Dancing, a Woman's Sport

[Black Sheep]

Les Femmes,
Gene Hashiguci brings up an excellent critique; man vs. Woman!
Let's face it guys, dancing is a girl's sport. Even the beginner lady, out classes the best male dancers in the aesthetics of this art form.
I learned one of my most important lessons from Frank Veloz in 1949, on how to be a better performer as a dance team by showing the lady off in the dance combinations, always allowing her to be the star performer of the dance, allowing her to do all the graceful flourishes, which ability women are naturally genetically endowed with.
This female talent not only extends in taste of music and dancing ability, but look at Gene's list of lady D.J.'s below. Is it only a coincidence that these same ladies are also the leading Venue Hosts?
When I see a man dancing Swing, and he is doing all these awkward contortions, and breaking rhythm in the process, while the lady is twiddling her thumbs, I have difficulty holding back my laughter. Let's face it guys, competing with your lady partner in dancing is a no win game. Dancing is a lady's sport because WOmen come from Venus and guys come from Mars.

VIVA LA FEMME!

Black Sheep

[pygmalion]

HeHe! :lol:

This is an interesting and controversial topic, or at least, it's said in a rather controversial way. I can see what is meant, though. The main points, as I see them, are:

1. When dancing, it's the guy's (lead's) job to frame the lady and/or make her look good, not hog the spotlight for himself.

2. Women tend to pick up the art of dancing quicker than their male counterparts.

I'm not sure I buy into the genetics argument, though. :lol: I have my own thoughts on this, but I won't share yet. I'd rather know what you think. Thoughts, anybody? :D

[Vince A]

Well I certainly agree to disagree . . . it's a sport that takes two - usually a man and a woman.

I would also disagree that "women tend to pick up the the art of dancing quicker than their male counterparts" . . . changing it to . . . "some women tend to pick up the art of . . . . ." etc.

The reason that many think that way is because you see many more women doing it (dancing) than men. Why? Because men don't view dancing as a manly thing to do! Until they learn that that is where all the women are at.
I don't think you'd find any statistics out there to prove that women "are quicker or better than men, just as there would be no statistic to prove that men make better football players than women!"

[pygmalion]

Okay, okay, Vince, you got me! I was going to throw a mass of controversy out there and leave! :twisted: :lol:

But since you got the conversational ball rolling, here's part of what I think. Girls, at least in the US, have been socialized that dancing is okay for them. Boys, on the other hand, have been socialized to believe that dancing is for girls. And that's hard to overcome. I have seen so many couples where the wife wanted lessons but the husband had to be dragged into the studio kicking and screaming.

Once they got started, I didn't see any particular aptitude level based on gender. Maybe it's just me, but there are "natural" dancers who are male and "natural" dancers who are female, and "bad" dancers of both genders, too. *shrug*

I have more, but I'll just throw that out there for now. :lol: :lol:

See ya!

Jenn

[Vince A]

Ah ha . . . now we agree!

We got here quicker than I expected . . . I hope others will chime in on this, as it is a very important topic.

Natural dancers are hard to beat . . . having a natural ability to hear and dance to the music is even harder! I think this is a subject all on it own!

There are very few females that I dance (socially) with that can hear and feel the music and then translate that into what their feet and bodies do! You have to react to and with the music . . . not necessarily do patterns or routines, but you do need to master the basics to make it look like the dance it was intended to be!

I know even less men that can, and only a handful that truly dance this way. d nice is one of these and I've never seen him dance . . . I've read what he wrote and he can talk the talk or dance the dance!

Being a musician helps even more . . .

[Giselle]

Socialization has alot to do with it! But I know guys who have been brought up in ballroom who outstyle their female counterparts, so I think it just depends on the individual. :wink:

[Vince A]

Yep . . I know extremely sexy looking females who can give you the batting averages and pitching stats of every baseball player out here in the Majors, yet they cannot dance at all.

I also know guys that can expound for hours on the correct way to do chasse' steps in Waltz, but throw a baseball like a girl (I know, I asked for it)!

