There are some interesting thoughts in this article. The two main storylines of Billy Elliot The Musical might indeed appear as seeming contradictions: the striking miner's solidarity versus the individual self-realisation of Billy as a ballet dancer.
However in my opinion individualism and collectivism don't need to be polar opposites. First of all there is a difference between individualism and egotism. The egotist only cares for his own needs and tries to realise them without regard for the others around him. Self-realisation doesn't need to be egotistic though. To put this into perspective, every collective can also be seen as a group of individuals. In an optimal society such a group knows about the interdependence of all individuals on each other, but also gives each individual enough freedom to live according to their unique personal needs. Otherwise it would become oppressive.
A positive individualism in this sense should, to pick up themes from the musical: question classical gender roles (*), reject homophobia, give each individual the chance to realise their personal talents and passions, like e.g. ballet. There might be situations where collectivism and individualism clash and a middle ground needs to be found, but I don't think these two ideas are opposites in general. It is possible to combine them.
Of course we don't live in a perfect society and today's ideas of individuality too often border on egotism, so far I agree. It certainly is a danger of individualism that it can lead to a too strong focus on the self, forgetting about or even eradicating the collective.
However in the musical I see the miner's solidarity not as a contradiction but as a counter-balance to the idea of individualism. In fact the musical expresses its support of socialist or collectivist ideas right at the beginning with historic newsreel footage of Labour politician Herbert Morrison:
"Now I want you men of the pits to come through. I want this great scheme of nationalisation to succeed triumphantly. The whole country is watching to see how this great new organisation, this new adventure, this new experiment, comes out. The great experiment of socialism in a democracy depends on you. The whole future we are trying to build up in our country is for all our people, and all our children, and it depends on you."
In the end Billy can only fulfill his dream of becoming a ballet dancer through the support of his local community who overcome their initial rejection and eventually support him, even collecting money for his audition. The community is depicted as always standing together, right to the end.
The musical's collectivist ideas also become clear in a recent interview with Lee Hall (**) where he states:
"Unfortunately the economic crisis and the attacks on the poorest in our country by the Coalition over the last five years have made the themes more immediate and more resonant. The current Tory party are actually going to go even further than the Thatcher government in attacking ordinary working class people."
Neither do I think that the musical affirms some form of enlightened homosexuality over benighted heterosexuality. It simply takes a clear stance in regard to stereotypes and prejudices. As much as a collectivist society should care for the poor and weak, it should also care for the full acceptance of minority groups.
So in the end I don't think Billy Elliot's solidarity with the miners is just a pose. In fact it is a central part of its political message.
(*) for an intriguing discussion of gender, masculinity, sexuality and youth in the film version of Billy Elliot see "Oi. Dancing Boy!" by Cynthia Weber
(**)
http://www.whatsonstage.com/west-end-th ... 37790.html
