Some possibly confusing tango terms [Archive]

plugger

12-10-2010, 02:59 AM

opendoor

12-10-2010, 04:35 AM

"into the floor" is first of all a stylistic term. In the post-Naveira-en dancing the leading technique differs from the former styles. Any rise, every upwards directed lead was eliminated from the dancing. Chicho told this in a workshop this year in Sitges.

UKDancer

12-10-2010, 05:52 AM

'Into the floor' is used a lot in Latin dancing too. It is just as vague in that context. I suspect that the majority of teachers cannot communicate what they actually mean. If they could, they wouldn't say anything so silly.

I'm afraid that when any dancer starts talking about 'philosophy', I want to know what philosophy he/she knows. Way of life? No, but obsession, possibly. ;)

Dave Bailey

12-10-2010, 06:43 AM

- "Axis" was only briefly confusing. It refers (I think) to the imaginary line through head, torso and abdomen to the WEIGHT-BEARING leg and foot.
That sounds about right to me also.

Of course, we could both be wrong :)

If this is correct, the concept is useful and easy to understand. Still, I think it may confuse beginners. For a long time, I envisioned my axis as an imaginary pole running through my head and spine, down into the floor between my legs. Ugh. And not just ugh; this error had me thinking that my axis was some kind of balance point between the two halves of my body, and that kept me from understanding that my axis, and my partner's, shifted each time we took a step.
"Axis" is jargon, but I think it has use; you simply need to explain what the jargon means. I'm not even sure I'd introduce the concept to beginners, to be honest; it may be more confusing than it's worth.

- What does "into the floor" mean? Gravity holds all of us down. Some great tango dancers take heel leads and some take ball leads, so that can't be the key. Does it mean, "Don't rise up as is done in ballroom waltz or foxtrot?" OK, but I NEVER rise that way in tango, and my feet are usually flat on the floor. When my teacher tells me to be more "into the floor," I'm sure she is right and that I am doing something wrong, but at times I don't know how I could be any more "into" the floor without taking a jackhammer to the hardwood. She probably means I need to flex the knees more and eliminate any rise of my torso and shoulders, etc.
I just wish the phrase would be replaced with something clearer for all students. It's also worth noting that even when ballroom dancers rise high on the balls of their feet, they are pressing INTO THE FLOOR. Don't physics majors at Stanford who dance tango ever gripe about this fuzzy term?

On the "into the floor" ("grounded") bit, I wrote an entry here which you may find helpful.

"Grounded: the myth of good balance (http://www.learningtango.com/Improvers/Grounded.html)"

- Finally, I sometimes hear or read that tango is not just a dance but a "way of life" and a "philosophy." Taking those terms seriously, I'd like to know they mean in this context. There are (not many!) other dances that I enjoy and respect as much as tango, but I'd never consider any of them as ways of life or philosophies.
Welcome to the Wonderful World Of Tango People Talking Total Rubbish :)

When people use these terms, are they talking about the rules and mores of the milonga -- dressing appropriately, the cabeceo, respecting the line of dance, protecting the woman, dancing for her and the music rather than for the spectators, etc.? If so, except for the cabeceo, these values are shared by all dances or ought to be. I'm in favor of dancing a lot of tango and respecting its culture. I just wondered if the philosophy and way of life referred to something broader or deeper than that.
To the extent that this "Tango is everything" mantra has any validity, I think it's simply an expression of the fact that Argentine Tango has roots in the specific Argentine culture; which has associated values, assumptions and, yes, philosophy.

And yes, those factors will absolutely shape a dance. But I'd suggest that they mainly affect the social side of the dance, rather than the technical side of things. Axis is not culture-specific, for example :)

dchester

12-10-2010, 08:40 AM

After several years of lessons and social dancing I've absorbed most customs and values of the local tango community. For a good part of that time, though, there were terms used by teachers and fellow dancers that I never quite understood. Some I still don't. To take four: "axis," "into the floor," tango as a "philosophy" and a "way of life."
- "Axis" was only briefly confusing. It refers (I think) to the imaginary line through head, torso and abdomen to the WEIGHT-BEARING leg and foot. If this is correct, the concept is useful and easy to understand. Still, I think it may confuse beginners. For a long time, I envisioned my axis as an imaginary pole running through my head and spine, down into the floor between my legs. Ugh. And not just ugh; this error had me thinking that my axis was some kind of balance point between the two halves of my body, and that kept me from understanding that my axis, and my partner's, shifted each time we took a step.
- What does "into the floor" mean? Gravity holds all of us down. Some great tango dancers take heel leads and some take ball leads, so that can't be the key. Does it mean, "Don't rise up as is done in ballroom waltz or foxtrot?" OK, but I NEVER rise that way in tango, and my feet are usually flat on the floor. When my teacher tells me to be more "into the floor," I'm sure she is right and that I am doing something wrong, but at times I don't know how I could be any more "into" the floor without taking a jackhammer to the hardwood. She probably means I need to flex the knees more and eliminate any rise of my torso and shoulders, etc.
I just wish the phrase would be replaced with something clearer for all students. It's also worth noting that even when ballroom dancers rise high on the balls of their feet, they are pressing INTO THE FLOOR. Don't physics majors at Stanford who dance tango ever gripe about this fuzzy term?
- Finally, I sometimes hear or read that tango is not just a dance but a "way of life" and a "philosophy." Taking those terms seriously, I'd like to know they mean in this context. There are (not many!) other dances that I enjoy and respect as much as tango, but I'd never consider any of them as ways of life or philosophies.
When people use these terms, are they talking about the rules and mores of the milonga -- dressing appropriately, the cabeceo, respecting the line of dance, protecting the woman, dancing for her and the music rather than for the spectators, etc.? If so, except for the cabeceo, these values are shared by all dances or ought to be. I'm in favor of dancing a lot of tango and respecting its culture. I just wondered if the philosophy and way of life referred to something broader or deeper than that. Yeah, I don't know what people mean by some of these terms either. My opinion is that when people try to explain things from the artsy side of their brain, (rather than approaching it more analytically), you get ambiguous terms like this. BTW, not all people mean the same thing when they used these terms, either.

In any case, this is what I've been able to figure out with some of these terms.

"axis" - This can mean a few different things depending on who's using the term, but it sometimes refers to whether you are completely balanced on your own (on axis), vs being tilted and needing support from the the other person (off axis). It also can refer to imaginary lines, like you already articulated.

"into the floor" - This one is an especially difficult concept, similar to the term get heavy. I have asked a few teachers who used this term what they meant, and apparently by pressing harder in some kind of way that I'm not smart enough to understand, you can press into the floor and weigh approximately 7.5 pounds more than you normally would otherwise. (OK, you got me. I haven't slightest idea what pressing into the floor or getting heavy means either).

"tango as a 'philosophy' and a 'way of life'" - Basically, this means adopt all things Argentine (related to tango), with the exception of things that are not PC and/or things that the teacher doesn't like.

I hope this helps you out.

http://www.dance-forums.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Sagitta

12-10-2010, 09:28 AM

On the "into the floor" ("grounded") bit, I wrote an entry here which you may find helpful.

"Grounded: the myth of good balance (http://www.learningtango.com/Improvers/Grounded.html)"

I read the article. It is a helpful explanation. I say that I am grounded when I feel that I am part/connected to the floor rather then separate/above it. And things like yoga/breathing techniques do help to understand and obtain it. I do Tai Chi and that helps me.

New in NY

12-10-2010, 12:03 PM

Grounded - I think of it as being on a moving subway car without anything to hold on to, so you have to really sink your weight into your feet. My new ballroom teacher explained that if you are really well grounded, you can feel asif your shoes wouldn't slip on any type of floor.

Dave Bailey

12-10-2010, 12:55 PM

Basically, "grounded" = "stable", from our perspective.

Steve Pastor

12-10-2010, 01:16 PM

Perfect place to post this link
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2006/centerofmass.shtml
where someone actually provides data on where the center of gravity is for a human body.

I found that after looking around after looking at this
http://journals.witpress.com/images/dollar.pngView
Abstract (http://journals.witpress.com/paperinfo.asp?pID=454&KeepThis=true&TB_iframe=true&height=400&width=600)
The Evolution Of Speed In Athletics: Why The Fastest Runners Are Black And Swimmers White (http://journals.witpress.com/paperinfo.asp?pID=454&KeepThis=true&TB_iframe=true&height=400&width=600)
ADRIAN BEJAN, EDWARD C. JONES & JORDAN D. CHARLES

In this article they repeatedly state that the belly button is the center of gravity. I wonder why the reviewers didn't make them supply a reference for this. Maybe it's in there among all of the other references they cite, but it's not very obvious.

OK. Who will be the first to do the calculations for men vs women, and whether or not is does in fact correspond to belly buttons of both men and women?

Ampster

12-10-2010, 01:22 PM

Basically, "grounded" = "stable", from our perspective.

Precisely. IMHO, is the best definition of "grounded."

Steve Pastor

12-10-2010, 01:30 PM

Don't physics majors at Stanford who dance tango ever gripe about this fuzzy term?

Can't answer that, but even this humble dance geek/biologist with some training in physics wants to know what is really up.
You may want to find a copy of "Physics and the Art of Dance" if you want to pursue this more. There are lots of old threads where some of us hit this pretty hard, too (hopefully with some degree of accuracy!)

It seems that the term "axis" is used mainly to refer to a line around which something rotates. Dance instructors... well, maybe I shouldn't go there.