Socialization is probably a big factor in this.

[SDsalsaguy]

Being a musician helps even more . . .
Not always! As funny as it may sound (no pun intended), too technical an ear towards the music can produce sterile dancing. Similarly, dancers and musicians are not always listening for the same things. In general any musical training – just like any cross-dance training – will be a boon...but not always...at least not without adjusting for the shifting foci.

[Vince A]

OK, true . . . "not always." I know a guy that plays (jazz) drums and has been taking WCS lessons for at least 6 years now, and he is no better a dancer than he was 6 years ago.

But, I have taught some WCS dancers, basic rudimentary information on music and music timing, and they say it has helped their dancing a bunch!

I believe it has its benefits . . .

[SDsalsaguy]

Woah there Vince! There's a huge difference between having some musical understanding vs. being a musician! Of course having some understanding of the music helps one's dancing...the music, after all, is what we're dancing too.

Your first example, however, brings to mind something else... now this is purely an anecdotal observation, but it seems to me that drummers have more trouble dancing then do other musicians I've come across. Anyone else have any evidence or ideas about this?

[pygmalion]

Okay, so let me throw something else in the mix. How much of women's apparently "getting it" quicker is due to the fact that leading is so difficult -- timing, floorcraft, knowing which patterns logically preced and follow each other -- all these are the responsibility of the lead (usually a man).

What do you think?

[Danish Guy]

Okay, so let me throw something else in the mix. How much of women's apparently "getting it" quicker is due to the fact that leading is so difficult -- timing, floorcraft, knowing which patterns logically preced and follow each other -- all these are the responsibility of the lead (usually a man).

What do you think?

This is absolutely true.

As the classes started, the couples trained the same basic patterns. The guys leading. The girls doing the difficult turning and steps. But later at the party, the guys would have to remember the pattern to be able to lead, but the girls would remember as they where being lead through the pattern. This also means much variation in the “training” from the girls, and the same few patterns for the guys.

I have often been commented after a successfully combination “You remembered this pattern! I completely forgot it!” :D :D :D

So guys, do the things you can do with style, and don’t be afraid to repeat it. 8)

And guys, take notes, it will help you expand the things you do with style. :wink:

[Vince A]

Okay, so let me throw something else in the mix. How much of women's apparently "getting it" quicker is due to the fact that leading is so difficult -- timing, floorcraft, knowing which patterns logically preced and follow each other -- all these are the responsibility of the lead (usually a man).

What do you think?
Ummmm, not sure what to think. I also follow and found that to be very difficult. As a leader, if I bring you into (WCS) right side pass with an ladies underarm turn, you as a follower should know exactly what this move, and then do your part. I should be able to actually let go of the connection once the pattern is started, and you should know where to go!

You need to acknowledge what the leader is doing, interpret that into a move (so you need to know those moves too), react to that lead, don't anticipate, finish that move, and end up in the slot on the other end, anchoring in place. You also need to hear and feel the music and timing, and know floorcraft . . . you also keep the lead from hitting others and putting you safely where you should go.

Back to you . . . what doyou think???

[SwinginBoo]

Vince,

I think that you make a good point about followers having to interpret the leads and use proper connection. However, I think that when you take two people starting out at the same time, the leader has the harder job. If you are just learning something, it is easier to have someone lead you through it. It is much harder to have to think about what to lead, do it properly, and be ready to lead the next move.

I started leading a few months ago, and it was difficult in the beginning. I only knew a few things and got bored leading them. As time has gone on I have gotten better. But I look at this experience and at least I had been dancing a while. I can't imagine never having danced before and trying to lead all these patterns and moves that are foreign to me.

[SwinginBoo]

By the way Jenn, I totally agree with you in the socialization thing. This unfortunately is a hard thing to change. It would have to start very young and with parenting. I hate to be a pessimist, but I don't think the way girls and boys are socialized in this country will ever change. :(

[Vince A]

SwinginBoo,
I remember back about ten years ago when I first started to WCS. It was so hard learning to do "the moves." I was thrilled to get someone (in a rotating class) that knew a little of the move or someone who had grasped it quicker (the woman, of course). I could concentrate more on me doing the move and where my hands, arms, and feet went!

