Is using patterns in teaching really that bad?

[timbp]

There are two parties in a class -- the teacher and the learner. Everyone criticises the teacher if the learner goes away with patterns rather than technique.

I have been dancing Ceroc/modern jive for four years, and started learning tango towards the end of last year.
Many people think of Ceroc as purely pattern (moves) based, with no true lead and follow. Maybe that was true 20 or 10 years ago, or in other places, but certainly in the past four years in Sydney it has been taught as lead-follow, and I now think of it (and dance it) as an improvisational lead-follow partner dance with the basic step being a walk.
While I will sometimes choose to lead a particular move, most of the time I am simply responding to the music and the relative positions of my partner, myself, and available dance floor. You could say I am doing nothing but stepping forwards or backwards or sideways or pivoting, and leading my partner to step forwards or backwards or sideways or pivot (regarding a spin as an extreme pivot).
So I am comfortable with the idea of a dance being improvised lead-follow in response to the music.

Now I am learning tango, and I like being given patterns. If I go out on the tango dance floor thinking all I have to do is lead forward and backward and sideward steps and pivots as the music takes me, then all I will do is forward and backward and sideward steps and pivots.

It is in the patterns that I learn to lead my partner to turn as I step around her, that I learn to change direction, that I learn to put forward and backward and sideward steps and pivots together in different ways to make something more.

At present, when I dance tango, I walk to the music or do the couple of patterns I am comfortable with. People who watch me might criticise my teachers for just teaching me patterns.

But I do not believe my teachers are teaching patterns. Nor do I feel I am just learning patterns (although for the moment I may be just dancing patterns).

However, I do believe others in my classes are only learning patterns. And perhaps if I did not already have dance experience I too would be only learning patterns.

For now, patterns help me learn to dance tango. Sometime soon I will start breaking down the patterns and putting the parts together differently (as I did for a time with Ceroc). Sometime after that I will generally forget about patterns or their parts, and just lead my follower according to the music and the available space.
But I don't think I can get to that point without starting with patterns.

Tim

[Heather2007]

For me (and I suspect I am in the minority), there is a difference between "dancing" tango and "feeling" tango. I lead as well as follow and from a follower's point of view, I would rather be in the arms of a man that (1) moved in time to the music; and (2) connected with me. If he chooses not to put me into a high leg kicking, swinging showey-offey movement but is able employ the aforementioned 2 then I am indeed a very happy bunny.

That all said, learning patterns in a class certainly is not bad and putting it to show in a milonga is not bad at all and is fun - just so long as it is executed with style, beauty, grace and heaps of charismatic charm - and that my friend is the difference between a good dancer and a traffic-stopping one.

[timbp]

For me (and I suspect I am in the minority), there is a difference between "dancing" tango and "feeling" tango.
I'm still struggling with just moving myself and leading my partner in response to tango music.
Maybe there is a difference between "dancing" and "feeling" tango. But let me devote a year or two to learning to dance tango, then I'll be happy to take your classes on the difference between "dancing" and "feeling".

[Heather2007]

I'm still struggling with just moving myself and leading my partner in response to tango music.
Maybe there is a difference between "dancing" and "feeling" tango. But let me devote a year or two to learning to dance tango, then I'll be happy to take your classes on the difference between "dancing" and "feeling".

Ha, ha, ha. Okay.
p.s. Love the Robert Heinlein quote :)

[Me]

Hi timbp!

Lead/follow vs. patterns is debated often. Usually patterns are 'bashed.' It is very common for tango n00bs who don't know beans about the dance to try to appear more expert than they already are, and a very, very common tack is to bash patterns. "Oh, those are just patterns. That isn't real tango." So my first piece of advice to you would be to beware any advice offered by other tango dancers. You'll also find these people bashing other styles of dance, so yes, be prepared for that as well. I'll never forget when one particularly annoying 'know-it-all' woman (who, incidentally, dances patterns) said to me, "You studied ballet? Oh that is going to ruin your tango!" And to that, I just stared at her like she was a complete idiot (and, she was.) Ballet will ruin my tango? Yeah, okay. You're stupid.

When I talk about lead/follow vs. patterns, I 'bash' patterns from a purely functional point. Does the student know how to lead? If so, fine. Dance some patterns. We all have our favorite combinations, though I suspect many would rather drop dead than to admit this.

