1. I am an aspiring burlesque artists with a strong arts background and education. I do not consider myself a "professional" by the current definition of the word.
2. I am new to this scene. I get it; however, I think being new affords me a bit of a fresh perspective than perhaps those who have been entrenched for the last however many years.
3. I'm not trying to piss anyone off or offend anyone--I would simply like to add to this conversation.
We need to discuss the cultural myth called "talent" and how we use this word/concept to critique and value others. There is a common cultural misconception that "talent" is some kind of have or have not quality. Brain research tells us is simply not true. Human beings have been singing, dancing and creating art for millenia. We are all born with the potential to sing in tune, move with accurate rhythm and feel and share joy creating "entertainment". This intelligence is spread normally among our general population as any other intelligence is.
84% of the general population has the ability to sing in tune and move with accurate rhythm.
What does that mean? It means that expression of inner potential + diligent practice = talent. People don't know this and so they think visibility + money + flashy stuff = talent and going forward, visibility + money + flashy stuff = professional and so the definition of talent and professional become synonymous and both are wrong.
Perhaps if we could redefine our notions of "talent" and "professional" in the world of burlesque to embody something a little more accurate and therefore a little more encompassing--we would feel less of a need to divide into the "professional" team and the "hobbyist" team.
My definition of professional:
Showing up on time
Being prepared
Being courteous
An active listener
Adaptable and able to rebound if something unexpected or unintended happens
Understanding the greater good and the real divine purpose of what it's about--engaging the customer/audience
Notice I said nothing about monetary compensation or full time dedication to the pursuit of burlesque. In my opinion, calling oneself a professional relates to the quality of work and attitude carried through performance and not how much or if you are being paid. It is a reflection of how I carry myself and not how others choose to categorize me. I consider myself a professional by this definition because it indicates that you are going to receive my best work on that day--whether you compensate me with money or not and regardless of your personal knowledge of me. And not for nothin'---but a free meal, a drink, the opportunity to work with you again, a favor when needed is compensation in my book. Don't get me wrong, I would like to be paid money too but to me money is a bonus. The highest compensation an artist can ask for is the feedback from their audience. If I get paid $5 an act or $50 an act but the audience isn't interested--who cares? You will never hear a true artist say "Yeah I'm gonna go phone this one in I don't really give a shit about these people, I just want my $50". Right? You would be appalled and offended at such talk.
So why equate $$ with professionalism? Why give "amateurs" money as a benchmark of quality? I know this doesn't address the needs or concerns of those who rely on their art to pay their bills but all I can say to that is ---who said we should all be able to do that? Many people have to get second jobs to pay their bills outside the world of art. What if the audience (who is really our boss) decided directly how much we were going to get paid? That would probably level this playing field quickly. It's not a realistic endeavor. Kudos to you if you are making it work but don't devalue my professionalism because I CHOOSE not to do the same.
Not everyone wants to be a full time artist regardless of money. I CHOSE to get married, start my family, work in education, pay off my tremendous debt for studying art, buy a house and get a little life experience before making time to pursue art because I knew then that I would be 1. Happy 2. a better artist. I don't have the pressure of feeding my son from burlesque and therefore it allows me to study more, think more, create more and up the level of my work before I put it out there. Hopefully it carries forward to what the audience experiences. And newsflash: just because I am not dedicated to this particular art form full time does not mean that I am some kind of disrespectful wannabe--it means I have other priorities and interests. So please do not put me in a catch all category.
It doesn't matter if my audience is every weekend at a dive bar, a symphony hall, a private party or a festival I participate in once a year. If the quality of my work is good and I have been compensated by the audience than that is what matters most. If that makes me a "hobbyist" (which by current definition lumps together a whole lot of different people) and being a "hobbyist" somehow carries a negative connotation--I don't really care. The audience doesn't care about how many dance classes I am currently taking or how much I'm being paid or even that I write this blog. They care if I have opened the door for our shared experience.
Being an artist and being an arts based business person are related but different things. There seems to be alot of grey area on this in the world of burlesque--and everyone knows someone who is a great artist and a terrible business person and vice versa. There has to be, I think, at some point a separation in these two things in order for an art form to survive. When you start drawing lines in the sand of who is and who isn't and what is and what is not you may be increasing business value but you may also be interrupting the natural progression of where the art itself is going. No one person or group can control the cycle of art and no one can control the ever changing sensibilities of the audience or what pop culture is feeding us. So I think it may be unrealistic to revolve an entire career around this and to create benchmarks for artists based on that.
It doesn't matter if the audience is 10 of my friends of 1,000 of New York City's most elite--they all deserve the same level of work and those who deliver on that are the true professionals. The audience doesn't really care about titles, trophies, or competitions. The audience doesn't care if I work at rite aid. The audience doesn't care if I got paid in peanuts or $100 bills. The audience doesn't care if I'm a "hobbyist". Paying undue attention to some of those things serves as entertainment to a very small audience---eachother.