Anyhow, I can point out two axes when we talk about dance: one through your body, when it is held in a more or less straight line, and one that extends from your center of gravity (see above!) into the ground (if you used a plumb line you (and knew where your center of gravity was, exactly!) could see this "imaginary" line.

Think I'll stop here, because when we start moving and bending, it gets complicated!

AndaBien

12-10-2010, 02:06 PM

If I remember correctly from Rolfing, the human body has (or should have) a kinetic axis the runs down through the skull, shoulders, hips and between the feet. The head, shoulders and hips can rotate to a degree around it. The purpose of Rolfing it to realign the individual parts of the body on this axis. I don't know if they address where the axis is if you are standing on one foot.

Steve, are you thinking that the center of gravity is the same as the axis? I would say not and that the center of gravity is a point, rather than a line. If the human body is leaning against something, with a straight body, the axis is still in the same place, but at an angle. Of course, a plumb line would not intersect the feet.

The idea of a shared axis is, IMO, a misnomer. I think shared balance would be more accurate.

Zoopsia59

12-10-2010, 02:26 PM

In this article they repeatedly state that the belly button is the center of gravity.

Quote:

Clothing contributed to the weight of the subjects and therefore resulted in a shift in each person's center of mass.
The subjects' heartbeats caused their center of mass to shift because one's center of mass changes as the heart dilates and constricts- pumping blood throughout the body. (end quote)

Wait a minue... they're willing to take into account clothing afffecting things (let's not even go into the fact that the heart is probably changing faster than anyone can measure or notice their center moving) but their result doesn't seem to allow that weight distribution on different people might affect it? Huh?

I'm pretty sure the flab on my thighs weighs more than my clothes! (and what's with doing an experiment without making everyone wear the least amount possible to eliminate that influence?... speaking of things the reviewers should have nitpicked!)

Incidentally, I didn't have that flab on my thighs 30 years ago. I was pretty skinny. Are they saying my center of mass/balance hasn't changed now that I put on 25 lbs and it's all in a 20" area between my waist and my knees? Wouldn't I have had to gain weight in an evenly distributed manner for my center not to move upward or downward on my body? I know that it hasn't because I can't begin to stuff my rear into those size 0-2 pants (even with the changes in how clothes are sized, I now wear a size 6 jean) but I can still wear old tops that were tight then.

And does my friend who is apple shaped and busty with tiny hips and a flat bum, with her excess ABOVE her waist have the same center point that I do? What about those guys I see at the gym who are obviously on steroids who have shoulders 3 times the size of their hips and biceps the size of my thighs?

I didn't try to figure out all their math and equations, but seems to me that deciding that there is a single point that is pretty much the center for all humans is obviously doomed. I've gotten pretty big-headed as I've gotten older, but not enough to make up for what's on my rear!

Steve Pastor

12-10-2010, 05:10 PM

If the human body is leaning against something, with a straight body, the axis is still in the same place, but at an angle. Of course, a plumb line would not intersect the feet.
Exactly right. And exactly where I get the "second" axis.

"Center of Gravity" or "center of mass" is a point.

If you've ever completed a single axis turn when dancing apilado, I'd say you've demonstarted the fact that the shared axis does exist.

Yeah, belly button center of gravity just doesn't work for me, which is why I found the paper to see where they got that (and again, I don't understand why they didn't get called on it), which is why I looked for something to substantiate it.

As far as the comments on the actual measurements of CofG, their qualifiers look to me like pretty standard scientific "disclaimers".

Steve Pastor

12-10-2010, 05:36 PM

Wow, there's a bunch of information available on center of gravity of the human body!

Regarding apilado...

Topplinghttp://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb31152/common/skins/common/blank.gif (http://schools.wikia.com/index.php?title=Center_of_Mass&action=edit&section=5) Edit (http://schools.wikia.com/index.php?title=Center_of_Mass&action=edit&section=5)

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060609021727/schools/images/e/ee/Topple.jpg (http://schools.wikia.com/wiki/File:Topple.jpg) A box as it becomes toppled.
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20101103150005/messaging/images/thumb/1/19/Avatar.jpg/16px-Avatar.jpgAdded by Yuany (http://schools.wikia.com/wiki/User:Yuany)

An object will topple once its plumb line falls outside of its base of support. The figure to the right shows a block being toppled over once its plumb line falls outside the base of the box.

Individual dancers in an apilado embrace, as I define it, have a a "plumb line" or "gravity line" as described above. That is, such that they would topple if standing alone. And yet the combined bodies do not fall over. This "new" object (the combined bodies) has a plumb line somewhere, just as the bodies do when unpartnered.

LoveTango

12-11-2010, 12:21 AM

One can see many definitions of "axis" if checking the dictionary. I think, in Tango, the following definition makes most sense: Axis is a line around which an object rotates.

I think, if we follow this definition, saying "have axis" or "on axis" would be meaningless, because as long as the dance motion involves rotation, the axis exists. However, during the dance the axis, this invisible line is not at a fixed location (relative to the partners).

For example, when executing a molinete with the leader balancing on a single foot and pivoting while the follower moves around the leader, this axis goes though the point under the leader's working foot. Often, the molinete is not a simple rotating around the leader, it also involves translation,that is to say, the couple "drifted" away. Then this axis is moved away from the leader's single foot to somewhere between the two persons, but closer to the leader.

A different example would be when the follower is pivoting during an ocho. At the moment of pivoting, the axis is through the follower's working foot.

The shifting of axis is obvious during a volcada execution, particularly if the volcada is immediately after pivoting around the follower. To begin, the leader "erect" the follower up after her weight has been completely transferred to one foot - the working foot for pivoting. The leader moves around the follower while the follower pivots. At this time, the axis is through a point under the follower's working foot. To start the volcada, the leader moves away from the follower, thus pulling the axis away from the follower towards a point between the partners.

I think a good dancer can subconsciously sense where the axis is during the dance and knows how to keep this axis perpendicular to the floor (thus to stay balanced). Both partners can contribute to this effect.

- my two cents.

opendoor

12-11-2010, 06:33 AM

.... Finally, I sometimes hear ..that tango is not just a dance but a "way of life" ..

That is true and my deep believe, too. It means, .. oh dear, this comes out to be difficult... mmh... (So only some lose associations, but actually no definition)

-integration of musicality, moving, stepping, standing, hearing, looking, feeling, tasting, smelling,
-interculturality, and belonging to a worldwide family,
-(and at the same time) feeling as an emigrant,
-role models, and codigos,
-room for self actualization and straightening,
-narcissism,
-educated and literate people,
-a balance of melancholia (Tango), carnaval (Milonga) and buoyancy (Vals),
-a woman for your whole life, that isn´t jealous, if you have another girl for a while, because she knows for sure, that in the end you will return into her arms again.

gyb

12-11-2010, 12:31 PM

bordertangoman

12-11-2010, 12:40 PM

Steve Pastor

12-11-2010, 12:58 PM

New member abejan sent the following to me in a PM.

The words "belly button" do not appear anywhere in the original, peer reviewed article published by Bejan, Jones and Charles. The article is available at www.constructal.org (http://www.constructal.org/), see the 8th box down.

The "belly button" expression was created by a reporter who wrote about Bejan-Jones-Charles discovery. This expression became popular in the media.

Sure enough, I searched the pdf of the article for "belly" and "navel", and neither term is in the article itself.

I'm not sure where I found the pdf, but it was on the first page of a google search.

Steve

Steve Pastor

12-11-2010, 01:01 PM

how one should understand the claim that in apilado the couple shares a "common axis"?

It helps to think of the two joined bodies as one "object", rather than as two separate "objects" or people.

Peaches

12-11-2010, 01:05 PM

I was also always confused by the meaning of axis. If axis refers to the imaginary line through head, torso and abdomen to the weight-bearinng leg and foot, how one should understand the claim that in apilado the couple shares a "common axis"?
Because there are multiple meanings, depending on what you're talking about.

Yes, there is the axis that runs through the body. This is the axis that people talk about when you're "dancing on your own axis."

But you can share weight (despite what some others on this forum would have you believe), or share a "common axis" in apilado. Which is to say, when you're dancing in a style where, if the other person was not there counterbalancing/propping you up, you would fall on your nose. In that case, "axis" is that imaginary plumb line between the two of you, where your bodies are counterbalancing each other. It takes two of you to create that axis around which you both work/dance...hence a shared axis.

Zoopsia59

12-11-2010, 02:20 PM

I was also always confused by the meaning of axis. If axis refers to the imaginary line through head, torso and abdomen to the weight-bearinng leg and foot, how one should understand the claim that in apilado the couple shares a "common axis"?

There are two different things people in tango mean when they use the term "axis". (and that's not including any references to "axis of evil" type stuff!)

If you want more clarity from the term, I suggest eliminating "axis" entirely and substitute "Balance" and "Alignment"

Sometimes the two things (balance and alignment) correspond, and sometimes they don't.

You should always be maintaining the proper Alignment (one use of the term "axis", as you referred to above) within your own body.. ie: your posture, how you hold yourself, the way the various parts of your body line up to one another independent of how that line relates to the horizontal floor.

Maintaining this line means that sometimes you will be on Balance (the other use of the term "axis") and sometimes you won't. Just because you get led in (or lead) an off-balance move like a volcada, or are dancing apilado with a great deal of lean, doesn't mean you let your alignment go all to h***.

And just because you are on-balance doesn't mean you have maintained your proper alignment. I can compensate for my balance getting off by letting my alignment suffer and have one hip jutting out sideways to counter the oopsie somewhere else (like a tip of the shoulders). I can stick my rear way out while pressing forward. These aren't good technique, but I can still say "I'm balanced".

