My 2 cents:

If I 'workshoppped' with someone, I call it a 'workshop.' If I hold a certian certification in a particular area, I call it a 'certification' and cite the exact name of said certification. If I have 'performed in the same show as XYZ,' I say 'I performed in the same show as XYZ.' Check my bio, you'll see. I hate when people 'pad their resumes,' if you will. Being influenced by someone or taking a couple workshops and studying with or being mentored by someone, well, those are EONS away from one another. As for as a cutoff time to be able to claim 'studied with' or 'mentored by,' I don't really know the answer to that. But one or 2 worskshops definitely does not suffice. You can have a formative INFLUENCE in your INTEREST in dance by taking workshops/classes here and there, that's ok. But masking it as something greater I feel is profoundly wrong. Hell, at only 3yrs under my belt, I am still a baby dancer myself and don't feel I've earned the right to say I have 'studied with' anyone at this point even though I have a couple of dance certifications. I intend on keeping my bio as honest as possible. At what point can I say I 'studied with' someone, not sure. Tough question to answer. I suppose I'll know when the time comes.

On my blog, I list all my teachers. I separate the list of who I think had the most impact and who I merely studied under for a bit. I don't do it for name dropping; I like to give credit to people and hopefully attract business their way. I'm also not performing professionally if that makes a difference or currently am trying to

If people ever ask why I chose a specific person as being influential, I determine this by time or something very useful I gained from these people. Usually it's both.

I don't consider doing a workshop really training with someone, considering how big and infrequent they often are. I define my studies very clearly as workshops, weekly classes, or private lessons and am happy to tell people the frequency and estimated dates.

If I performed with someone, I would only describe as such if the person actually danced/played live music when I was dancing. In other words, they were part of my performance in an important way.

I try to be descriptive as possible as to not be deceptive. I don't know if other people are just guilty of not being specific enough, not thinking it over to be specific, or are purposefully trying to be deceptive.

This is particularly interesting to me, as I've experienced a parallel...

I'm only coming up on my 2nd year of dance study, and have only had one teacher. I've been lucky enough to attend some fabulous workshops with amazing teachers (and a couple of other classes, also with great folks), but how much impact can a three-hour workshop really *have* on you, your style, your dance life?

And although I've been lucky enough to dance in shows with some great headliners, for the most part I wasn't even onstage at the same time. Doesn't really count...

Anyway, the parallel is that this resume-padding goes on in any performing art I've experienced so far. When I sang professionally, I would sometimes see other singers' resumes that would state something very grandiose such as "Performed with Dame Janet Baker, such-and-such a festival, blah, blah, blah....."

Dude, I was there. We were in the chorus. You were holding a spear as the Third Minion from the Left. Not so much performing with, as performing as scenery.

Pretty much the same story.

Goodness, I brought this up ages ago in Bellydance Drama tribe, and I was pretty much flamed for feeling that it was INAPPROPRIATE to say that you "studied" with someone if you've taken a workshop with them.

I believe in breaking it down clearly:

Study:

Workshops: Pretty clear here.
Intensives: Separates from workshops = more than 2 days. Like a weeklong intensive with RB.
Studied: This person is, or has been, your teacher. You take, or have taken, regularly with this person, not less than 6 months. IF you have done multiple intensives regularly with this person, that might qualify ALSO as "studied".
Trained: You probably have been with this teacher for a long time, years. This teacher has influenced your style.
Certified: pretty clear here.

Performance:

I don't know about this one personally. I am unfamiliar with how the marketing is supposed to work with this one. I currently have been going with the trends that I've seen. If you requested to be in a show and it was an "anyone can perform" thing, then you are in a show where [insert dancer name] is the headliner.

If you were asked to perform in a show, or auditioned for a show, I've noted that people tend to state that they have "performed with." I DO think it is unclear though, and seems to hint that you MAY or MAY NOT have actually collaborated with the person.

Show tickets for performances (concerts and the like) typically have the headliner, followed by "with [insert less popular performer]" and I note that bands often reference that they played in a show with, or played with. So perhaps the best way to state it is "performed in a show with".

And on that note, I'm going to go check my tribe and see what I put in for the Moria show (eep! I certainly hope I've not offended.)

<--------This person just fell off their chair laughing because he knows what sparked this thread.