When patterns go bad is when a teacher does not show students how to dance at all - They just show patterns. The dancers have absolutely no idea where their center is, where their partner's center is, no conception of embrace, no idea at all about the cause/effect of tango, the making/taking of space in tango... the list goes on. I don't like dancing with these students because they hurt me. A typical dance is they take me in a vice grip embrace and they kick their feet around beneath us, hurting my toes and ruining my nylons. They have a head full of patterns and they're rushing, completely ignoring the music, trying to finish each pattern before they forget. They have no idea how to walk and send their presence through the space, providing the woman with a lead that she can follow, because they have not been taught how to do so. To make the experience even worse, oftentimes these dancers will start 'coaching' me through their patterns. My male dancer friends complain all the time about women who dance patterns as well. They say the ladies "run off with out them" and well, they do! They feel a lead into cruzada and they're gone - They'll ocho forward to the man's right and do scary back boleos and what-not. None of this lead at all. All of this is the fault of the instructors, not the dancers.

So I guess all of this is to say, I do not think teaching a pattern is bad, provided the fundamentals of that pattern are taught first, and (ideally) the pattern is used to reinforce these fundamentals during instruction. Also, be careful of any advice offered by other students. Moreoften than not, they don't know what they are talking about. They might appear very knowledgeable and advanced to you because you are new to tango, but just give it six months to a year and then maybe you'll change your mind.

[bordertangoman]

For me (and I suspect I am in the minority),.

true

there is a difference between "dancing" tango and "feeling" tango. I lead as well as follow and from a follower's point of view, I would rather be in the arms of a man that (1) moved in time to the music; and (2) connected with me. .

Hmm as I prefer not to teach patterns as its mostly a step backwards that people have to let go of later on; its hard to say. If you want to be a popular teacher then a pattern gives instant gratification to a lot of people who like the illusion of being able to do something rather than actually being able to do. There are a few people around who havn't got beyond the few patterns they learned with a high profile tango teaching couple and resolutley refuse to come to my classes whereas most of the people I'm teaching are getting there slowly and steadily understanding how to lead and follow and use the music.

Hare vs Tortoise perhaps?

[Twirly]

Is it even possible to teach several weekly classes without including any patterns???

To me, the worst kind of class is when the teacher goes through a long, complicated pattern that the leaders can't even remember (so the follower has to help and so isn't following). Usually there are two or three little points of technique, but nobody is listening as they're to busy concentrating on what comes after the triple gancho they just tried to do.

A good class could include a short pattern, perhaps with a few variations, that is used to illustrate some interesting technical points. Preferably it should look quite easy on the surface (maybe a giro, or just some walking with turns) and not include more than one complicated element so the students can really focus on HOW you do it.

Or something like that :)

[Norka88]

When I am in a class and we learn a "pattern". My job is to learn to lead it. Once I am comfortable with the "pattern" I find out if I am truly leading it by finding places within it to go somewhere else. Sometimes if I'm not comfortable with the "pattern" I just change it to match the music and my style.

[Heather2007]

...Sometimes if I'm not comfortable with the "pattern" I just change it to match the music and my style.

Exactly. Excellent.:applause:

[The Bear]

I've recently been dragged kicking (ganchoing?) and screaming into my teacher's Improver/Intermediate class (by my teachers) and can relate that so far at least, we don't appear to be learning patterns in there.
What we tend to do is investigate one move and variations of it. For instance, a couple of weeks ago we looked at how at a particular point during leading an ocho, we can interrupt by stepping through and either gancho then step out and resume ocho, or gancho then boleo, etc. Later we looked at how instead of leading a gancho at this point, we could sacada instead, so we looked at a couple of sacada examples, though I suppose putting them together could constitute a pattern. Does three sacadas constitute a pattern? We spend far much more time looking at different options and variations than and how to make them work, than trying to piece patterns together. Last week after a bit of (much needed on my part) revision, we looked at overturning pivots and three variations of same. I'm kind of hoping we revise it tonight because by the time we finished last week, my brain was fried!:confused:

[Gssh]

I think a teaching patterns is great. A patterns gives a leader an idea how to chain different elements, most of the time it provides the easiest entry into a move, and the most logical exit, and it offers a solid base to develop variations from, and to explain the different options one has in each move. Everrybody has and uses patterns.