Both leaders and followers should be trying to maintain their Alignment all the time. A leader should not move in a way that forces the follower out of alignment, although he may deliberately take her off balance.

Conversely, unless she fears for her safety, a follower should not sacrifice her alignment to compensate for being taken off balance. If it was intentional, the leader expects to support her weight. If it wasn't intentional, her compensation will make it harder for him to fix the problem or learn what he did wrong.

I am of the philosophy that followers should allow themselves to go off balance up to the point where they feel unsafe, then make a deliberate motion of placing the free foot to save themselves even if no weight change was led, rather than allowing their alignment to all go wacky to stay on balance. Wacky alignment that's on balance really doesn't help the leader at all. Proper alignment that's off balance gives him more information. Having to take an unled step to avoid disaster sends a clear signal too.

It's also to a follower's advantage to work at keeping the alignment strong so that if she is muscled around, she will not get hurt. Compensating often involves movement that wrenches something that shouldn't be wrenched, often in the back.

So when people say "Maintain your axis", hopefully they are meaning "maintain your Alignment and Posture"

When they say "Take the follower off-axis", they mean "Deliberately lead a counter balanced move" (which means one or both individuals will be off balance but by virtue of their relation to each other, will provide mutual balance)

So forget the term axis.. it's not needed. Everything meant by it can be explained in words that don't cause so much confusion such as Alignment and Balance.

Steve Pastor

12-12-2010, 03:29 PM

Again, regarding the above referenced paper..
They present "Models used to predict the scaling rules of animal locomotion", and for running it is the same model I used to look at dancing in the apilado position. One modification is that they they state that the "Falling forward" of locomotion is calculated from the center of mass rather than the top of the head.

plugger

12-14-2010, 01:40 AM

All these suggestions are interesting and each seems plausible, which could mean either that there are clearer ways to state the concepts or that the terms are so rich in suggestion of multiple meanings that we should keep on using them. (Which we will anyway, I expect.) Here's my best shot.

AXIS: I eventually realized that my teacher uses the term most often in one particular and practical way – the exhortation to “Find her axis!” That advice is all-important. I think it means that I must discern, from the way my partner feels in the embrace, (1) whether she is securely balanced and (2) whether she is weighted on her left or right foot. (Her axis ends at one or the other.)
If her axis is insecure, I need to fix that before trying anything else. And if I can discern how she is “weighted” on one foot or the other, I know exactly what I can lead next and what I cannot lead without first changing my weight or hers.
There was mention of a center of gravity or mass, which is not the same as axis. If the two joined dancers are regarded as one body, it will have a center of mass that will either be located inside one of them or outside both of them, since it is unlikely to be in both dancers at the same time (although it could shift from one to the other as they dance.)
I suspect it will be somewhere between their bodies. If the embrace is close it could be at a point of contact and, in a sense, shared. (The “shared axis” in apilado.) In all styles, it’s probably roughly at navel height. The center of mass is important because if it moves outside their bodies, loss of balance occurs.
By the way, I doubt that in apilado it’s necessary for the partners to hold each other up. The force exerted chest-to-chest can be horizontal and provide an excellent connection even if each partner can stand up securely without the other’s support.
INTO THE FLOOR: I take this to simply mean lowering one’s center of mass. Other than wearing heavy shoes or carrying a lot of change in one’s pockets, this is best done by flexing the knees and keeping the feet flat on the floor through as much of a step as is feasible. That advice probably agrees with most accepted tango styling, but not all.
Yes, one can push down just as hard on the ball of the foot as on the heel or sole, but it feels most securely grounded when the entire foot is down. I think the advice to dance “into the floor” aims to produce a caminada that is in contact with the floor as much as possible and keeps the body low.
TANGO PHILOSOPHY: I tend to agree with the perceptive post that said a person dances tango for pleasure and that of the partner, enjoys and values being part of an international and cosmopolitan community and understands that the music and the customs of the milonga are inseparable from the dance experience. I might call it tango culture rather than philosophy, but I can’t think of a more likely meaning for the term.
TANGO AS A WAY OF LIFE: I take to mean that a person embraces the above “philosophy” along with a lifestyle that includes dancing tango often, socializing with others who dance tango, collecting tango music and in general being more involved in tango than in other dances or pursuits.
Thanks to all for responding to what might have been construed as a somewhat cranky question!

Madahlia

12-14-2010, 04:54 AM

INTO THE FLOOR: I take this to simply mean lowering one’s center of mass. Other than wearing heavy shoes or carrying a lot of change in one’s pockets, this is best done by flexing the knees and keeping the feet flat on the floor through as much of a step as is feasible. That advice probably agrees with most accepted tango styling, but not all.
Yes, one can push down just as hard on the ball of the foot as on the heel or sole, but it feels most securely grounded when the entire foot is down. I think the advice to dance “into the floor” aims to produce a caminada that is in contact with the floor as much as possible and keeps the body low.

I've heard this phrase used in other dances as well and still have no idea what others mean by it but I've formed my own conclusions, right or wrong. When I feel I'm dancing well I have a strong sense of connection with the floor even more than with my partner, so I'm aware of gravity holding me down to it and being able to use it to push against giving me impetus and stability, in much the same way that I'm receiving force and impetus from my partner's lead. (I'm talking physics here, not actual man-handling, in case you were wondering.) In fact, the floor is more reliable and predictable than a physical lead, so it's good to keep in touch with it!

Connection with the floor is generally unconscious and unconsidered but I think it's (literally) fundamental. Without feeling conscious of how my mass is relating to the floor my dancing can feel rickety, insubstantial and unstable. I enjoy the 3D feel that using the floor gives me but I'm not consciously lowering my body or pressing my feet into it even though that's probably part of it. It's almost like the floor is leading me as much as my partner. Maybe leave off the hallucinogenics before going to the milonga next time, huh?

UKDancer

12-14-2010, 05:00 AM

I really think that this 'into the floor' business is something which we feel and understand (to varying degrees) but cannot properly articulate. The words we have chosen are not very helpful ones. I don't know whether anyone could do better?

Peaches

12-14-2010, 05:26 AM

By the way, I doubt that in apilado it’s necessary for the partners to hold each other up. The force exerted chest-to-chest can be horizontal and provide an excellent connection even if each partner can stand up securely without the other’s support.I'm not doubting that there can be an excellent connection when both partners can stand securely on their own. Hell, for that matter, I can have an awesome connection with a partner dancing in open embrace. (Eye contact, don'cha know!) And, yes, even in apilado it feels as if most of the "force exerted" (I don't like thinking of it as force, and I certainly dislike the idea of exerting it anywhere...but if we're sticking with vaguely physics-ish terms I'll go with it.) is horizontal. No, no one is "holding up" the other person--at least not in the sense of carrying one another. But in that style neither partner can stand without the other. They ARE "holding" each other up (more like propping, really--think of balancing two cards against one another). And it IS necessary.

newbie

12-14-2010, 07:04 AM

- What does "into the floor" mean? Gravity holds all of us down. Some great tango dancers take heel leads and some take ball leads, so that can't be the key. Does it mean, "Don't rise up as is done in ballroom waltz or foxtrot?" OK, but I NEVER rise that way in tango, and my feet are usually flat on the floor. When my teacher tells me to be more "into the floor," I'm sure she is right and that I am doing something wrong, but at times I don't know how I could be any more "into" the floor without taking a jackhammer to the hardwood. She probably means I need to flex the knees more and eliminate any rise of my torso and shoulders, etc.
I just wish the phrase would be replaced with something clearer for all students. It's also worth noting that even when ballroom dancers rise high on the balls of their feet, they are pressing INTO THE FLOOR. Don't physics majors at Stanford who dance tango ever gripe about this fuzzy term?

This one is a favourite of all the teachers. But if you ask what they mean they can just repeat "into the floor" like a mantra. I actually replied once that, of course I was into the floor because otherwise I would be floating in the air. To another teacher I asked if he was meaning that the knees had to be a bit flexed or something and he said no, don't flex the knees but you have to be into the floor. To yet another I asked if it was about the feet that had to be kept flat on the ground and he said no, I can be on my toes and into the floor. So for years it remained for me a kind of transcendental expression, that explains itself, like the pudding.

Of course even if I never met any teacher who was able to explain what it meaned, it never prevented them from telling me that I was not enough "into the floor".

So, the teachers being useless here, I created my own view about this notion. You're into the floor if you can hold a horizontal push or pull without having to move your feet to recover your balance. If you can stand up in the BsAs colectivo without using your hands then you're into the floor (if crowded, it does not count).

Dave Bailey

12-14-2010, 07:35 AM

Maybe leave off the hallucinogenics before going to the milonga next time, huh?
Are you mad? How else could one cope with Negracha's?

I really think that this 'into the floor' business is something which we feel and understand (to varying degrees) but cannot properly articulate. The words we have chosen are not very helpful ones. I don't know whether anyone could do better?
Stability.

bordertangoman

12-14-2010, 08:28 AM

Stability.

..using the muscles that control the foot, inc toes, and legs

tangotime

12-14-2010, 08:41 AM

Of course even if I never met any teacher who was able to explain what it meaned, it never prevented them from telling me that I was not enough "into the floor".

.

I believe the more common term is " grounded "; essentially, having the weight on the supporting leg in a controlled position, that will facilitate direction to any given point. Whether the "ball " or " heel " is employed in the action to follow, and also prior to its departure from that "standing " leg, is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

This is an answer given by the late Bill Irvine on this very topic.. when he was asked the Q. he replied ( paraphrased ) I always feel that there are 2 direct forces in action, one is "pulling " me in an upwards direction, and the other is forcing me into the ground .

