I've just finished reading "No Applause ... Just Throw Money: The Book That Made Vaudeville Famous" by Trav S.D. This is a highly entertaining (and a bit opinionated) look at the history of vaudeville that is both reverent and irreverent. If your interest in bellydance extends to a curiosity about what popular entertainment was like in the U.S. at the time the dance was introduced to the public, you'll find this book of interest (although by way of explaining how "cooch" dance made it onto stages across the country, the author repeats the myth of Little Egypt performing at the Chicago World's Fair that I discussed in a previous post).
I found the description of vaudeville's decline particularly thought-provoking. It was, of course, mainly technology that "killed" vaudeville - silent films in the 19-teens and then radio in the '20s. (Working in an industry - newspapers - facing a similar threat from electronic media, I could relate). But it made me think about how audiences started abandoning live performances in order to watch grainy black-and-white films with no dialogue. Sheer novelty was a big draw, no doubt, as were the much cheaper prices to see films rather than live shows. (And even in those days, film producers were able to lure top talent into their stables.) Radio's popularity was easy to explain - listeners were able to enjoy their favorite vaudeville singers and comedians without having to leave the comfort of home. But of course all this led to a shift away from watching live performances and into watching them through a medium. This also meant a shift in the kind of performances people were exposed to - singers and comedians made the transition to radio (and, later, television), but dancers, acrobats and other vaudeville stalwarts didn't get the same kind of exposure and their artistry began to be pushed out of the mainstream.
Now, none of us today would give up the luxury of having entertainment that's pre-recorded and/or transmitted through a medium of some kind (I'll confess to being an iPod addict), but I think we lose a little something in not being in the same room with the entertainers. I know I enjoy bellydance much more when I see it performed live than while watching it on a performance DVD - and it's even better when it's done to live music. There's a vibe between the dancer, the musicians and the audience that you're not going to feel watching a DVD at home by yourself. The music, for that matter, sounds better live than on a recording.
Since I am fortunate enough to live within a train ride of NYC, I try to attend live professional bellydance shows as often as I can - and a few of these have been a mix of bellydance and "neo-vaudeville" so I've been able to get at least a glimpse of what entertainment was like "in the old days." In an age of corporate entertainment, the opportunity to gather in small groups to watch dedicated performers give it their all can be very rewarding, and should not be passed up.