What is bad is learning patterns. When leaders think the next move of a sequence is automatic, or when followers "recognize" the start of a sequence and then does the rest on her own, when a leader complains that a follower "doesn't know" the pattern he wants to lead, thats when a pattern turns from a helpful tool into something that is not helpful.

I think it is like learning to write - one has to read a lot, and to spend a lot of time copying what other people have written, but the goal is not to generate a pastiche of other peoples writing, but to learn the underlying rules and structure of good writing.

Gssh

[Ampster]

It is my belief that patterns taught WITH proper technique is fine.

You can't just teach how to lead, if there's nothing to be led. You can't just teach patterns if you don't teach how to lead them.

So, if taken in balance, IMHO, its fine.

The combination comes in handy when you've got the fundamentals down. As a matter of progression, it would work, as long as you apply the proper technique, musicality, connection training to them. Its fun.

[Cortado]

It is my belief that patterns taught WITH proper technique is fine.



You can learn lots of technique - balance, axis, closing your feet/knees, pivoting down, preparing before the step, ad nauseam, but there comes a point where you have to put the technique in practice and you have to execute some figures. If you like the figures you repeat them and they are part of what you dance. Lo and behold - you are doing patterns! and if you happen to be a teacher you are teaching patterns!

In my opinion if you are to progress, you have go through the cycle of learning things then unlearn them enough to deconstruct them and learn alternative or better stuff.

It is not teaching pattern that is wrong, it is the concept that they are rigid that is wrong. The teacher must promote the idea and the student must be aware that the ability to mix and match and improvise is what makes the dancer a true dancer rather than a person who performs routine tricks. Even so if this person performs these tricks with fluency and does enough of them to be able to choose the best suited to the music, he would be considered to be a good dancer. There are a few of them around.

Horses for courses. Some people like patterns because it gives them an illusion of faster progress. Some people like technique because they like to think they are learning the proper way. Whether they realise it or not they still have to do a bit of both. The journey is long and many people in both camps give up. Lets not discourage anybody or slag off the way they like to teach or learn.

[Heather2007]

Are there any leaders here that make up their own patterns? If so, fancy sharing the experience, the move etc. with others here.

[bordertangoman]

Are there any leaders here that make up their own patterns? If so, fancy sharing the experience, the move etc. with others here.

I made up one early on to get the follower into a backward ocho:
since I was a bit slow on moving into the cross system I would start by a side step to my left, lead the follower to pivot and take a back step, then take a foward with my right foot alongside her, then after her pivot I would take a backstep; then do the weight change into cross sytem. Someone told me that it was my 'signature move'

Then there is the milonga double gancho:
basically you stop mid step with right foot forward then move back and do a gancho on her right leg with yours then she does the same with you as you step forward again.
this can go on until you untangle yourselves!

[Joe]

One may think one made up a pattern, but these things have probably been danced by a million different people before. :)

[bordertangoman]

One may think one made up a pattern, but these things have probably been danced by a million different people before. :)

Being original is so difficult!! (DOH!)

[bafonso]

One may think one made up a pattern, but these things have probably been danced by a million different people before. :)

Yes, but the originality lies in the fact that you did at that moment in the music preceded by something and followed by another.

Everyone uses the same words to write books but not everyone can do it well. :-)

I'd agree that the issue with patterns is teaching them as a rigid element and not exploring alternatives, allowing creativity to chime in :)

[tangotime]

What we tend to do is investigate one move and variations of it. For instance, a couple of weeks ago we looked at how at a particular point during leading an ocho, we can interrupt by stepping through and either gancho then step out and resume ocho, or gancho then boleo, etc. Later we looked at how instead of leading a gancho at this point, we could sacada instead, so we looked at a couple of sacada examples, though I suppose putting them together could constitute a pattern. Does three sacadas constitute a pattern?





EVERYTHING we dance is a " pattern" or part, thereof . ----, or a link to an existing one, or one to follow.

Reconstruction-- is purely and simply, an extension of a previous idea ( pattern )
To teach technique, in all genres, you will eventually need a pattern to apply that.