Zoopsia59

12-14-2010, 01:33 PM

This one is a favourite of all the teachers. But if you ask what they mean they can just repeat "into the floor" like a mantra. I actually replied once that, of course I was into the floor because otherwise I would be floating in the air. To another teacher I asked if he was meaning that the knees had to be a bit flexed or something and he said no, don't flex the knees but you have to be into the floor. To yet another I asked if it was about the feet that had to be kept flat on the ground and he said no, I can be on my toes and into the floor. So for years it remained for me a kind of transcendental expression, that explains itself, like the pudding.

Of course even if I never met any teacher who was able to explain what it meaned, it never prevented them from telling me that I was not enough "into the floor".

I think some teachers simply don't know why their students aren't stable and they have no idea how to fix their problems. If it comes naturally for them, they don't know what they are doing differently from you or anyone else. Personally, I don't think teachers should introduce concepts that they don't know how to explain clearly or teach another person to do. Of course, as we know, just because people can dance at the highest level doesn't make them great teachers.

The best guidance I've ever had on stability (and I'll add that the teacher never used the term "into the floor") came from a female teacher who tried to get me to use my pelvic muscles differently. For me, it was especially the ones in the front of my hip bones. She demonstrated that you can be way up on tiptoe with the kness straight and still be stable, and you can also have your standing knee bent with your foot flat and be unstable. The pressure that really grounds you comes from "dropping" the pelvis and relaxing it away from the erect ribcage.

(In fact, I've had two famous female teachers who have very different styles BOTH talk to me about trying to "separate the ribcage from the pelvis.. elongating by stretching them away from one another to achieve simultaneously stability and a lifted, light feeling)

She put my hand on her hips so I could feel the muscles she was talking about and feel what she was doing with them. She tried to get me to do the same with my muscles. Because of various joint problems I have, it took me quite a long time to even begin to implement this strategy while dancing, but it makes a world of difference when I can do it. Oh hell, it took practice before I could even feel the muscles just standing in the living room.

Now for the fine print.... it is EASIER to have those muscles do their job right if my knees are bent and my feet are flat, but it's not required that they be. After all, they're not only different muscles, but they're in an entirely different joint. The problem is habit. My habit when my leg is straight and I'm on my toes is to also lift in my pelvis. Consequently, I always had a light airy feeling when I danced ballet, but I suffered from poor grounding. Even in something as lifted and "up" as ballet, those muscles should not have been lifting and certainly not tensed.

I've never had any other teachers give me any useful guidance about about "grounding". If anything, they all focus on the knees. For many people, bending the knees is only the beginning.. it will help them use their pelvic muscles better, but without specific instruction on what to do with those pelvic muscles, they'll just be dancing with bent knees and only be somewhat more stable.

And another pet peeve... just saying "Be strong in your core" doesn't fix it either. Tell a beginner that, and they're likely to just TENSE their core, which is pretty counterproductive.

Zoopsia59

12-14-2010, 01:39 PM

This is an answer given by the late Bill Irvine on this very topic.. when he was asked the Q. he replied ( paraphrased ) I always feel that there are 2 direct forces in action, one is "pulling " me in an upwards direction, and the other is forcing me into the ground .

Ah.. should have read ahead... this is exactly what my teachers were trying to explain. But for many of us, Irvine's words are not enough... they leave one with the question "HOW do I do that?"

Peaches

12-14-2010, 01:58 PM

Ah.. should have read ahead... this is exactly what my teachers were trying to explain. But for many of us, Irvine's words are not enough... they leave one with the question "HOW do I do that?"
Ding ding ding! Winner.

Yeah, I get the stable, unable-to-be-knocked-over thing...but HOW?!?!

UKDancer

12-14-2010, 05:00 PM

Ding ding ding! Winner.

Yeah, I get the stable, unable-to-be-knocked-over thing...but HOW?!?!

Easy: get into the floor! ;)

JohnEm

12-15-2010, 04:37 AM

Mainly I agree with DB and BTM:

Grounded in tango essentially means stability .. using the muscles
that control the foot, inc toes, and legs. I would add that the whole body
and sense of balance need to be engaged. But it has to be comfortably
within your capability so it needs developing away from classes.

This too:
I believe the more common term is " grounded "; essentially, having the weight on the supporting leg in a controlled position, that will facilitate direction to any given point. Whether the "ball " or " heel " is employed in the action to follow, and also prior to its departure from that "standing " leg, is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

But not this which just confuses:

This is an answer given by the late Bill Irvine on this very topic.. when he was asked the Q. he replied ( paraphrased ) I always feel that there are 2 direct forces in action, one is "pulling " me in an upwards direction, and the other is forcing me into the ground .
What Bill Irvine "feels" is immaterial, it's what you have to do that's important.
And of course the upward pulling is that description that teachers often describe
as imagining you have a piece of string extending from the top of your head
reaching and pulling upwards. The imagery is a way of trying to get students
to engage their core muscles by using their full height. As we get older
that is an ability we seem to lose and have to find again.

Peaches asks how to be grounded, and it's a very good question
that is so difficult to answer. I'm afraid this doesn't help:
Easy: get into the floor! :wink:
Nor is talk of being able to make yourself weigh heavier, which is physically impossible,
and just loses the teacher credibility with any scientifically knowledgeable student.

I know it's my mantra, but physical fitness is all.
Finding and developing core strength - pilates, yoga, yogalates if you must,
all help. Leg muscle strength, ankles, feet and toes, and core, all need
to work together. Learn too how to separate your pelvis from your upper body
and control the twisting independently.

Teachers don't seem to want to tell people, certainly adults, that there is
no easy way to all this but airy fairy ideas are not the answer.

JohnEm

12-15-2010, 05:39 AM

This is such a long post from Zoopsia, much of which I agree with, I thought
I'd add a man's perspective where appropriate which I hope helps.

The best guidance I've ever had on stability (and I'll add that the teacher never used the term "into the floor") came from a female teacher who tried to get me to use my pelvic muscles differently. For me, it was especially the ones in the front of my hip bones. She demonstrated that you can be way up on tiptoe with the kness straight and still be stable, and you can also have your standing knee bent with your foot flat and be unstable. The pressure that really grounds you comes from "dropping" the pelvis and relaxing it away from the erect ribcage.
Well you can't "drop" the pelvis, it is where it is. You can elongate your body
to help achieve the separation and engage the muscles in the abdomen.
Although I don't subscribe to "dropping" the pelvis you can rotate it by
effectively dropping your "tailbone" under and if you draw yourself up to
your full height that seems to become its natural position. It always bothers
me a bit to see people, mainly ladies, dancing with their butt stuck out
and their bodies in the shape of an S. It's not good long term for backs.

(In fact, I've had two famous female teachers who have very different styles BOTH talk to me about trying to "separate the ribcage from the pelvis.. elongating by stretching them away from one another to achieve simultaneously stability and a lifted, light feeling)
I'd have been much happier to have heard described an "engaged" feeling.

She put my hand on her hips so I could feel the muscles she was talking about and feel what she was doing with them. She tried to get me to do the same with my muscles. Because of various joint problems I have, it took me quite a long time to even begin to implement this strategy while dancing, but it makes a world of difference when I can do it. Oh hell, it took practice before I could even feel the muscles just standing in the living room.
Interesting - so I did a test. And yes I can feel them but don't use them
consciously, they are just there doing their job which I suppose is the point.
It has to be natural, you have to develop them by other ways so they are
available easily, freely when needed, and without conscious effort.

There are other muscles too right on the pelvis so here's something else to try.
My body core strength originally didn't come about because of tango but
because of persistent recurring back pain, spasms, sciatica and the need
to repair the damage caused by work and solve it. Having largely solved it
for normal life, tango proved that wasn't enough.

Back pain returned as did sciatica.
So more exercises were needed but the sciatica still recurred.
I hadn't actually found a way to exercise the muscles on the back of
the pelvis that appeared to be the cause of the problem. But a tango
partner who had natural disassociation (meaning she never had to be
taught it) could rotate her pelvis independently, something most
professional tango teachers can probably do without thinking but I couldn't.
Not because I hadn't the physical ability but because I couldn't control
the necessary muscles. It didn't take long to rectify that - a couple of days
and I was fluent - but wow did it wake up those back pelvic muscles.
Where they were locked up and one always slightly swollen, they were
normal after about 10 days and the sciatica was gone.

The side benefits were and are a significant improvement in the ability
to wind up my body and in the ability to provide intent from the upper
body alone for rotational movements.

Now for the fine print.... it is EASIER to have those muscles do their job right if my knees are bent and my feet are flat, but it's not required that they be. After all, they're not only different muscles, but they're in an entirely different joint. The problem is habit. My habit when my leg is straight and I'm on my toes is to also lift in my pelvis. Consequently, I always had a light airy feeling when I danced ballet, but I suffered from poor grounding. Even in something as lifted and "up" as ballet, those muscles should not have been lifting and certainly not tensed.
Not sure ballet comparisons are that relevant I'm afraid.
Ballet by it's nature is mainly a light and lifted dance.
And I don't get what you mean by a "lifted" pelvis either.

Poor grounding to me usually means instability and that brings us
back to all sorts of inadequate muscle strength and/or control.

