Radical Naked Dance in San Francisco

Debbie says:

Dandelion Dance Theatre will present The Undressed Project;s Annica this Wednesday through Sunday, July 12th through 16th, at 2840 Mariposa Avenue in San Francisco (Begins at Theatre of Yugen’s Noh Space and travels through Project Artaud Complex. Wheelchair accessible.) You can purchase tickets here. Later performances in Hilo, Hawaii, are also listed on the Dandelion site.

“In the Undressed Project, Dandelion uses naked modern dance to uncover the inherent beauty, interconnection and impermanence of all bodies; as well as the blocks that get in the way of experiencing such a perspective. ” Performed by a “wildly diverse company,” plus naked dancers from local workshops at all locations.

Our friend Karen Summerly pointed this out to us. Scheduling will probably prevent both Laurie and I from going to this one, but it sounds wonderful!

<br /> fat<br /> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/body image" rel="tag nofollow">body+image</a><br /> nujdity<br /> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/dance" rel="tag nofollow">dance</a><br /> Undressed+Project<br /> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/Body+Impolitic" rel="tag nofollow">Body Impolitic</a><br />

3 thoughts on “Radical Naked Dance in San Francisco

  1. Haven’t seen the performances… however, as a dancer, and in reply to the former comment…. it must be realized that there is a vast difference between “playboy/playmates” mentality and naked dancing celebrating our bodies and the ability to move and emote with great respect.

    “Playboy and playmate” mentality is that of cheapness and exploitation of (usually) female bodies — implied — for men’s material-only pleasure.

    Nothing “wrong” with it particularly… but definitely nothing “right” about it either.

    One dance work performed mostly in the nude was choreographed and performed years ago here in Los Angeles by Rachel Rosenthal (?) — re the Russian Chernoble nuclear accident. The nakedness had a purpose in the “story line” — it wasn’t about “playboy and playmates”. Newspaper reviews hardly, if at all, even mentioned the “nakedness” — the work as a whole got rave reviews.

    Former commenter here is stuck on “nakedness” as a “no-no” or something forbidden… therefore sees nakedness as as something cheap and degrading as “playboy and playmates”.

    It depends on how the “nakedness” is presented — with what spirit and intent?

    Hope he/she begins to see “nakedness” as a beautiful thing–not a cheap thing– when wholly and purely presented, experienced.

  2. Could comment #1 be a kind of spam? I’m just saying because the pairing of “free” and “naked” together with the idea of playboy-style websites with no charge conjures up a commenter who is a consumer of free nude websites. If that is not the case, commenter #1, sorry about that. Maybe I’m just seeing the world through spam colored glasses because I somehow started getting unfiltered comments from a thread on a fat acceptance board I’m on, and I realized what a labor of Hercules it must be to shovel out the negative commenters.

  3. Yes, that Playboy/Playmate comment was spam, and has been removed. However, it brought us that great comment from Julie, so all is not lost …

Join the Conversation

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.