Hello forum users,

I'm a student from the University of Melbourne, Australia. I'm researching the burlesque subculture.

Would anyone like to share their opinions with me? I may use the information in my paper but it is at your discretion, and I will keep your details anonymous. If you would like to share any information with me, I can provide you with all necessary information to satisfy research ethics requirements.

I have 3 key questions I'd like to ask you:

1) What do you find appealing about the burlesque style, performance, or experience?

2) Do you think that burlesque challenges or subverts mainstream norms of gender and beauty?

2) What do you think about Dita Von Teese? Does she reflect authentic burlesque, or is she too commercial and mainstream?

If you'd like to share these answers with me, you can do so here, or you are more than welcome to email me.

Thank-you for your assistance!

Howdy from Brisbane!

I like that it's largely freeform - unlike, say, ballet or other conventional styles there isn't a uniform or a set or certain moves or anything like that. People are more open to going all out crazy and innovative. To me burlesque is more of an attitude, of sending up perceptions and messing around with people's ideas of things.

I think it does in some ways but also reinforces them in others. You are more likely to find a wider spectrum of sizes and ages than you would in other contemporary performance forms - there isn't the pressure to diet or look youthful or anything like that. However, there's also subtle pressure to keep to a retro 20s-50s corsetted glamour, and it's hard to be a culturally diverse performer and not be expected to look exotic (I've had times where I'm about to perform a totally random routine and I've been introduced to my chagrin as a Bollywood Princess!!).

I think also that now that burlesque's going mainstream and that people who aren't usually in the scene are cashing in, there is some pressure to look more mainstream. People claim that because burlesque doesn't really go for the tanned blonde buxom bimbo look that it's not mainstream; however, there is still a "mainstream" attractiveness that tends to be the biggest draw. I've been at many revues where the typically glamorous got more response than a more clever or comedic work done by someone not so glamorous. Someone on this forum said a while ago that modern burlesque has become less a progressive performance art and more of vintage cosplay, which I agree. I got into burlesque because I love the performance-art parts of it, but I also feel a bit disconnected from the scene because I'm not into retro rockabilly aesthetics.

Dita's a good example of the mainstreaming I'm talking about. She got into the limelight largely due to her marriage to Marylin Manson and stayed there because she represented an ideal view of glamour. If Dita was dark-skinned and dumpy I doubt she'd get as much attention! I'm personally tired of looking up burlesque articles and seeing her name over and over...come on! there's more to burlesque than Dita. However, she sets people's expectations of what a "good" burlesque show is, so shows that more follow her aesthetic (high glamour, lots of pretty) tend to do best with mainstream casual audiences. But it's a bit like anything else really - the more off-beat oddball examples of the genre tend to be harder to find and appreciate. People often want to be entertained, not poked at, and there are still a lot of people who go to burlesque shows to see pretty women.

I've written tons about similar issues so if you want to chat let me know

B*B, Tiara

1) What do you find appealing about the burlesque style, performance, or experience?

When it's done right - wit, charisma, good use of theatrical power, glamour.

2) Do you think that burlesque challenges or subverts mainstream norms of gender and beauty?

Depends who's doing it. Burlesque is just another sphere of the performing arts, so it is reliant on those that do it - which in the current burlesque world veers wildly between those that get it and use and advance the form in a smart, knowing, witty way, and those that shoot their creative load on choosing a name, and have no ideas left over for the actual performance. So: depending on the exponent of the art, it can subvert and challenge the mindset of the mainstream, or it can go right along with it and be as mainstream as Alan Tichmarsh, and about as interesting and sexy.

I guess, bearing in mind it's underground roots, it kinda should be there to challenge and subvert, but honestly, it's just another artform and like all the others, is constantly in flux.

2) What do you think about Dita Von Teese? Does she reflect authentic burlesque, or is she too commercial and mainstream?

Well, she's very successful and kinda good looking, but as a performer I think she's pretty awful. Dull act. No connection between performer and audience. No wit, or spark. Nothing special at all, in my humble opinion.