I've never had any other teachers give me any useful guidance about about "grounding". If anything, they all focus on the knees. For many people, bending the knees is only the beginning.. it will help them use their pelvic muscles better, but without specific instruction on what to do with those pelvic muscles, they'll just be dancing with bent knees and only be somewhat more stable.
Bending the knees is what the ballroom tango took on board, maybe
because the canyengue style was in evidence at the time (1910 to 1922).
But the knees don't have to be bent, in fact that flattens the cadence of
the walk (sometimes called snake legs), but they do need to be flexed
and not locked straight. That way the leg muscles contribute to the stability
being sought; locking the knees also seems to lock out the ability
to use of most of the leg muscles.

And another pet peeve... just saying "Be strong in your core" doesn't fix it either. Tell a beginner that, and they're likely to just TENSE their core, which is pretty counterproductive.
Too true but people still need to be told that and much more besides.

Some people, even longer term dancers, stay locked and find disassociating
very difficult. It's why many dancers want the freedom to move within the embrace.

So it's back to developing all the necessary fundamental physical abilities
away from classes.

Madahlia

12-15-2010, 06:23 AM

Easy: get into the floor! ;)

I think you were wasting your time there!;)

I know it's my mantra, but physical fitness is all.
Finding and developing core strength - pilates, yoga, yogalates if you must,
all help. Leg muscle strength, ankles, feet and toes, and core, all need
to work together. Learn too how to separate your pelvis from your upper body
and control the twisting independently.
I absolutely agree with this. There is no magic formula - every effort you make to train your body, making it strong, flexible and controlled will pay dividends, both on and off the dance floor. But it needs work, you cannot expect to walk onto the dance floor and find your body miraculously prepared for a challenging dance without prior effort.

This is an answer given by the late Bill Irvine on this very topic.. when he was asked the Q. he replied ( paraphrased ) I always feel that there are 2 direct forces in action, one is "pulling " me in an upwards direction, and the other is forcing me into the ground. Now this does make sense to me - but of course I would have to be the one creating the opposing forces using my body. The trouble with all these images is that they won't have meaning for everyone. I also find value in the image of lifting the crown of my head to the sky whilst letting arms and shoulders relax - but then after years of yoga, pilates and various other exercise I'm used to playing with different alignments etc.

Dave Bailey

12-15-2010, 06:23 AM

UKDancer

12-15-2010, 07:11 AM

I think you were wasting your time there!;)

Yes, obviously. Oh well, it was a cheap shot.

tangotime

12-15-2010, 09:53 AM

But not this which just confuses:

What Bill Irvine "feels" is immaterial, .

What ANY world class dancer "feels" is important in this sense; their ability to convey and describe an " action ", and to describe at as a "feeling " that may be translated to performance.

I would however concede, that those that come into T/Arg without any other form of dance training, that their journey may be fraught with many more pitfalls ,than those who have engaged in other partnership dance disciplines .

JohnEm

12-15-2010, 10:15 AM

What ANY world class dancer "feels" is important in this sense; their ability to convey and describe an " action ", and to describe at as a "feeling " that may be translated to performance.
Well I did qualify my opinion of dissent, so did Madahlia qualify her
opinion of assent, both of us in much the same terms.

What a world class dancer "feels" is only of importance if he/she can
communicate it in terms that make sense to the majority of
their audience of participants.

Surely the point is that the upward force is within you and the only value
of such imagery of strings etc is to encourage the participant to picture
and simulate the result of such imagined external force. It seems to me
disingenuous to talk of factually feeling such a force which doesn't exist
and merely adds to the mystery of it all without adding any understanding.

I would however concede, that those that come into T/Arg without any other form of dance training, that their journey may be fraught with many more pitfalls ,than those who have engaged in other partnership dance disciplines .
And from experience, sometimes those other partner dance experiences
aren't always that helpful and can even be confusing.

tangotime

12-15-2010, 10:33 AM

[quote=JohnEm;839149 What a world class dancer "feels" is only of importance if he/she can
communicate it in terms that make sense to the majority of
their audience of participants.

And from experience, sometimes those other partner dance experiences
aren't always that helpful and can even be confusing

.[/quote]

And thats exactly what he accomplished ( from my experiences around Bill and numerous other world class coaches ), but thats no mean feat, its the mark of world class coaches .

... and yes, I would agree that other experiences may be in conflict.. but for the well trained dancer, those conflicts are usually easily resolved .

JohnEm

12-15-2010, 11:53 AM

And thats exactly what he accomplished ( from my experiences around Bill and numerous other world class coaches ), but thats no mean feat, its the mark of world class coaches .
I can't comment as I have no experience of his teaching.
However my comments are based on your post of his "feeling"
and you know my view of that now.

And how meaningless the term "World Class" teacher or coach is.
We each have to form our own opinion.

... and yes, I would agree that other experiences may be in conflict.. but for the well trained dancer, those conflicts are usually easily resolved .
Now that is a bit rich!
We aren't talking well trained dancers here, just ordinary people of
very mixed abilities who may or may not have experience or be
competent in some other dances. So let's not be elitist.

Zoopsia59

12-15-2010, 12:20 PM

I know it's my mantra, but physical fitness is all.
Finding and developing core strength - pilates, yoga, yogalates if you must,
all help. Leg muscle strength, ankles, feet and toes, and core, all need
to work together. Learn too how to separate your pelvis from your upper body
and control the twisting independently.

Teachers don't seem to want to tell people, certainly adults, that there is
no easy way to all this but airy fairy ideas are not the answer.

All this cross training was not necessary back in BA during the "Golden Age of Tango" and it is still not necessary for those 80 year old milongueros who are not exactly the picture of fitness.

So this raises the question... is it just that tango has changed and styles today require a significant level of fitness?

Or is it that we (the worldwide tango community) have made tango so darn complicated that its hard to just RELAX while dancing?

I can't speak for others, but the vast majority of my problems are caused by tension. I wouldn't be nearly this tense if Tango didn't seem like some esoteric fantasy that I can never achieve in real life, and the evaluations of partners so often harsh.

Frankly, I totally disagree that there is no easy way... it SHOULD be easy... just relax and enjoy it.

What makes it NOT easy is that it's so hard to relax. I'm sure I'm not the only one having trouble finding that line between being energized and being tense in an activity that seems designed these days to make you as nervous as possible about your ability to do it!

Zoopsia59

12-15-2010, 01:02 PM

This is such a long post from Zoopsia, much of which I agree with, I thought
I'd add a man's perspective where appropriate which I hope helps.

Not sure why your perspective would be different based just on gender...

Well you can't "drop" the pelvis, it is where it is.

Well, yeah... just like you can't be heavier or lighter. It was an expression and she was actually talking about the muscles, not the pelvic bone itself. It made sense to me and was exactly the feeling I needed to be seeking to fix my problem. As per my post right above this one, it was about relaxing and maybe even trying to push those specific muscles downward because I had so much tension in them.

you can rotate it by
effectively dropping your "tailbone" under

that would not have been the correct solution for my problem. The amount of tilt (forward or backward) in my pelvis was not the issue.

and if you draw yourself up to
your full height that seems to become its natural position.

The tailbone "tucked" is not always natural. It depends on the amount of tuck. A backwards tip to the pelvis is no more natural than a forward tip. The spine is designed to have curvature in the lower back, and the amount of it varies naturally from person to person. Because I have a tiny waist and a fair amount of flab on my rear, even with my pelvis tucked under too much, there would be an illusion of arching in my lower back.

I'd have been much happier to have heard described an "engaged" feeling.

Well, it wasn't your lesson. Since my problem was too much tension in the relevant muscles, lessening the "engagement" was vital. "Overly contracted" is pretty awkward to dance with. I'm sure if you had been taking the lesson, you would have gotten instruction from her that would have applied to your situation.

so I did a test. And yes I can feel them but don't use them consciously, they are just there doing their job which I suppose is the point.

I'm curious how you know whether you were "testing" the same muscles I was getting instruction on? Even in HER body (which is awesome BTW... the lady has isolation control of all her core which leaves me doing this: :notworth:) Anyway... even in HER body, when she had me place my fingers on the muscles she wanted me to "drop", it was a very tiny area. And "dropping" is EXACTLY what I felt the muscles doing when she moved them for me to feel.

natural disassociation (meaning she never had to be taught it) could rotate her pelvis independently ... I couldn't control
the necessary muscles ... wow did it wake up those back pelvic muscles.
Where they were locked up and one always slightly swollen, they were
normal after about 10 days and the sciatica was gone.

You and I don't have the same problem in the same area of the body. I don't have sciatica. I have a great deal of disassociation (the blessing of a long torso and tiny low waist). My ability to rotate my pelvis independently is not an issue. I have an above average (even for a tango dancer) amount of ability to disassociate.

My problem is tension in specific muscles from unconsciously contracting them while dancing which has worsened my problems of tendonitis in my hip joints, which in turn creates more inflammation and contraction. This tendonitis does not affect my range of disassociation from my upper torso. It affects my ability to completely relax the muscles so that at the end of my range I can actually return to neutral rather than get stuck in a twist with the muscles cramped and not responding. If anything, I disassociate too much, going past the point at which I have control.

Not sure ballet comparisons are that relevant I'm afraid. Ballet by it's nature is mainly a light and lifted dance.

And yet, ballet dancers are VERY grounded. From what I can gather from why I had problems in ballet, they achieve this by lifting the upper body away from the lower body and sending the lower body downward. Maybe a more experienced ballet dancer here can explain this better. I tried to lift all the way to the floor, which gave me great ballon as I moved, but left me unstable during standing floorwork. It also meant I couldn't leap very high because I never really came "down".

