That's a good question. For myself, I don't say that I've "studied under" someone unless I've taken at least several sessions worth of classes with them. Enough that I understand their style extensively, and could describe or demonstrate it if asked.

I think it's also appropriate to say you "are a student" of someone if they're a teacher you've taken multiple workshops with and practice their style intensively. The first name that pops into my head is Suhaila...lots of people study with her from afar and practice on their own, taking workshops when they can. But they may not ever have taken non-workshop classes with her.

If I've just taken one or two workshops with someone, if I mentioned them at all, I'd probably put them under a list of "instructors I've taken workshops with."

In terms of performance, I'd say I performed with another dancer if A) I was in a troupe with them for at least several months and worked on numbers together (B) I worked on at least a single choreography with them that involved our mutual collaborative efforts. I wouldn't count an improvisational, last minute duet as "performing with" someone. With musicians, I probably wouldn't list them unless I'd danced with them on multiple occasions (enough that they knew who I was and that we mutually knew one another's patterns). Er...that's my two cents!

I remember a really long thread on this topic a while ago, but I don't remember if it was in this tribe or another one.

My two cents...

One workshop does not a "study/train with" make. Nope. Sorry. One 3-5 hour session with someone is nice, but does not equal a consistent and long-term understanding of the particular style/technique of a dancer. Now, a weeklong intensive can be counted, I think...that says that there was immersion in the technique and I think that absolutely can alter a dancer's style for the long run. But this whole "I took two classes with Dancer X"="trained with" is a misrepresentation of experience.

As for the performing...unless you are actually in a piece with someone, you didn't perform with them. Unless you are dancing side by side with that person (not at a hafla), on a stage, to the same music, choreo or improv, you didn't dance with them and have no right to say that you have performed with them. Being on the same bill or at the same venue means absolutely nothing when it comes to that kind of claim.

I actually found Frank's wording to be really hazy, whether intentional or not...to say that you have "trained with and/or performed with" people is totally unclear and the two concepts are VERY different. To say that you've trained with someone is to say that you were his/her student...to say that you've performed with someone is to say that you are enough of an equal to be put onstage next to them. But even then you need to be honest with yourself...for example, I took a workshop series with Elizabeth Strong which culminated in a student show where she danced with us--but I'd never use that event to say that I've performed with Liz Strong.

What I do know is that I've been dancing seriously for close to eight years, and can count the people I have truly studied and trained with on one hand...er, maybe a hand with a couple of extra fingers. Sure, I've peppered that training with a few random workshops or what have you, but I also watch "So You Think You Can Dance" and have been inspired and influenced by some of the choreos and skill I see there...should I drop that name somehow too?

I think that overall, people need to be honest with themselves about their experience when they are trying to prove a point about themselves. And if you are some kind of wunderkind dancer, why bother putting down all the big dance names under the sun? Let your dancing speak for you. If you stuff all these names into your resume within a small chunk of time (in Frank's case it was 26 names that he'd "trained with/performed with" in a two-year period) it makes it clear that you're misrepresenting your experience, which will make people not trust you, great dancing or not. If you really have a need to prove that you're a strong dancer, just point people to a video of you and let them judge for themselves...all the "names" in the world mean nothing if you don't have the goods.

If I took a workshop with someone, I don't call it anything other than a workshop. My dance CV lists my training (such as long term classes, either ongoing over the years or a full college semester), and then it says that I have attended workshops with the following list of people. I think it is important to let people know that I am continuing to expand my training, even in 1-5 hour chunks, because my focus is on fusion and that variety of input is valuable to me. I have taken a few workshops on African dance, and to leave those off would be omitting a very valuable dance resource to me - I use those moves. But I wouldn't say I "trained with" that teacher. And I own some DVDs, but those don't go on my CV. I consider them a practice aid, and not "training."