Now patterns are the easy part!

[SwinginBoo]

It definitely helps when the follow has experience. I've been the follow in many of those instances. I'm sure it helps build the confidence of the leader who is still unsure of what he's even trying to do.

It's so exciting when you lead something new, something you're making up, and your partner follows it. A definite confidence booster :D

Stephanie

[Vince A]

It definitely helps when the follow has experience. I've been the follow in many of those instances. I'm sure it helps build the confidence of the leader who is still unsure of what he's even trying to do.

It's so exciting when you lead something new, something you're making up, and your partner follows it. A definite confidence booster :D

Stephanie
Hi again, Stephanie,
Ah, you're one of those ones that we "leads" have to thank, so thank you!

I've just about given doing much other than basics. Now it's dancing to that music and feeling what that music is telling you to do! If it calls for a pattern, thenI do it, if not . . . ???

I also love to make up things on the fly . . . holding my partner back for many, many counts, and just playing at the ends of our connection, or pulling them in doing some dirty dancing in the middle of a WCS move. And oh yeah, those out-of-place things like doing the moonwalk instead of dancing the regular steps!

I love when follower takes these leads and "goes with it!" Yes!

It definitely is a confidence booster.

[SwinginBoo]

Yes, SwingKitten has been subject to my leading insanity on many an occasion :tongue:

By the way - You're welcome :D

[pygmalion]

Okay, so let me throw something else in the mix. How much of women's apparently "getting it" quicker is due to the fact that leading is so difficult -- timing, floorcraft, knowing which patterns logically preced and follow each other -- all these are the responsibility of the lead (usually a man).

What do you think?
Ummmm, not sure what to think. I also follow and found that to be very difficult. As a leader, if I bring you into (WCS) right side pass with an ladies underarm turn, you as a follower should know exactly what this move, and then do your part. I should be able to actually let go of the connection once the pattern is started, and you should know where to go!

You need to acknowledge what the leader is doing, interpret that into a move (so you need to know those moves too), react to that lead, don't anticipate, finish that move, and end up in the slot on the other end, anchoring in place. You also need to hear and feel the music and timing, and know floorcraft . . . you also keep the lead from hitting others and putting you safely where you should go.

Back to you . . . what doyou think???

Sorry, Vince. I'm playing Devil's advocate with this thread. Just throwing out ideas to see how people respond -- trying to keep the conversation going by NOT stating my opinion too early. *shrug*

I think that leading and following are both very difficult. Learning to make and keep the proper connection is something both lead and follow have equal responsilibity for. Navigating the floor does add a layer of complication, it's true. But sophisticated following -- now that's an art form.

Bottom line, guys and girls both have their parts, and both need to bring all their skills to the table. An experienced follow is just as capable of making life easier for a lead (and by golly, SHOULD do it) as a good lead is responsible for making life easier for his follow.

[pygmalion]

By the way Jenn, I totally agree with you in the socialization thing. This unfortunately is a hard thing to change. It would have to start very young and with parenting. I hate to be a pessimist, but I don't think the way girls and boys are socialized in this country will ever change. :(

I'm not optimistic either, SwinginBoo! :cry:

You should see the little kids at a school where I do volunteer work. If you ask the three-year-olds about ballet class, all the kids raise their hands to participate. By the time they get to that sexuality identity age (about five or six) the boys will not dance. Truthfully, there's not a single boy in the ballet class. Dance is for girls, remember. :x Sad, isn't it?

[SDsalsaguy]

I actually went to check out the "Super Street" class at my gym last night – not so much for hip hop but as a change of pace for my cardio...and guess what? Yup, you got it...I was the only guy in the class. Needless to say many guys who are into the gym scene are probably key exemplars of the "dance is for girls" mentality...

[d nice]

Checkin in.

Followers progress faster than leaders for a simple reason. A follow is only required to learn how to use frame, keep her feet under her and moving in the rhythmic pattern of the dance, and let the leader move her.