Poor grounding to me usually means instability and that brings us
back to all sorts of inadequate muscle strength and/or control.

Only if instability is caused by that. My muscles are QUITE strong. Believe me, you can't go through life with them contracted without them becoming strong. Except that all that contraction creates damage which in turn weakens them because there is no "repair time". But the solution is not just to strengthen them.. it's to RELAX them so they have downtime. Strengthening exercises just hurt me if I haven't gotten them relaxed.

JohnEm

12-15-2010, 01:27 PM

Interesting as ever - where will this go next?

All this cross training was not necessary back in BA during the "Golden Age of Tango" and it is still not necessary for those 80 year old milongueros who are not exactly the picture of fitness.

So this raises the question... is it just that tango has changed and styles today require a significant level of fitness?
To answer that we have to picture BsAs in the 40s and 50s.
Then those milongueros were young and they learned in
their relative youth and in the peak of fitness. Those skills
they learned have never left them. But do bear in mind that
many now in tango abroad are rather scathing about shuffling
milongueros. I agree that many have very compromised
posture these days but the best did not. Think Ricardo Vidort,
Tete, Miguel Balbi etc.

I am as close as I can be at present to milonguero, therefore apilado,
but shuffling isn't in my repertoire but more like some of the people
in Tango and Chaos videos. Hopefully.

Teachers must take some of the blame. To teach professionally
and earn a living from tango, first you have to have something
to teach. And it has to appeal to a wide, and often uninformed,
audience of potential paying students. The milonguero way of
passing it on - 8 to 16 lessons and of you went to practise and
dance and find your own tango (apparently), as simple or as
complicated as you decided - isn't what people expect and
won't pay for food on the professional tango teacher's table.

Now we are more prescriptive. Lessons are the be all and end all.
Not so for me however as Tango in its traditional form should be
the ultimate self-learning, self-improving dance. We should open
source it (like software!) and perpetrate it everywhere possible.

So teachers take the blame for the complications of moves and and
an assortment of styles.The argentinians of the show school tendency
(Todaro, Los Dinzels, the Nuevo Three and those teaching
the contemporary VU fad) are responsible too.

Or is it that we (the worldwide tango community) have made tango so darn complicated that its hard to just RELAX while dancing?

I can't speak for others, but the vast majority of my problems are caused by tension. I wouldn't be nearly this tense if Tango didn't seem like some esoteric fantasy that I can never achieve in real life, and the evaluations of partners so often harsh.
Yes I believe you're right. But the tension is within you and it's your
responsibility to rid yourself of esoteric fantasies (ooh I love the thought
of what you might be fantasising!).

Frankly, I totally disagree that there is no easy way... it SHOULD be easy... just relax and enjoy it.

What makes it NOT easy is that it's so hard to relax. I'm sure I'm not the only one having trouble finding that line between being energized and being tense in an activity that seems designed these days to make you as nervous as possible about it!
The only thing about no easy way is the way of getting dance fit.
It takes time, a little determination and some dedication.
Bring some fitness to the class and it becomes easier.

Unlike the young milongueros of the Golden Age, most of us come to
this at a later stage in life. What we took for granted when young -
when I was at the original tango learning age I was a competitive
cross-country runner - we cannot take for granted now. Look around
any class, or video of a class demonstration, and see the variety of
posture. It's not intentional by the people, it's the result of life, maybe
a sedentary one, maybe a stressful one, maybe physically exhausting,
but that is the situation that teachers have to deal with. No wonder
we have the watered down upright, less connected tango that is VU or
similar. I have noted too that teachers in workshops leave couples
mainly to whatever embrace they are happy with and rarely interfere.

If you are getting stressed, stop being deconstructed or learning some
new and fancy move, don't do classes for a while if that's what you
are doing. To me, it seems you have a crisis of confidence.

JohnEm

12-15-2010, 01:41 PM

Not sure why your perspective would be different based just on gender...
Because in my experience men don't think of these things?
And the role of the man is different to a lady - isn't it?

Well, it wasn't your lesson. Since my problem was too much tension in the relevant muscles, lessening the "engagement" was vital. "Overly contracted" is pretty awkward to dance with. I'm sure if you had been taking the lesson, you would have gotten instruction from her that would have applied to your situation.
Cutting your post to the chase . . . . point taken of course.

I'm curious how you know whether you were "testing" the same muscles I was getting instruction on? Even in HER body (which is awesome BTW... the lady has isolation control of all her core which leaves me doing this: :notworth:) Anyway... even in HER body, when she had me place my fingers on the muscles she wanted me to "drop", it was a very tiny area. And "dropping" is EXACTLY what I felt the muscles doing when she moved them for me to feel.
Seems I wasn't testing those particular muscles but I can feel muscles there,
never identified before, nor in my years of being somewhat overweight
and unfit would I have been able to find them.

Your post does seem to indicate a great deal of analysis, maybe excessively,
for what should be a relatively simple dance as we both agree.

Your other problems are certainly not mine - it goes to show
just how different we all are and how differently the stresses
and strains of life impact our bodies.

dchester

12-15-2010, 02:29 PM

All this cross training was not necessary back in BA during the "Golden Age of Tango" and it is still not necessary for those 80 year old milongueros who are not exactly the picture of fitness.

So this raises the question... is it just that tango has changed and styles today require a significant level of fitness?
Me, I'm going for the Chicho picture of fitness.

http://www.dance-forums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

http://www.tango.info/x/jpg/couples/MariaFrumb-y-EugenParri.200x300.jpg

Madahlia

12-15-2010, 05:01 PM

Me, I'm going for the Chicho picture of fitness.

http://www.dance-forums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

http://www.tango.info/x/jpg/couples/MariaFrumb-y-EugenParri.200x300.jpg
Very wise, he certainly looks pretty "relaxed".;) I would guess his lady partner has seen the inside of a gym a few times, however. When are we going to see a bulgy bear female role model? *Sigh*

tangotime

12-16-2010, 01:40 AM

.

And how meaningless the term "World Class" teacher or coach is.
We each have to form our own opinion.

We aren't talking well trained dancers here, just ordinary people of
very mixed abilities who may or may not have experience or be
competent in some other dances. So let's not be elitist

.

I hardly believe that anyone who has any experience( given time ) would not accept that there are certain prof. who have graced many a dance floor, that are indeed just that . They are not only " dancers ", but theorists .

And why would my statement be " elitist " ?.. I couched it in those terms, to make a point that people who have trained in some more abstract theories DO understand concepts that they may apply to other genres . And I do mean Students .

This discussion has taken on the same theoretical argument that Salsa has about " Sabor ".. everyone kinda knows what it is, but is often ill defined .

My conclusion is ,that one needs to be present and immersed in the subject matter that hopefully will bring clarity .

And by the way, Im not remotely an expert on T/Arg... my skills are from other genres .

JohnEm

12-16-2010, 03:45 AM

I hardly believe that anyone who has any experience( given time ) would not accept that there are certain prof. who have graced many a dance floor, that are indeed just that . They are not only " dancers ", but theorists .
I'm not sure what and why you are arguing that, though I'm sure you're right.
Being theorists, being good professional dancers doesn't necessarily make them
good teachers though that might be enough qualification in many people's eyes
to undergo their teaching.

And why would my statement be " elitist " ?.. I couched it in those terms, to make a point that people who have trained in some more abstract theories DO understand concepts that they may apply to other genres . And I do mean Students .

You qualified the statement by saying "well-trained" dancers.
That's a moot point indeed.
Most adult dancers who haven't danced all their lives,
even those who have experience of other dances,
cannot by any stretch of imagination be called well-trained.

Where is the training to just dance?
Where is movement taught (especially to men).
The only comment I ever got when I learned jive
was that I had a good sense of movement.
That must have been from the dance training
I did get when very young, long forgotten I'd thought.

Never seen movement taught as a specific thing,
only very incidentally. In tango often as a result of steps,
rather than steps being the result of movement.
In ballroom almost exclusively as a result of steps -
ballroom taught to men and women facing each other
in lines, like two separate mirroring line dances,
and then you come together. Hmmmm - Yuk!

So I'm not talking about elite dancers but
about normal people taking up dancing
(almost of any kind), maybe for the first time.

This discussion has taken on the same theoretical argument that Salsa has about " Sabor ".. everyone kinda knows what it is, but is often ill defined .

Err, no idea what "Sabor" is!
Can't see much theory in my posts,
personal experience more like.

My conclusion is ,that one needs to be present and immersed in the subject matter that hopefully will bring clarity .
Very true, no argument with that at all.

And by the way, Im not remotely an expert on T/Arg... my skills are from other genres .
Yes that's appreciated - and I know that broadly
we actually seem to agree quite a lot.

ant

12-16-2010, 03:56 AM

This too:

I know it's my mantra, but physical fitness is all.
Finding and developing core strength - pilates, yoga, yogalates if you must,
all help. Leg muscle strength, ankles, feet and toes, and core, all need
to work together. Learn too how to separate your pelvis from your upper body
and control the twisting independently.

Back pain returned as did sciatica.
So more exercises were needed but the sciatica still recurred.
I hadn't actually found a way to exercise the muscles on the back of
the pelvis that appeared to be the cause of the problem. But a tango
partner who had natural disassociation (meaning she never had to be
taught it) could rotate her pelvis independently, something most
professional tango teachers can probably do without thinking but I couldn't.
Not because I hadn't the physical ability but because I couldn't control
the necessary muscles. It didn't take long to rectify that - a couple of days
and I was fluent - but wow did it wake up those back pelvic muscles.
Where they were locked up and one always slightly swollen, they were
normal after about 10 days and the sciatica was gone.