[kieronneedscake]

I personally find that extensive repetition of patterns leads to lazy inattentive followers, and leaders who think they can lead what is being taught but actually can't. I hear countless tales of men expecting their partner to go somewhere and getting rather upset when they do not. The blame is layed squarely on the unfortunate follower.

When I am dancing freely, I find that a short pattern can help me achieve something I have not properly learned yet. I use as much of some pattern to perform the crux of the pattern as I need, then set it up or resolve it in whichever way fits the present space on the dance floor and balance of myself and my partner.

Some patterns are elegant and easy and help you move around the floor. These are good ideas to share. Others are plain unnecessary. I recall a lesson from some highly regarded visiting teachers that appeared to be a showcase rather than a lesson, because no poor person should have to recall 32 steps in a sequence in an improvised dance!

[DennisBeach]

I personally find that extensive repetition of patterns leads to lazy inattentive followers, and leaders who think they can lead what is being taught but actually can't. I hear countless tales of men expecting their partner to go somewhere and getting rather upset when they do not. The blame is layed squarely on the unfortunate follower.


Problem I found with patterns, is while I was still learning my part and not ready to lead the move, my wife was having to do her part on her own. That tends to encourage the lady not to follow. We learned a lot of our moves from videos. That allowed me to learn my part before working on it with my wife. Than when she started working on learning the move, I was to the point were I could focus on leading correctly. We also could take things in pieces.

When we were taking private lessons, I would always ask how I was suppose to lead parts, when it was not clear.

[timbp]

Problem I found with patterns, is while I was still learning my part and not ready to lead the move, my wife was having to do her part on her own.

I think the problem was with your wife, not the patterns.
If you were not leading the move, she should not have been moving.
Her "part" is to follow what you lead.

[timbp]

When I am in a class and we learn a "pattern". My job is to learn to lead it. Once I am comfortable with the "pattern" I find out if I am truly leading it by finding places within it to go somewhere else. Sometimes if I'm not comfortable with the "pattern" I just change it to match the music and my style.

That's my approach.
Except I'm not really comfortable enough with tango to do that fully. If I try to vary something I've been taught, and it goes wrong, I can't be sure if it was my fault (and what was wrong with my lead), or the follower's fault (and how could I have successfully led it with her).

I want to reach the stage of leading something, and responding immediately if the follower does not react as I expect.
I want to dance improvisationally, responding to the music and my partner.

I can't do that yet (in tango). And right now learning patterns is good, as it shows me various ways different steps can be put together.

[Angel HI]

And right now learning patterns is good, as it shows me various ways different steps can be put together.

This is the purpose of patterns. The problem is not with the student...it is with the teacher. Many teachers not only allow their students to become pattern-bound, they go so far as to teach them to dance by pattern/s. I have shared on teh DF before being at a workshop with the great Cecilia Gonzalez when a guy asked her how to best remember the patterns from the weekend. Ceci never missed a breathe when she asked, "What do you want to do that for?" She went on to explain that patterns are specific learning tools, and no dance should be described by its pattern.

Learn the elements within the patterns.

[Cortado]

She went on to explain that patterns are specific learning tools, and no dance should be described by its pattern.

Learn the elements within the patterns.

The elements are like words, new words. They are meant to be used freely where appropriate.
Why learn to use the words only in a given sentence, in a set pattern and be unable to use the element/words anywhere else?

Using this analogy, choreographed shows are like the reciting of a poem, done beautifully, of course. You have to wonder about the true talent and ability of the people involved in a non rehearsed environment.

[Steve Pastor]

Here's a thought.
I'm brushing up on my really minimal Spanish for a hoped for trip to Machu Pichu later this year. Last year I learned some Swahili for a trip to Tanzania. I've done the tour Europe thing, too. And it sure was handy to have a few phrases that you could use.
Please. I would like... Thank you. Etc, And the always important "Where is the restroom?"

Learning a language involves learning words, but also how to put them together in useful ways.
Learning dance, too, then, should involve the equivalent of sentences which would be patterns, along with learning the basic vocabulary of steps and the grammar of lead and follow.

[Angel HI]

The elements are like words, new words. They are meant to be used freely where appropriate.
Why learn to use the words only in a given sentence, in a set pattern and be unable to use the element/words anywhere else?