The leader mus learn how to keep his frame, keep his feet under him and moving in the rhythmic pattern of the dance, move the follower, and then learn all the patterns that are associated with the dance, as well as choose what works best with what, listen to the music, and for swing dances be able to improvise new moves to the music.

So the follower gains an early depth while the leader is still struggling with breadth.

A leader should not ever rely on a follower to recognize the pattern and fill in the rest. The follower should never attempt to anticipate what pattern is being lead and try to "help" and do it herself.

There is a difference between a leader suggesting a direction and then letting the follower improvise off that suggestion and starting a pattern and expecting her to complete it for you. I think Vince you were refeing to the former yes? I'm kinda stickler for symantics in dance discussions. I'm a little O/C that way. Sorry. :oops:

[d nice]

My hip hop classes are often have at least twice as many women as men.

[pygmalion]

A leader should not ever rely on a follower to recognize the pattern and fill in the rest. The follower should never attempt to anticipate what pattern is being lead and try to "help" and do it herself.



Amen to this, d nice. And this is exactly what many inexperienced leaders expect -- they expect the follow to read their minds. :shock: :x And then have the nerve to get upset or think you're a bad follower if you don't fill in the blanks after receiving a bad, late, or non-existent lead. It really doesn't help anyone in the long run if the follower jumps in there, second-guesses the leader, and does the patterns. Then the lead has no idea that he's not really leading well.

A good follower can help a lead, though, by waiting, keeping the connections as best she can, and by following what is actually being led. Then, perhaps in the long run, both the lead and follow develop the skills they need to be effective in their own roles.

Just my opinion here, folks. :D

[SDsalsaguy]

Just my opinion here, folks.
The nerve of you Jenn! Giving your opinion! Why aren't you giving mine? It make so much more sense...just ask me! :tongue:

[Vince A]

Sorry, Vince. I'm playing Devil's advocate with this thread. Just throwing out ideas to see how people respond -- trying to keep the conversation going by NOT stating my opinion too early. *shrug*

No problem Jenn. I do it all the time with Jonathan and Damon, and they jump back with both feet. I think there is an understanding of this among the moderators/administrators. We're not being picky, just trying to "open" up the thread . . . but then sometimes, we are being critical.
And I've found, we all can take it! Everyone in the forum can . . . well, maybe not every one!

[Vince A]

There is a difference between a leader suggesting a direction and then letting the follower improvise off that suggestion and starting a pattern and expecting her to complete it for you. I think Vince you were refeing to the former yes? I'm kinda stickler for symantics in dance discussions. I'm a little O/C that way. Sorry. :oops:
d nice,
Absolutely that's what I meant. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I would never let a follower complete a move by herself.

We're happy you're the way you are . . . it keeps "on our toes" . . . literally!

[pygmalion]

A good follower can help a lead, though, by waiting, keeping the connections as best she can, and by following what is actually being led. Then, perhaps in the long run, both the lead and follow develop the skills they need to be effective in their own roles.

Just my opinion here, folks. :D

Oh yeah, and I forgot the most important way a follower can help the lead. By being supportive, and not critical, especially of new leaders. A little kindness goes a long way.

[pygmalion]

Oh, and one more question, just so we can beat this topic to death! :lol:

Is there a difference between dance genres in terms of what is more or less acceptable for a man to dance? Here's why I ask: I've never seen a cowboy in a C&W bar who had a problem with two-stepping. And those Latin guys in salsa clubs seem to view their ability to do salsa as a demonstration of real machismo. But the ballroom guys I know are, at least at the beginning, dancing because of necessity or the coercion of their women. What gives?