It seems to me that your mantra and what I feeel should be learned from your back experience are a contradiction.

It appears to me that the reason you had a back problem was because of the application of incorrect technique and not the lack of physical fitness and it was the correction of this incorrect technique that resolved the problem.

As far as I can see working on physical fitness is more a lifestyle choice rather than having real relevance in dance. I would agree that for show tango and more energetic neuvo it has relevance but for the standard Salon style of dancing at a Milonga, dancing to the music is by far the most relevant skill.

JohnEm

12-16-2010, 04:08 AM

It seems to me that your mantra and what I feeel should be learned from your back experience are a contradiction.

It appears to me that the reason you had a back problem was because of the application of incorrect technique and not the lack of physical fitness and it was the correction of this incorrect technique that resolved the problem.

As far as I can see working on physical fitness is more a lifestyle choice rather than having real relevance in dance. I would agree that for show tango and more energetic neuvo it has relevance but for the standard Salon style of dancing at a Milonga, dancing to the music is by far the most relevant skill.

That's just so . . . . complacent. Sorry, can't think of any other word.

Apilado/milonguero, whatever you want to call it is much more
physically demanding than Nuevo in ways you don't first appreciate.
I was already a dancer of different genres without pain.

Fitness maybe a lifestyle choice for some, for me it was necessity
so you're wrong. Wrong too about incorrect technique except that
I couldn't apply the correct technique. Being able to apply the
correct technique needed an improvement in muscle strength in the
right places, posture etc. And it still needs working on.

You miss the point too that I, like many others, carry back strain
injury from overwork, over lifting, overstress etc. Managing my
back is the only practicable answer.

Tango didn't cause the back problem but it did highlight that
there was more work to do.

And of course, dancing to the music is a very important skill
but it isn't the only criterion and not the only required skill.

tangotime

12-16-2010, 04:23 AM

, .
Being theorists, being good professional dancers doesn't necessarily make them
good teachers .

You qualified the statement by saying "well-trained" dancers.
That's a moot point indeed.
Where is the training to just dance?
Where is movement taught (especially to men).
Never seen movement taught as a specific thing,
only very incidentally.

In tango often as a result of steps,
rather than steps being the result of movement.
In ballroom almost exclusively as a result of steps -
ballroom taught to men and women facing each other
in lines, like two separate mirroring line dances,
and then you come together. Hmmmm - Yuk!

Err, no idea what "Sabor" is!
Can't see much theory in my posts,
personal experience more like.

- and I know that broadly
we actually seem to agree quite a lot.

Para 1,, I never meant to imply that it did.. it was meant to underscore that with the correct training, many of the indicated problems can/may be resolved .

Para. 2.. WHERE can " dancers " learn " movement "?. hopefully thru a highly qualif dance Pro. ( Ive been teaching it for yrs !.. and im NOT unique ). I dont even understand HOW any "teacher?" is able to develop a partnership in dance without devoloping Lead and Follow .And where to go ?.. seek where the best dancers get their training .

And, your comment on B/room classes is probably true.. but thats only the thin end of the wedge of teaching . Developing dance skills to the higher levels, is a time, effort, and financial commitment that the majority never achieve ( thats by choice ).. so, in a beginners class one has to "spoon" feed the info and devolping the finer points given the above requirements, and it still really depends on the quality of the teaching .

Your last statement about theory is an interesting one. Everything you do in dance was once ( and still is ) a theory. The practical application of dance, is based upon tried and true theoretical premises, that have evolved and continue to do so .

Agreement on much.. yes, but not all .

UKDancer

12-16-2010, 04:26 AM

Where is movement taught (especially to men).
The only comment I ever got when I learned jive
was that I had a good sense of movement.
That must have been from the dance training
I did get when very young, long forgotten I'd thought.

Never seen movement taught as a specific thing,
only very incidentally. In tango often as a result of steps,
rather than steps being the result of movement.
In ballroom almost exclusively as a result of steps -
ballroom taught to men and women facing each other
in lines, like two separate mirroring line dances,
and then you come together. Hmmmm - Yuk!

It is the bedrock of my teaching that two people move their bodies together, when we dance, and that even as beginners, we only move our feet because we would fall over if we didn't.

Admittedly, a step-led approach is more common (and you do have to give beginners something that they can DO, straight away, or they won't be back for another class), but I want to create dancers, not dance robots. Like most teachers, I largely fail, but that isn't for want of trying!

JohnEm

12-16-2010, 04:35 AM

It is the bedrock of my teaching that two people move their bodies together, when we dance, and that even as beginners, we only move our feet because we would fall over if we didn't.

Admittedly, a step-led approach is more common (and you do have to give beginners something that they can DO, straight away, or they won't be back for another class), but I want to create dancers, not dance robots. Like most teachers, I largely fail, but that isn't for want of trying!

Good on you!!!
Just don't give up.

JohnEm

12-16-2010, 04:41 AM

Your last statement about theory is an interesting one. Everything you do in dance was once ( and still is ) a theory. The practical application of dance, is based upon tried and true theoretical premises, that have evolved and continue to do so .
Oh crikey, which is theory and which is practice.
But I'm going to continue to subscribe to practice
rather theoretical. After all it isn't a theory if you can do it!
Perhaps it just sems to be the wrong word though I guess
from your usage it's common in some dance circles.
More jargon then.

Agreement on much.. yes, but not all .
If we agreed on everything there'd be nothing to talk about.

tangotime

12-16-2010, 04:54 AM

After all it isn't a theory if you can do it!

If we agreed on everything there'd be nothing to talk about.

Its not WHAT you do.. its all about the way that you do it ..and, at one point in time it was a movement that was theorised and refined .

There are numerous theories in the dance world ,that are equally accepted and rejected . And then there are those that have become foundational .

Thats why dance sites like this create understanding( hopefully ) !.

As an afterthought, your critique of what was taught in a B/ Room class begs this Q.. what other method do you think will bring better results ? .

The reason i ask is this; its been used for decades in the B/room genre and has produced ( eventually ) some of the greatest dancers ever to step onto a dance floor. Im always open to new ideas.

UKDancer

12-16-2010, 05:16 AM

.. what other method do you think will bring better results ?

It's a fair question. Ballroom (and to a lesser extent, Latin) and lots of other loosely related styles aren't improvisatory in character. We have to give beginners material to work on (and it has to be simple to start with - and that, at least, is also true of AT).

"Yuk!" might be a personal response to the styles (or the method, it's hard to guess which - both, probably), but that's just your perception/experience of styles which are enduringly popular, and which give a very, very large number of people pleasure and fulfilment in their dancing. As an aside, most (obviously not all) of these people would shake their heads in bafflement, watching the goings-on at a milonga, and go away again, very relieved that no one had asked them to dance... ;)

tangotime

12-16-2010, 06:01 AM

It's a fair question. Ballroom (and to a lesser extent, Latin)

Latin, in either its indigenous format or the B/room styles, encompass as many ( maybe even more ) ground rules that will facilitate ease of passage .

Ther is a common belief for e.g. , that Salsa is not encumbered with " rules ".. on the contrary ,ALL dance motion is..

UKDancer

12-16-2010, 06:26 AM

Latin, in either its indigenous format or the B/room styles, encompass as many ( maybe even more ) ground rules that will facilitate ease of passage.

I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I meant that in comparison with AT, Ballroom (and Latin to a lesser extent) are NOT improvisatory styles of dance, and therefore require a structured approach to their teaching.

Take a style like International Rumba: at a high level, you will see almost nothing that you could find between the pages of one of the standard texts (in which the 'rules' are defined), whereas in, say, Slow Foxtrot, you will see almost nothing that isn't.

AT's practitioners usually defy any attempt to put AT into one or more boxes. This is ironical, of course, because the rest of us can see all too clearly how the dance is constructed from a stylised vocabulary of movements, and the dancers themselves spend a lot of time arguing with each other about the competing claims of these different styles (rather undermining their position in the process).

bordertangoman

12-16-2010, 06:51 AM

As far as I can see working on physical fitness is more a lifestyle choice rather than having real relevance in dance..

I would agree that for show tango and more energetic neuvo it has relevance but for the standard Salon style of dancing at a Milonga, dancing to the music is by far the most relevant skill.[/QUOTE]

No. Musicality without technique and good posture and toned muscles in core and legs is like herding cats...you could get a load of solists but no partner connection.

by analagoy; Anyone can blow a saxophone but to get a good long sustained note requires training of the abdominal muscles

@ JohnEm; I dont think milonguero requires more fitness than nuevo.

opendoor

12-16-2010, 07:04 AM

Looks like my understanding of "into the floor" is totally different from yours (the rest of the world) ?! (post 2 of this thread)

By the way, the 1:40 thing (a doubling within a giro) in the following vid is lead upward.

http://www.dance-forums.com/showthread.php?t=37956
youtube.com/watch?v=No-RL83tkeo

tangotime

12-16-2010, 07:21 AM

Take a style like International Rumba: at a high level, you will see almost nothing that you could find between the pages of one of the standard texts
.

I didnt know we were discussing "higher " levels.. after all,the original Q was about a basic fundamental( and virtually the same at the lower end ) .

And of course, at the higher dance levels of teaching, there are many nuances that do not readily translate into the standard technique book .

And it should be made clear to the newcomer, those "books " , are essentially a guide for standardisation of acceptable material for specific levels of dance and exams . They really leave a lot to be desired beyond that approach .

ant

12-16-2010, 07:59 AM

I would agree that for show tango and more energetic neuvo it has relevance but for the standard Salon style of dancing at a Milonga, dancing to the music is by far the most relevant skill.