— At what point can one claim to have "trained with" or "studied with" someone?

To me, trained implies continual, intimate training on a regular basis. I see them weekly if not more than once a week, and they continually correct, critique and offer advice. Having said that, if you're working hard to a teacher's tapes, or from copious notes. And if you have contact with said teacher if they aren't in town, I'd say you are doing a degree of training.

Studied with, again... IMHO, is a lesser than trained with. I've studied with Carolena Nericcio as far as I'm concerned because I've done two workshops and have had communications to ask when I've had problems. She can see me, recognize me, and address me by name. I can't claim to truly be "training" with her yet, since I rarely see her, but I could change that after August because I'm going for privates with her and I will be taking a teacher training with her in November.

— In other words, when it is okay to drop names and claim someone as having been your teacher and a formative force in your dance education?

Christina, you've asked two different questions here. I've never met one of the most formative forces in my dance education. Francisco Carranza was only a character on a tape when I saw him, but he continues to shape how I comport myself when I am dancing. But he's never been a teacher of mine. I've learned from him, yes, but there was no ACTUAL teaching. I cite Francisco as "an Influence."

It is okay to drop names when said teachers won't turn around and say:
A) Who???
B) Coming to one class on a Tuesday night and then never returning, does not make you a student of mine.
C) My lawyer will be calling you with a Cease And Desist order.
D) I do not want to take responsibllity for your crappy dancing.
E) Yes, I did a workshop for your dance school, but popping in for 5 minutes doesn't mean you can list me as training you!

— By the same token, at what point can one claim to have "performed with" someone else? Dancing separately but in the same show?

No way! Sharing a bill is in no way the same as performing together. Diana Ross performed with The Supremes. Madonna performed with Britney Spears. Sonny performed with Cher. The opening act for any of the aforementioned acts did not "perform" with the stars, but shared a bill.


— Performing once together with no joint preparation?

Yes, that is performing if there was an audience watching. Only because I want to list that I danced with a member of Blue Lotus Tribe! ;-))))) No joint preparation doesn't make it any less of two people on stage performing together. I've been lucky to have had the great privilege to have danced with Rachel Brice at one point (no, I'm not name dropping, I'm trying to make a point!). We improvised during one of her gigs up here. I was also sharing the bill on that evening. But then, I wouldn't put that in my dancer bio.

Where is the line between sharing a venue and "performing with" another dancer?

Look for the fool with the umbrella walking down the middle of a busy highway, and that is where you'll find the line. Maybe its just me, but that is a big difference.


— I ask because I have seen some rather questionable lists citing all of those dancers one has "trained with" or "performed with" by dancers with only a few years at best under their bellydance belts.

And how strange that they've all been deleted out of the many tribes they were cross-posted on.

— It seems to me nearly impossible to "train with" dozens of teachers in the span of 2-3 years to the point where every teacher has had a lasting and profound effect on the dancer enough to claim them as a teacher. Similarly, I find it hard to believe that someone of the same experience has collaborated on so many projects as to have dozens of "performed with" credits racked up.

I agree. No WAY.

If you've been dancing for two years and claiming to have danced with most of the major stars in bellydance, you certainly wouldn't have time to be noodling about on Tribe!

uh oh.

looks like i am a culprit of this in a sense!

as i go over the list of teachers i've had the luck to learn from, i notice that i worded it as "studied with". and while many of the people i have listed are folks i can legitimately say i've studied under, just as many are those that i've had one or two workshops with. the workshops have certainly influenced me as a dancer, but i cannot credit those teachers for my technique.

i'm glad you pointed this out. now i'm trying to figure out how to word it in a more straightforward fashion, without going over my word limit!

Thank goodness I'm not in the 'guilty of this' party!

Neta and I definitely opted for the 'what we are influenced by' as far as genre of dance instead of influenced by this name or that name.

However, we do give credit where it's due. We totally gave Tribaltique a shot out on our TR08 video posting because one of their kick ass moves was 'hipnotized' for our usage. Total pun intended.

Now we've never gone so far as to claim that I've danced with someone for being the same show! I think that's a bit much. If that were the case, then I guess I could claim everyone that performed at Tribal Fest because technically that's a three day 'show' so I've danced with all of the west coast people, some east coast people, and some peeps from different countries!

I think it gets kinda crazy.