[Swing Kitten]

I'll take a shot in the dark and venture to say that it's about cultural identity and assumptions. Whether it's a culture one is born into or merely adopted by the individual. I can see how that would be the case with the two examples you've stated. "Cowboys" dance Country Western, we all know what we think a cowboy is. I feel that the men who dance Latin are assumed to be particularly suave, tall, dark and handsome ladies men, again I think that everyone knows what that is (whether or not everyone's thinking the same thing)

What modern culture readily identifies itself with waltz? Who dances waltz? (agian working on assumptions and that there's a 'type' of person who does this) Alright, a ballroom dancer dances waltz... again... what is a ballroom dancer? Who is this? There's not a neat little box these people fit in... or, more importantly, the appearance of one (a favorite past time of Western Civilization).

I also feel the need to note-- particularly in reference to Hip Hop-- that those who dance are not nessesarily the ones who take classes to learn how to dance. I would imagine that most boys learn this through interaction with their friends and peers. They look and learn... experiment. Also I think that there is an inkling of truth that a lack class participation may due to the assumption that manly men don't need help (the stereotype of never asking for directions illustrates this) and to take a class automatically puts him in a weak position... there is something he does not know, that he may not be good at, and that he will need help to learn and would have to be willing to ask and make mistakes-- this can be very difficult for the delicate ego.

thoughts?

[SDsalsaguy]

thoughts?
Pesky things those!

Seriously though, I think you're onto something. Of course we're talking about generalizations now and, as such, they don't have universal applicability. Salsa, for instance, also has a different image across class differences in Mexico (just to give one example). But that, at least in part, is where you're really getting at the crux of the matter – that appearance can often be more salient then substance.

[SwinginBoo]

I also feel the need to note-- particularly in reference to Hip Hop-- that those who dance are not nessesarily the ones who take classes to learn how to dance. I would imagine that most boys learn this through interaction with their friends and peers. They look and learn... experiment. Also I think that there is an inkling of truth that a lack class participation may due to the assumption that manly men don't need help (the stereotype of never asking for directions illustrates this) and to take a class automatically puts him in a weak position... there is something he does not know, that he may not be good at, and that he will need help to learn and would have to be willing to ask and make mistakes-- this can be very difficult for the delicate ego.

thoughts?

That's quite an interesting point Kristen. Very observant of you :wink:

[pygmalion]

I was thinking something like that myself. I grew up in a house full of dancing house parties, where guys never seemed to be self-conscious about dancing. But then, they weren't waltzing. They were just jammin, and nobody worried about taking lessons or using proper technique.

[Vince A]

Jenn,
Now it's my turn to be the devil's advocate . . . I don't this has been resolved yet!

Who learns faster, or was that quicker? Leader or follower?

A lot has to do with what dance we are doing. For instance, if we are doing a Waltz, the leader and follower are (fundamentally) doing the same steps . . . for what ever reason . . .

How about the Cha Cha . . . basically the same - even in cross-body leads, both are doing the same steps!

And NC2S . . . both the same!

And for you C&W dancers . . . how about the 2 Step . . . again the same steps

Now, I agree that sometimes there are exceptions to this . . . to get on the same foot, i.e., both on the R foot then L foot . . . (chasse' in Waltz).

Now take Swing. Same steps??? I cannot speak for Lindy, but in WCS, the steps, or footwork can be very difficult. Especially while just learning. And this is due to the fact that leaders "steps" (footwork) and what they do with their "body" can be so different from the one who is following.

So, both the lead and the follow must "do" their part of each move. Each must know what to do in the pattern. A follower is not always in the grasp of the leader . . . just holding on by the fingertips . . . and she must learn to follow just as the man must learn to lead . . . especially in Swing versus some other dances.

In closing, I think that both the lead and follow learn to do their part at equal paces. In Swing, I also think there are more "open position" movement, therefore the lead is somewhat intimidated to get the follower back "in the slot." There are basically 4, 5, or 6 ways to do just one move . . . say a "whip" . . . and the lead must be ready to make his move to keep the dance going. Which now presents another problem . . the slot or the frame. Which does the follower follow?

It's a dual job . . . I believe the bottom line . . . is that there are more female dancers out there, so the chance for success being "faster or quicker to grasp" is much greater with the females!

Jus' my 2(ents . . .

