Hmm...I read through most of it although I wish she had condensed her thoughts a bit more. But I found most of her statements to be simply untrue. I am a pretty vocal participant on tribe and can say that if anything it has helped me gain recognition within the community--although that is not why I participate so often. Sure, some people disagree with me or think I talk too much, but much more often than not I have found support and encouragement. And I have found that acting as a critic and even starting a tribe based on peer critique has gotten me very kind words and encouragement for more of this sort of thing.

Honestly, I'm not really sure what Neon wants. I understand what she's saying about how top-name stars can't really speak their full minds for fear of offending their usual adoring public, but does she not want any of us to discuss...anything? Usually the people who don't want others to act as critics at all are the ones who have found themselves criticized and can't handle it. I say that if you are a professional performer, musician, designer, vendor, event organizer, promoter, etc. then we as the consumers and members of the community have every right to bring up issues we see or make comments on the work we see those professionals do. And before I get flamed, please note that I said *professionals*.

Also, her statement saying that you're either a critic or an artist but you can't be both is bullshit...about as bullshit as the line, "those that can't do, teach". Please. If anything, being an artist HELPS me give a better critique, and having a critical eye is imperative to being an artist.

I will have to reread it later with more time to focus.

I'm not a big fan of lists, or of absolutes. I think telling us what she was hoping to achieve with the article would help. Is she trying to say that 'star power' is worth cultivating, and this is how she thinks it can be best cultivated? If so, what's the big deal? Whether you are a fan of her dancing or not, she certainly has a measure of star power. If you don't intend to cultivate star power her way, ignore it like you would any other article you don;t agree with. IMO.

I almost feel that her article was in itself perpetuating that which she is attacking.

Neon sure covers a lot of aspects of publicity, and I confess I dont' have time to read the whole thing. haha

but I don't agree with the premise (have heard this before, elsewhere, maybe bhuz?) that big stars don't/shouldn't mingle w/the hoi polloi online. Takes away that "mystery". As you said, Yasmin, "Apparently commercial considerations are more important than passing on knowledge."

I think that stance is ridiculous, and pretty snooty, but I'm an "inclusionist", that's where I'm coming from. The "star" thing, the "cult of personality" is silly, and the bottom line of profits just isnt' more important that being real with people.

So I think she has some good points - everything going straight to youtube etc. but what's her point, we shouldn't talk? I don't get it.

If stars need a "mystery", then why are there so many magazines discussing every little detail of famous people's personal life?
Oh wait, I can see Paris Hilton going: "Sorry, I don't want to talk about it, I want to keep my mystery" *LOL*

I think Neon's article focuses a lot on the negative sides of discussion forums which in my eyes are the smaller part of them.
Most discussions are about people helping other people with their questions about how to become a better/more educated dancers.
And if "star dancers" give advice, it's very appreciated and helps their positive image!
In a small world like the Oriental dance scene is, being approachable is much more sympathetic than being the big diva in her ivory tower.

And really, being online and being a part of half a dozen discussion forums has done so much in my favour and really boosted my dance career! So why should I stop now?
"Sorry, now that I am famous, I will not talk to you simple folks anymore!"
What kind of an arrogant b*tch would that make out of me?

I have to be honest, I lost interest in Neon's article and quit reading about half way through. Obviously I don't agree, as I "run my mouth" in cyberspace quite a bit. I do think it is different to voice one's opinions in a forum of bellydancers than in a forum of the general public. ie. for someone to say "Miles Copeland is irrelevant" (lol) among people in the business is different than saying it to someone outside the bellydance community.

I don't see much difference between people chit-chatting (or having bitch-fests) in a coffee shop or online - except of course that things in print are easily shared. But a conversation at the coffee shop can be overheard and quoted in a trade publication just as easily. Artists of all sorts come together to gripe and exchange ideas. We're human beings, for god's sake. To read Neon's article, it would seem that if I want to achieve stardom, I must cease having opinions and become a homogenized cookie-cutter entertainer. No, thanks - I'll keep mouthing off and dancing for my fans here in the big O. If they abandon me because they don't like something I said, well, like momma said, then they weren't good friends anyway.

I think this could have been two or three separate articles on more focused points. I'd like to see her expound on this one: "One of the traditional roles of an art critic or historian is to find a balance between the established aesthetic and the innovations of avant-guard artists who undermine it. This is the form of criticism that is vitally needed in our field. As a community we spontaneously do some of this, but, unfortunately, most of our discussions end up revolving defensively around “it’s not bellydance,” while it is totally possible to discuss such matters with an open mind, and with neither overt nor masked aggression."

I suppose I just feel that saying 'think about the consequences of what you say before you speak' is sort of common-sense and applies to everyone, not just bellydancers. And if people think about it and still want to speak, and do so well, more power to them. Someone has to raise their voice every now and then. I may not always agree with Gibson, for example, but I respect her for speaking her opinion in a way that isn't an attack on anyone, and for being very articulate in doing so. Likewise, Sherri just posted a VERY popular thread on health insurance and dancers - an issue that would likely have continued to lurk beneath the surface if she hadn't said something. Everyone may not have liked it, but it needed to be said.

Silence can be golden if you're offering your opinion only to "hear" the sound of your own voice. But if there's a purpose, then there's no reason not to address an issue in a constructive way... And yes, everyone on the Internet, not just bellydancers, could use a lesson in what "constructive criticism" is, but again, that's just people, it's not only bellydancers. I've read just as many lame, overly negative/positive, or useless critiques of movies and books as I have of dancers, DVDs or dance shows, if not more.

i agree with a lot of what neon said- i think,the article was rather long, but from what i rmemeber i agree. most critiques done in this buisness are private- i'm glad about that. why do we need to have a review? word of mouth travles fast here (in nyc) so the feedback gets back to us artists right away.
having said that- everyone does have the right to express their opinions, publish articles, say whatever they want. i think neon was questioning why reviewers feel the need to critique. if the reviewer's goal is to really give a holisitic crititique/review then they have my blessing (though they dont' need it), but many people don't have arts' best intentions- that is a danger.