Using this analogy, choreographed shows are like the reciting of a poem, done beautifully, of course. You have to wonder about the true talent and ability of the people involved in a non rehearsed environment.

Very well said, and my (Ceci's) point exactly.

Learning a language involves learning words, but also how to put them together in useful ways.
Learning dance, too, then, should involve the equivalent of sentences which would be patterns, along with learning the basic vocabulary of steps and the grammar of lead and follow.

Though, I believe we are agreeing with each other, I must add that your analogy is fine as long as one remembers that there might be more than one say to say something, and not be confined, or worse, defined, by the one way that one learned.

I remember teaching someone french a few months ago. She was frustrated to learn that the French might greet her by saying bonjour, ca va, or salut. For her learning benefit, she wanted them to only have one way even though Amers might say hello, good morning, how's it going, or a number of others. Dance must be learned in the same way. We must never define a dance strictly or even primarily by a pattern or vocabulary of steps.

[timbp]

While we're doing language analogies:

When my parents first went to Europe, they fell in love with Italy (Italy was not on their original itinerary. They had intended to go to Greece, but there was political unrest [early 1970s] and the travel agent told them southern Italy would show them all the Greek culture and architecture they could see in Greece).
So they fell in love with Italy, and their next trip was to Italy alone. In preparing, my father read all the books he could on how to speak italian and on italian grammar. My mother read the italian-english dictionary.

When they were in Italy, my father had beautiful grammar, but could actually communicate very little, as he didn't have the vocabulary; my mother could get her meaning across in almost every case, even if her language was awkward.

So if the language analogy applies to tango, who should I be emulating?

[jhpark]

start with learning how to speak well, even with very little vocabulary. add the vocabulary over time.

in language, fumbling around is okay. in dancing, it's much better to do a little bit well and and add to that, than to learn to do a lot badly and try to incrementally make it better. (though i think most start out doing it the second way, and they either come to their senses and switch to the correct method ;) , or they slowly improve enough to be woth dancing with, or just drop out. i'd be curious to know what % follow which path, but i'm too lazy to come up with a survey)

however, i'm using the analogy for something other than patterns vs. non-patterns. i think for the first year or so, you're learning patterns (even if they are only 3-5 steps) and not elements yet... i tried to think in terms of elements after six months, and it was just overwhelming. much easier to break down any pattern to 3-5 steps and think about -- okay, here i could rotate more or less, to change the direction of subsequent travel. here i could just stop this pattern and do a calasita.

breaking it down to individual steps gives so much freedom it's just too overwhelming to start with. it's hard enough learning how to walk -- it'd be terrifying to complicate it with all the different directions you can walk in too early on.

at least, that's the way i like to learn.

[bordertangoman]

start with learning how to speak well, even with very little vocabulary. add the vocabulary over time.

in language, fumbling around is okay. in dancing, it's much better to do a little bit well and and add to that, than to learn to do a lot badly and try to incrementally make it better. (though i think most start out doing it the second way, and they either come to their senses and switch to the correct method ;) , or they slowly improve enough to be woth dancing with, or just drop out. i'd be curious to know what % follow which path, but i'm too lazy to come up with a survey)

however, i'm using the analogy for something other than patterns vs. non-patterns. i think for the first year or so, you're learning patterns (even if they are only 3-5 steps) and not elements yet... i tried to think in terms of elements after six months, and it was just overwhelming. much easier to break down any pattern to 3-5 steps and think about -- okay, here i could rotate more or less, to change the direction of subsequent travel. here i could just stop this pattern and do a calasita.

breaking it down to individual steps gives so much freedom it's just too overwhelming to start with. it's hard enough learning how to walk -- it'd be terrifying to complicate it with all the different directions you can walk in too early on.

at least, that's the way i like to learn.


Most of the good stuff I learnt was breaking the movement within the step down;

so you know where the followers weight is, where her feet are and where her axis is.
a lot of tango moves are 'intrusions' or interferences with a normal side forward or back step.
If you wanted to lead a change in direction for instance; you might leada follower to a forward or back step but before she collects; you lead her turn the opposite way to the ocho it might have been; and of course you have to put yorself in the right position to do this ( watch Chicho Frumboli who is a master of this)

The follower has develop an understanding of leads that are more subtle than a simple step or pivot and that she doesn't always collect between steps.