[d nice]

While the leader and follower are executing the same "step" in a lot of dances, the leader still has to learn the various patterns and how to lead the follower through it. The follower, with good frame, and knowledge of her footwork, does not generally need to know any of the patterns.

As to which the follower should "obey" the frame or the slot... the answer is always the frame, with the arguable exception of choreography where the leader is out of position, and if the follower stays in the slot the leader can get back onto the pattern.

If you watch the old clips the slot in wcs was a matter of convenience. It was only in later years after codification of competition and instruction that the slot started to dominate the dance, being held as sacred. Watch the champions, the slot is present, but there are numerous places where they clearly break the slot and "drift" either returning to the original slot or eventually establishing a new one. This can be seen in champion level competitition divisions as well as extremely experieced social dancers.

The slot is a convention, the music is the master, the leader the guide.

[SwinginBoo]

I think frame is definitely the most important factor here. It dictates where you go (slot or no slot), and what you do (patterns). Without frame we'd all be a bunch of machines just reciting patterns in a slot.

[Swing Kitten]

Here's another vote for frame! The frame is the connection IMHO who cares where you are on the floor or in relation to your previous move as long as there's comunication and you're not bumping into people.

[Vince A]

I agree. The slot is only SO wide and the lead must turn his upper body, opening that door, to bring the follow down the slot.

Which leads me to another question for the woman . . . do you "assume" a specific count all the time . . . say, as in WCS, a 6 count?

Why or why not? If you don't, how do YOU know whether its a 6 or an 8 count or more move? Is it a hunch, a feeling? A definite "stop" by the lead before moving on??? What?

[will35]

I am a little reluctant to jump into this fracas, but I'd just like to say one thing about socialization. It is fairly common knowledge that during a certain era in Buenos Aires, women were bound by the custom of chaperoning. Nice girls didn't go around any old place dancing with strange men. There were lots of men, and fewer girls to dance with. When the available girls danced with the men, whispers went around about how good the leaders were. So the men were in an intense, but friendly, competition with just enough comraderie to keep things together. Since there were no girls to practice with, the men learned to dance with men. In the practicas, the young men first learned to dance as followers, that is, as women. They danced as women for a year or so, and the older boys were learning to lead the younger boys. When the young boys were finished being the women, they started to learn to lead the newer boys around. The women learned what they learned at home from their family members. But remember, the competition was amongst the men, mostly. These old milongueros who learned to dance as women are legendary. They are the best Tango dancers on earth. They had to be good to even dance with any woman at all. And yes, Pygmalion, from what I have heard, Nito Garcia did his time in the all male practicas, too. He was a childhood friend of Pepito Avellaneda, I believe. Nowadays, there are three women to every guy dancing. What difference do you suppose it has made? I believe in Tango dancing, the leader is the captain of the ship. I might be wrong, but there are a few women who like to dance with me. I'd give my left arm to go back to those days and sit in (as a woman) on just one of those practicas with Avellaneda and the greatest milongueros in the world. Of course, there are some people who still follow this model in Buenos Aires. There are still young milongueros who learn to follow before they learn to lead.

[SwinginBoo]

Which leads me to another question for the woman . . . do you "assume" a specific count all the time . . . say, as in WCS, a 6 count?

Why or why not? If you don't, how do YOU know whether its a 6 or an 8 count or more move? Is it a hunch, a feeling? A definite "stop" by the lead before moving on??? What?

Sometimes when I'm dancing I'm like "How did I know that was a 6 and not 8?" The answer is (for me) just trusting the connection and not assuming/anticipating the next move. Trust in your connection and you don't have to think about the count.

[Vince A]

SwinginBoo,
Let me build on that . . .

I think you've said before that you are a Lindy dancer. Right?

WCS and Lindy are basically the same dance. Right?

So, if I did a basic "whip," how do you know to walk-walk, counts 5-6? Is it something I do? Or don't do?

If I moved this on to a basic "continuous whip," how do you know to keep moving with me.

I really am curious about this, and I've been asked this by students.

I assume the answer to be that I'm not moving during count-4 of the basic whip and in your slot, yet still moving during count-4 of the continuous whip and out of your slot???

