[Tango-L] Women dressed as men in tango

[Konstantin Zahariev]

OK, I meant a 'last word' on the specific topic. I have to respond to
this more general posting (see below).

On 9/14/07, Sergio Vandekier <sergiovandekier990 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I invented nothing, what I have said was based in my own experience as I was
> growing up in Buenos Aires, in my discussions with tango historians
> themselves or with members of my family and friends that had lived the facts
> by them explained; also in readings and in the knowledge of Argentine
> Culture and history in general.

Please no strawman arguments. I never said or implied you invented
anything - I even pointed out in some cases which specific pieces you
are referring to or provided more details on the evidence you give.

> All along these years I run into foreigners (never one Argentine) that
> disputed historical facts as generally accepted basing their conviction in
> their own deductions and beliefs or in books written by foreigners.  They
> were mostly Europeans or from Latin America.

This is so vague (what subjects or claims or facts are we talking
about) or personalized (people _you_ have run into) as to be
unfalsifiable.

There are Argentines whom you've never met that question some of the
most common stereotypes about tango - like the 'born in brothels'
claim. Of the more famous ones Arturo Penon comes to mind (Pugliese's
first bandoneon from 1969 on). I haven't had time to check the bios of
all authors of the peer-reviewed research articles or dissertations
I've looked at to know if any of the Latin-American sounding names are
actually Argentine. Why would that matter though?

>
> Disgusted with this situation I finally decided to quit writing in Tango-L,
> in my own stupidity I thought it was interesting to share this little known
> fact of  tango women dressing as men, big mistake!

It is fairly well known that some tango women dressed in manly
clothes. Not just Azucena Maizani, but also Mercedes Simone (at least
on occasion). But this interesting trivia isn't the totality of what
you shared - you brought this up in the context of it being evidence
that tango was a men-only dance/world until possibly the 1920-30s. I
also gave you an alternative explanation (with examples from this and
other branches of musical performance) for this phenomenon, but you
ignore it or at least seem not to be open to the idea that alternative
explanations might exist.

>
> I thank you and all the foreigners that did a "systematic research of our
> history"

I have family in La Plata. Am I in the club now? Or am I a
proxy-foreigner? Or a proxy-Argentine? Am I more credible because of
blood connection?

> never mind the arrogance of believing that we are totally unable of
> knowing or investigating our own history.

Another strawman argument - I have never claimed that you are unable
(never mind 'totally unable') to know or investigate your history -
why would I make such a dumb and idiotic claim? I also never claimed
the scientific research I am referring to was done exclusively by
'foreigners' - I actually do not know the nationality of the authors
and I do not much care as long as their logic and evidence holds up to
scientific scrutiny. The scientific method is not subject-bound or
topic-bound - the same basic concepts apply across all areas of
inquiry.

> Here I must concede the fact that tango, having being considered something
> "depicable, proper of the lower classes" was neglected as a subject of study
> by Argentine intelectuals. Despite of this we could paper the road from here
> to the moon with all that has been written about our popular dance and
> music.

First, I think you are also blurring the lines between opinions and
scientific inquiry. I am more interested in the latter and less
interested in extrapolations exclusively based on the former, though
in a field where so much is oral history we have to take both in
tandem.

Second, a related concept is that when I provide some
counter-arguments to yours, it does not imply that I consider the
opposite claim to have been proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. I
merely hope to show that other possibilities (or shades of gray) must
be allowed for consideration. Science is never about being 100
percent, but we can estimate what is more likely and always keep an
open mind to revise our theories.

Third, systematic scientific research means, among other thing, not to
pick and choose (when equal-weight or equally-(un)certain) what
evidence we should include and what we should ignore. One of the
consequences of that is that theories are always open for revision
when new data are found. Another is that you can have a book written
in 1936 that was systematic in the sense that its theories may have
covered all facts available in 1936. The underlying reason for all
this is that we never have a complete and exhaustive set of
observations about a certain reality or phenomenon, and in cases when
our incomplete set is extremely small, as with tango, great caution
and a tolerance for uncertainty is required when extrapolating from it
to what the reality might have looked like.

Consequently, on this subject I am willing to tolerate a lot of
uncertainty and the possibility that your exact set of specific claims
is the correct one, so long as you can provide convincing arguments
and data and a theory that not only holds up for all your claims in a
coherent and self-consistent manner but also explains away all the
contradicting arguments and data. I do not see the tolerance for
uncertainty in you though, even though you are dealing with a similar
extremely small set of observations.

> Summary it is best not to write about the following subjects: Tango History,
> Gender roles in tango, Tango Styles.  If you do you will get tangled in a
> discussion that will never end.
>
> Have a good day, Sergio

With best regards,

Konstantin
Victoria, Canada