural2]

I recently went to a hip hop competition (WOD Chicago, awesome competition, anyone in Chicago should check it out) and one of the things that stood out to me was that they would have at least 1-2 exhibition teams performing in between every competitive team. This seemed to provide opportunities for a few things; as it allowed for lesser known talent to perform alongside very talented groups, lightened the competitive atmosphere, and provided more time for judges in between performances. Is this something people can see happening with bhangra comps in the future? (Of course this has its own issues of committees finding/managing more teams, longer show lengths, etc. but I can see bigger competitions having the ability to cater to this type of "hybrid" competition)

 

[siddyp]

I recently went to a hip hop competition (WOD Chicago, awesome competition, anyone in Chicago should check it out) and one of the things that stood out to me was that they would have at least 1-2 exhibition teams performing in between every competitive team. This seemed to provide opportunities for a few things; as it allowed for lesser known talent to perform alongside very talented groups, lightened the competitive atmosphere, and provided more time for judges in between performances. Is this something people can see happening with bhangra comps in the future? (Of course this has its own issues of committees finding/managing more teams, longer show lengths, etc. but I can see bigger competitions having the ability to cater to this type of "hybrid" competition)

burgh does this every year. i think its great and really gives the show more entertainment value

 

[Gabbah Shareef Bhalwan]

I recently went to a hip hop competition (WOD Chicago, awesome competition, anyone in Chicago should check it out) and one of the things that stood out to me was that they would have at least 1-2 exhibition teams performing in between every competitive team. This seemed to provide opportunities for a few things; as it allowed for lesser known talent to perform alongside very talented groups, lightened the competitive atmosphere, and provided more time for judges in between performances. Is this something people can see happening with bhangra comps in the future? (Of course this has its own issues of committees finding/managing more teams, longer show lengths, etc. but I can see bigger competitions having the ability to cater to this type of "hybrid" competition)

burgh does this every year. i think its great and really gives the show more entertainment value

What would you say were the differences between the exhibition and the competition performers, in this context?

 

[siddyp]

I recently went to a hip hop competition (WOD Chicago, awesome competition, anyone in Chicago should check it out) and one of the things that stood out to me was that they would have at least 1-2 exhibition teams performing in between every competitive team. This seemed to provide opportunities for a few things; as it allowed for lesser known talent to perform alongside very talented groups, lightened the competitive atmosphere, and provided more time for judges in between performances. Is this something people can see happening with bhangra comps in the future? (Of course this has its own issues of committees finding/managing more teams, longer show lengths, etc. but I can see bigger competitions having the ability to cater to this type of "hybrid" competition)

burgh does this every year. i think its great and really gives the show more entertainment value

What would you say were the differences between the exhibition and the competition performers, in this context?

they weren't bhangra performances. There was a hip hop team, a fusion team, raas team, an acapella group... basically different acts to not let all the bhangra performances run together. it allowed the audience to not get 'bored' and not let the bhangra become monotonous

 

[Gabbah Shareef Bhalwan]

Do you think the could do the same but use bhangra (i.e rather than hip hop, raas, etc) and keep it from getting monotonous?

 

[RsKderpu]

Basically, it all comes down to motivation. Who is motivated to keep it going, to improve the world of Bhangra, and what new ideas that can bring to it. Innovation.

 

[vmural2]

I think doing that with an all bhangra lineup would be sick, however, I can see it being feasible only in certain places; like a comp held in an area with a dense bhangra scene, or a comp that receives a significantly large amount of applicants, and out of those applicants, the teams that don't make it are humble enough to take an exhibition spot and commit to it. It's also difficult to count on out of state teams to come out for an exhibition, unless its specifically advertised as an exhibition show (Pao, Heights), but IMO, if the competition is big/prestigious enough, and does the proper marketing, it may not be as difficult to achieve.

One can also include certain criteria for exhibition teams (assuming all bhangra) that are a little less strict than comp guidelines to ensure that they aren't total bs performances. But overall, I think having more exhibition teams would take the pressure of competing teams to "entertain" for the night, as the entertainment value can be achieved through the exhibition performances. Audiences would still get their money's worth, teams get exposed more, its a lighter atmosphere, and at the end of the day, there's still a winner.