[SwinginBoo]

SwinginBoo,
Let me build on that . . .

I think you've said before that you are a Lindy dancer. Right?

WCS and Lindy are basically the same dance. Right?

So, if I did a basic "whip," how do you know to walk-walk, counts 5-6? Is it something I do? Or don't do?

If I moved this on to a basic "continuous whip," how do you know to keep moving with me.

I really am curious about this, and I've been asked this by students.

I assume the answer to be that I'm not moving during count-4 of the basic whip and in your slot, yet still moving during count-4 of the continuous whip and out of your slot???

Ok, I would agree about Lindy and WCS being practically the same as far as patterns go.

In a basic whip I would know to walk-walk counts five and six because like you said you aren't moving and we're still in the slot. When you go for the continous I can feel your body still moving, your frame tells me to go to 7&8. I don't normally think about patterns and things like that when I'm dancing so I had to really think about this. I guess you answered your own question really. I think a lot of it is really relying on the connection, and if you're in WCS, keeping the slot in mind.

I'm sorry, I know this didnt help you any :(

[dancergal]

Why or why not? If you don't, how do YOU know whether its a 6 or an 8 count or more move? Is it a hunch, a feeling? A definite "stop" by the lead before moving on??? What?

Vince, I'll tell you what I was told by a Pro and it works. The walk walk can be extended if the leader keeps moving forward, around or whatever and until the leader stops and we triple step. So you don't have to know how many counts there are. We basically do the walk, walk, triple step, triple step to everything. Ok, I'm not explaining it that well, but you get the point right?

[Vince A]

On no . . . you did help! You confirmed what I thought! I also follow (and I know that you lead) and I'm just trying to "nail" the slot or frame thing. I keep hearing both sides - although everybody at DF says frame!

I know I have to turn my shoulders for you to follow, say in a R side pass, but I'm stepping out of the slot on 2, then moving on . . . in WCS!

If I didn't turn my frame (shoulders) but still stepped out of the slot, would you still follow?

[SwinginBoo]

I know I have to turn my shoulders for you to follow, say in a R side pass, but I'm stepping out of the slot on 2, then moving on . . . in WCS!

If I didn't turn my frame (shoulders) but still stepped out of the slot, would you still follow?

I would still follow if your arm went in the direction you wanted me to go. I often follow that move when dancing. When I run out of arm I'm sure the leader will tell me where he wants me to go with the connection.

Does this make sense? :?

[Vince A]

Yes, you did . . . and it makes sense. The arm is still attached to the frame?

[SwinginBoo]

ok, so if you stepped out of the slot, but did not turn -- essentially we'd be facing in opposite directions for a moment. (if we are thinking of the same thing here) the connection would be held from your left hand to my right - so your left hand would be wrapped across the front of your body. Ok, now from there you could lead whatever you like because the connection is between our hands.

You could turn and step back in the slot
You could bring me back through the slot the way I came in a turn

Am I talking about the right thing here? Or is this just utter nonsense? :oops:

[Vince A]

You're right on. Actually, you are heading right where I was going.

So, in a sense, no pattern or specific moved was involved, yet we were "playing?"

Which, to me, is the essence of WCS!

[SwinginBoo]

Exactly. I feel like knowledge of the patterns is important because it gets the engine started and lays the tracks, but the "Playing" is what it's really all about. :tongue:

[Vince A]

Yep . . . "playing" is what the two dances are all about, and that's what I'm trying to get all of my dance friends to think about. It's so hard to get some of them off of . . . "Oh, I have to learn that difficult 32-count move . . . it looked so hot!" YUCK!

Basics, connection, frame . . . eyes, flirting, playing = FUN!

[Swing Kitten]

I would go forward only when I felt the lead/weight transfer and the triple step turns are not taken for granted. I would have to be "caught" and lead into the turn. (compression occurs between the lead's right hand and my back) This happens seemingly automatically most of the time but I keep an active ear to what my lead is telling me... he might have a surprise for me and I wouldn't know it unless I listen.