If you read Mauricio Castro's book on Structure of the Dance you can see he has reduced it to a number of movements that a leader or follower can make then proposed that these can be danced in a lot of different combinations. It takes time to develop the skill to use this but you could start ( as I did ) with exercises; eg lead a back ocho on the fifth step. It doesn't matter what the previous four steps are; the woman is standing on one leg and you can invite her to pivot and step no matter where you weight is; you just have to figure out what you have to do to get this to happen.

[Angel HI]

When they were in Italy, my father had beautiful grammar, but could actually communicate very little, as he didn't have the vocabulary; my mother could get her meaning across in almost every case, even if her language was awkward.

So if the language analogy applies to tango, who should I be emulating?

Given that I often teach/tutor french, I like this one alot. I agree with the mother's method, and would say to emulate her.

start with learning how to speak well, even with very little vocabulary. add the vocabulary over time.breaking it down to individual steps gives so much freedom it's just too overwhelming to start with. it's hard enough learning how to walk -- it'd be terrifying to complicate it with all the different directions you can walk in too early on.

at least, that's the way i like to learn.

Most adults do. Adults want to be more cerebral...more methodical. A child will just do it...no reason...no forethought...just because it goes like this..., and it is because of this that they learn to feel. After a time, they begin to employ more correct technique. there's a lot of truth to the adage, "Through the eyes of a child..."

If you read Mauricio Castro's book on Structure of the Dance you can see he has reduced it to a number of movements that a leader or follower can make then proposed that these can be danced in a lot of different combinations. It takes time to develop the skill to use this but you could start ( as I did ) with exercises; eg lead a back ocho on the fifth step. It doesn't matter what the previous four steps are; the woman is standing on one leg and you can invite her to pivot and step no matter where you weight is; you just have to figure out what you have to do to get this to happen.

Right, wrong, or indifferent, this is how I have been doing it for years. I believe that one learns best how to lead by knowing where the follow is/needs be. It is then that he learns where he is.

[Hock Siew]

I feel that both technique and patterns both have their place in teaching Tango – in the correct proportions. Of course, the correct ratio is very subjective and depends on a lot of factors. But I think, more often than not, there is a slightly greater emphasis on patterns. I understand that the reason for this is to sustain the interest of the average student. Although, personally, as a beginner, I would like for there to be a slightly greater emphasis on technique; I`m pretty happy with everything as it is, as after all, we should follow the demands of the average student.

My observation on my own dancing is that, eventhough I know that steps can be led in any combination, and that I do not need to follow patterns; I often end up doing the steps in the sequence that I have learnt them. This is especially true of fast paced songs; probably because I don`t really have time to think. I guess I find doing the steps in different order slightly more difficult, or maybe it is just less familiar :-? Perhaps, it is because the entry is different; or perhaps, it is just that I perceive the entry to be different :-? Anyone have any thoughts on this? I`m still working on sorting it out...:)

[timbp]

I believe that one learns best how to lead by knowing where the follow is/needs be. It is then that he learns where he is.

That's exactly how it works for me.
I'm currently doing group classes with 2 different teachers.

The first describes everything in terms of where to lead the follower, only telling the leaders where to step once he is sure we know where to take follower. Every time I finish one of his classes, i wonder why everyone says tango is hard.

The other separates leaders and followers and teaches each their steps, then puts us together to practice, then tells us any technique needed to actually lead it.
In this class, I find it difficult to lead my partner, partly because the class puts the focus on my feet so I'm thinking about what I should be doing rather than what I want my partner to do, and partly because the followers try to do their part regardless of my lead.
With the first teacher, the focus is on my partner, and my feet usually sort themselves out.

[timbp]

[FONT=Verdana]My observation on my own dancing is that, eventhough I know that steps can be led in any combination, and that I do not need to follow patterns; I often end up doing the steps in the sequence that I have learnt them. This is especially true of fast paced songs; probably because I don`t really have time to think. I guess I find doing the steps in different order slightly more difficult, or maybe it is just less familiar :-? Perhaps, it is because the entry is different; or perhaps, it is just that I perceive the entry to be different :-? Anyone have any thoughts on this? I`m still working on sorting it out...:)

I am very much a beginner at AT. When I dance it, I usually just try to lead a good walk, and the couple of patterns I am confident I can lead well. And I generally lead those patterns exactly as I have learned them.
I vary the pattern when I am forced to to avoid a collision. And that is where I feel I really learn to lead. My instinct is to protect my partner, so if I see a looming collision, I automatically break the pattern and move her (and myself) out of the way. When that happens, I'm not thinking about patterns, feet, weight changes -- it is purely "I need to get her from there to here (or she'll get hurt)".

