Posted:
Since when did international acclaim become a criteria in labeling the best dancer in India? I mean why does a dancer from India need to be valdiated by westerners to be considered amongst the best dancers in India? Didn't the British leave India decades ago, then why is there this internal need to have everything that Indians do be validated by westerners? Geeta, Remo, Farah, Saroj, Ganesh etc, are all brilliant dancers and it's a shame they should be considered any less then Terrence, Sandip etc. who have trained in western countries.........People on the forum are constantly mocking Geeta, and now Farah and Saroj by saying things like "oh they only do bollywood" or they can't do western...umm the last time I checked whatever style these people do the Indian audience loves it, and at the end of the day that's what matters....Why should western styles be forced down Indian audience's throats if that's not what the audience wants to see? Indian audience likes Hip hop for example and contemporary to some extent so some of these choreographers are using it in their choreography but why is there this overwhelming burning desire to make everything in Bollywood resemble Hollywood? Why should Bollywood dances be like western dances? who said western dances were the be all and end all of dancing? Funny thing is Indian audience doesn't care much for Hollywood or many of its dances because if they did Bollywood would have stopped being so dominant ages ago......Just because many people on the forum live outside of India in western countries they automatically tend to want to make everything in India resemble the place where they live....and Thank God India doesn't resemble any of those places...........Did anyone tell Madonna that she can't be considered a great dancer because she doesn't know Indian style? So then how can people tell Farah or Saroj or Geeta that they can't be considered great dancers because they don't know western styles?