I am with the above posters on the "performed with" category. That means dancing in the same piece with someone. I can see saying it, also, if you put together a show with one or two other dancers (such as the Indigo's Le Serpent Rouge) where you performed solos but were obviously working together for a cohesive effect (not necessarily dancing as a group). Joint preparation is pretty much a must, in my opinion, because that's the definition of "working with." I mean, I went to the same school dances as some really hot guys, but I wouldn't say I "went with" them because I actually went with a friend or by myself. Know what I mean? : )

The main thing, to me, is not to obfuscate or misinform while still displaying any assets you have. If someone reads the resume and gets the wrong idea, obviously it is being presented in a confusing way. If you're not sure, ask someone else to read it, or try paraphrasing yourself - say the same thing in different words, and if it comes out wrong, word it a different way. Those are just good writing tips in general, too.

As for performing, if I have performed with someone with no joint preparation, then I might say I "sat in" with them. I don't know if there's an equivalent phrase for dance that conveys the same meaning. I would only say this in the context of a real show, not an informal jam.

Anything more involved than "sitting in" and I am comfortable saying I have performed with someone.

Heres the thing: show me what you can do first, then tell me who you learned it from. If I am a member of the GP, I'm not gonna know who the hell you're talking about, and if I'm a member of the BD community, then I'm gonna know that who you took a workshop from 2 years ago may not have any bearing on your skills. If you wanna impress me, more show and less tell. The Youtube age makes it easier than ever.


P.S. This rant not directed at anyone in particular. I think I missed the thread that spawned this one!

"I have seen some rather questionable lists citing all of those dancers one has "trained with" or "performed with" by dancers with only a few years at best under their bellydance belts. It seems to me nearly impossible to "train with" dozens of teachers in the span of 2-3 years to the point where every teacher has had a lasting and profound effect on the dancer enough to claim them as a teacher. Similarly, I find it hard to believe that someone of the same experience has collaborated on so many projects as to have dozens of "performed with" credits racked up."

Exactly my thought. If someone has trained with a famous dancer, my first response is "That must have been wonderful!", and my first question is, "When and where?"

Unless the Previous Poster is independently wealthy, I saw his claims to Famous Name instruction/collaboration as "shallow, not deep". The man's got a lot of talent and dedication, and he obviously takes his bellydance seriously. But when you claim to have studied almost 10 different styles in 3 years...obviously most of them didn't get much time!

My apologies if the PP *does* have the financial and time resources to study/collaborate intensively and at length with all the dancers he mentioned, and in all the styles mentioned. But it hardly seems likely. And if it is true, how did he find the time out of his busy schedule to cross-post all over tribe?

I agree with the more show less tell comments, but what about a resume, etc, especially if you are looking for a gym or a school or some other entity from the GP? I am in a remote area where workshops are about the only way I CAN take classes. If I put together a list of who I have studied with according to the definitions in this thread, it looks like I haven't done anything for the last 12 years, when I have, in fact, been working my butt off. I try to make it to 3-4 workshops or private lesson intensives a year. some of them I may list as workshops, but what about workshops that translate to 36 contact hours with one instructor? hour wise, that's over 4 months of weekly classes. would it be appropriate to list number of training hours? Not being defensive here, just wondering what you would consider an honest statement in a different kind of situation.

this might be another semantics question, but right now i'm a student rather than professional performer (i can only hope to get there eventually):

if i'm taking classes from a rather large bellydance studio, where it is owned by one personality, but take classes from two or three others, would i say i've studied under the owner (who i have studied under for the past couple of years)? list all of them? list the ones who have made the biggest impact? list the ones from the last year?

i ask because the idea of having a "dance cv" has really struck me- i've never written down what i've done before, and i'm going on five years in. is this the sort of thing one should keep track of?

thanks in advance.

Because I don't really care to do the workshop circuit, I keep it short and simple on my website by mentioning those who have had the greatest impact on me and stating my philosophy on education:

"... some of my favorite and most inspirational instructors include: Shoshanna, John Compton, Artemis and Jajouka. As an instructor, I am constantly taking classes and workshops with other instructors. I encourage my students to take classes from other people to help them grow and develop their own dance style."

You know, I just had a thought: While I will skip over or roll my eyes when I read that someone has studied/trained with a laundry list of people who clearly they can not have taken more than a few workshops with, I take no offence someone saying that they are INSPIRED by x famous person. Although, I think that anyone who knows the famous dancers would probably be able to pick x famous person's inspiration out from amongst the dancer's dance style. Just a thought.