My previous dance experience is Ceroc/modern jive. This is often looked down on as a purely pattern-based dance, with no lead or follow. But in fact it is just like AT -- an improvisational, lead-follow partner dance, with the basic step being a walk.
I started as someone who could not dance, could not even find the beat. I learned the moves that were taught in class, and eventually I learned to dance on the beat, and sometime after that I really learned to understand lead-follow. It was about then I learned that the moves could be broken up and put together in different ways.
Then I started to experiment. Mostly I would just be dancing the taught moves, but every now and then I would find a point where I would think "what happens if I do this instead?" Then I would have to find my way out of the result.
I visualise it by thinking of positions rather than steps. This step leads to that step leads to the next step (sequence taught in class). But, from this position, I can lead this step, another step, or some different step (finding a common position from various sequences).

I don't know how much of this ceroc experience is directly applicable to my AT, but my aim is to learn the technique I need to lead tango, and learn some patterns, and then break up those patterns and lead according to how I feel the music.

[tsb]

if we substitute "patterns" with "syllabus", then we should allow for those who are content to develop facilty sufficient to be able to dance rather than spend an entire evening watching from the sidelines. this is particularly true in the ballroom world; the development of syllabi comes from the portion of english society for which freestyle/interactive dancing proved to be too much of a challenge. dance historian richard powers at stanford university discusses this development here: http://socialdance.stanford.edu/syllabi/sequences.htm

the point is that there may be some people whose goal is to learn just enough to be able to dance with a SO, for *them*, learning patterns might be sufficient - though not for the vast majority of people who dance AT.

i'm currently taking AT lessons with an instructor who has a very intuitive approach that i have found to be more helpful for me - i found it much simpler to understand and develop my lead for molinetes & sacadas; i'd been shown both as patterns by previous instructors, and i'd not been able to master either.

[dchester]

That's exactly how it works for me.
I'm currently doing group classes with 2 different teachers.

The first describes everything in terms of where to lead the follower, only telling the leaders where to step once he is sure we know where to take follower. Every time I finish one of his classes, i wonder why everyone says tango is hard.

The other separates leaders and followers and teaches each their steps, then puts us together to practice, then tells us any technique needed to actually lead it.
In this class, I find it difficult to lead my partner, partly because the class puts the focus on my feet so I'm thinking about what I should be doing rather than what I want my partner to do, and partly because the followers try to do their part regardless of my lead.
With the first teacher, the focus is on my partner, and my feet usually sort themselves out.
I'd like to take a class from a teacher that taught by the first method you stated. Most of the classes I take, focus on steps/patterns.

FWIW, I have found that for me, I have to focus on what I'm trying to lead (what the follower needs to do), before I can really understand (and actually do at a milonga) what is being taught. I also like to occasionally vary the pattern during the class, so I can determine if I'm actually leading anything, or if the follower is just doing the pattern.

[Peaches]

the point is that there may be some people whose goal is to learn just enough to be able to dance with a SO, for *them*, learning patterns might be sufficient - though not for the vast majority of people who dance AT.Very true. Everyone dances for different reasons, and to varying levels of dedication.

I feel kind of this way about ballroom. Not so much that I only want to learn patterns (and I don't have a dancing-SO to dance with), but honestly I want to be able to follow some things decently, and I'm about content with that. I couldn't care less that I've got crap for hip action and styling when I dance a cha cha, for example...so long as I can follow things, I'm pretty much happy. The same is true for standard dances, except with them not having correct technique makes following infinitely more difficult, and has more of an impact on the leader. I'm just not dedicated enough, and just don't care enough, to really want to take it further. (Hence, why I say I'm just a social dancer. And not even the kind of social dancer who wants to have great technique, but just not compete. I'm "just" a social dancer exactly the way it tends to get used--as a slur.)

With AT, though...it's a whole different ballgame.