No. Musicality without technique and good posture and toned muscles in core and legs is like herding cats...you could get a load of solists but no partner connection.

by analagoy; Anyone can blow a saxophone but to get a good long sustained note requires training of the abdominal muscles

@ JohnEm; I dont think milonguero requires more fitness than nuevo.
[/quote]
The post you refer to relates to the comment

Originally Posted by JohnEm
.....physical fitness is all.

I would have thought that a person playing the saxophone would try to play it with musicality rather than making long sustained notes. Are you saying long sustained notes are more important than playing a proper tune?

dchester

12-16-2010, 08:36 AM

No. Musicality without technique and good posture and toned muscles in core and legs is like herding cats...you could get a load of solists but no partner connection.
How toned would you say Chicho is or Tete was?

tangomonkey

12-16-2010, 09:21 AM

How toned would you say Chicho is or Tete was?

I'd say - like me - under the blubber is a well deveolped musculature. :eek:

I am sure I have great six-pack abs - but will never be able to see them...

Spending time in the gym doing core, balance, strength, and cardio work has had results.:D - if not very visibly.

dchester

12-16-2010, 09:32 AM

I'd say - like me - under the blubber is a well deveolped musculature. :eek:

I am sure I have great six-pack abs - but will never be able to see them...

Spending time in the gym doing core, balance, strength, and cardio work has had results.:D - if not very visibly.
Yeah, I know what you mean. It's not easy for me to maintain this trim 280 pound physique.

http://www.dance-forums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

bordertangoman

12-16-2010, 09:36 AM

I would have thought that a person playing the saxophone would try to play it with musicality rather than making long sustained notes. Are you saying long sustained notes are more important than playing a proper tune?[/QUOTE]

Its an Om question...

Long notes are a basic exercise for the beginner ( and all other levels)

It gives you breath control; then you have a better chance of playing a tune;
you cant breathe between each note, so you learn how to conserve your breath and breath in at appropriate places; so you cant play musically with out fitness and technique
and playing long notes is one exercise to improve this..

like I said musicality is useless without technique and fitness.

bordertangoman

12-16-2010, 09:39 AM

How toned would you say Chicho is or Tete was?

Chicho is fit he moves like a cat; so he's going to have far more muscle than I have because he's moving more mass around.

I really couldnt give a monkeys about Tete. Is he still alive?

tangomonkey

12-16-2010, 09:47 AM

I played saxophone in high school and sang in a choir in university (and studied opera). Imagine singing over an orchestra in an opera house and projecting your voice to the back rows. Takes considerable physical technique.

And I won't comment on the stereotypical physique of an opera singer...;)

opendoor

12-16-2010, 10:21 AM

How toned would you say Chicho is or Tete was?

Concerning Chicho (I was lead by him): very well toned, and it feels like an submarine is going to overtake (or undertake) you!

bordertangoman

12-16-2010, 11:17 AM

AndaBien

12-16-2010, 11:39 AM

"...I really couldnt give a monkeys about Tete. Is he still alive?[/quote]

Tete died a few months ago.

(What's going on with the quoting method)?

Madahlia

12-16-2010, 01:12 PM

It appears to me that the reason you had a back problem was because of the application of incorrect technique and not the lack of physical fitness and it was the correction of this incorrect technique that resolved the problem.Yes, but the problem had to be solved by physical training so whether the initial problem was lack or fitness or not the solution remained the same.

As far as I can see working on physical fitness is more a lifestyle choice rather than having real relevance in dance.How come then, that the degree of physical fitness correlates so closely with the degree of skill of the dancer? Why are there so few fat, unfit professional dancers? Having a trained, responsive body helps people to acquire the techniques that all of us, no matter how unambitious we are in our approach to dance, apparently value highly. Why else do we have these endless discussions about axis, walking, disassociation and other skills which we pretty much agree are the essential foundation of the dance?

The truth is, that if you have a trained, responsive body that you are fully aware of, and in control of, these basic skills are easier to acquire. Of course, as a purely social dancer, you might feel you don't have to bother with basic skills - but I somehow don't think that is the case?

One example -I dance with lots of men who frequently wobble and lose their axis because they don't have awareness of their core, which mars otherwise pleasant dances. I'm sure the same is true of followers. A bit of regular training outside the dancefloor would help to sort out that problem and make them better social dancers.

I would agree that for show tango and more energetic neuvo it has relevance but for the standard Salon style of dancing at a Milonga, dancing to the music is by far the most relevant skill.
I've been thinking about why the old milongueros can get away with still being considered maestros despite age and lack of condition and I think superb connection with the music and its interpretation has to be a major factor. A highly accurate, confident and subtle lead is probably another - but perhaps we could hear a bit more from someone who has actually danced with one? As someone has already mentioned, I suspect that they are still very aware of how to use their core muscles, despite general lack of condition.

Zoopsia59

12-16-2010, 01:37 PM

[quote=Madahlia;839406Why are there so few fat ... professional dancers? [/quote]

This is why:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101213/us_yblog_thelookout/sugar-plum-fairy-doesnt-want-apology-from-critic-who-called-her-fat

Note that none of the criticism had anything to do with her dancing, her interpretation of the role or her fitness. It was just about the way she LOOKED because of her weight.

Zoopsia59

12-16-2010, 01:40 PM

Why else do we have these endless discussions about axis, walking, disassociation and other skills

Cause even when we're sitting at our computers (and probably should be working) we can't stop thinking about Tango. Since we can't gossip about tango people, we have to talk about something! :D

Zoopsia59

12-16-2010, 01:59 PM

One example -I dance with lots of men who frequently wobble and lose their axis because they don't have awareness of their core, which mars otherwise pleasant dances. I'm sure the same is true of followers. A bit of regular training outside the dancefloor would help to sort out that problem and make them better social dancers.

Most of the leaders I dance with who wobble and lose their balance do so, not because of a lack of core conditioning, but because they have no idea how to rotate their upper body to walk outside partner (or to do anything else) and never got taught how to place their foot in relationship to the follower as they step.

It usually goes like this: The leader wants to step outside to my right, but was never told to rotate his upper body toward mine to help him get there without breaking the connection. So he tries to keep his chest in front of mine but tips it over sideways so that his hips are next to mine to allow him to step beside me. Then because he is tipping and falling and worrying about stepping on me (these are almost always the same leaders who are afraid to step on me, so they end up trying to step around me) he places his foot so that it points away from me into the center of the room, which brings his right hip forward, thus blocking his connection to me even more. That makes it almost impossible for him to rotate his upper body towards mine... in fact, it pulls his upper body the OTHER way, so he has to tip sideways (right shoulder down) even more to try to connect his torso to mine at all.

Eventually, he falls over.

None of that says anything at all about the strength of his core... (in fact, someone with a strong core can twist up like this even more before they eventually fall over) It's just bad technique (or complete lack of technique) If I correct the leader and get him to use his body correctly, he may turn out to be completely stable.

Putting your body in the wrong position because you don't know any better is not the same thing as not being ABLE to put/hold it in the correct position. I'd say that on a local level of hobbyists, the former is a bigger problem than the latter (at least here) One of the leaders who I have trouble connecting to for some reason is a martial artist... he's very strong but I always have trouble following him. A leader I like danced with a modern dance company... he's quite strong, but he sometimes gets nervous and the tension gives him stability problems (just like me, actually... I actually LOOK quite fit and have reasonably strong core muscles)

I just not buying into the idea that people's problems are typically coming from lack of strength. It hasn't been my experience of people I know, male or female, leader or follower, that lack of strength is their biggest obstacle.

dchester

12-16-2010, 02:45 PM

This is why:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thelookout/20101213/us_yblog_thelookout/sugar-plum-fairy-doesnt-want-apology-from-critic-who-called-her-fat

Note that none of the criticism had anything to do with her dancing, her interpretation of the role or her fitness. It was just about the way she LOOKED because of her weight.
Yep, and it's a shame that so many people are petty like that.

Zoopsia59

12-16-2010, 02:50 PM

Yep, and it's a shame that so many people are petty like that.

As I recall, there was quite a bit of flak about Cheryl Burke's weight too.

tangomonkey

12-16-2010, 05:11 PM

...reminded me of a ballet I saw on PBS a long time ago. The Dutch National Ballet company coreography to some Bach Brandenburg Concerto movements - in fat suits...

Some clips:

http://www.richardprins.com/2010/05/dutch-national-ballet-groosland/

Dave Bailey

12-17-2010, 04:38 AM

Yes, but the problem had to be solved by physical training so whether the initial problem was lack or fitness or not the solution remained the same.
I agree that fitness is a good thing - of course it is. I also have back pain issues, and I know the solution - or, at least, the thing which helps the most - is a combination of stretches, mobility, and fitness.

How come then, that the degree of physical fitness correlates so closely with the degree of skill of the dancer?
The correlation is less high for social dancers - skill is paramount. It's much higher, obviously, for performers.

dchester

12-17-2010, 09:14 AM

How come then, that the degree of physical fitness correlates so closely with the degree of skill of the dancer? Why are there so few fat, unfit professional dancers? First, professional (AKA performance) dancing is a different animal from social dancing. Second, I think the answer to your question has to do with what the customer (and the organizers) wants. Part of what they are marketing is an image, and fat people don't often fit into that image.

Having a trained, responsive body helps people to acquire the techniques that all of us, no matter how unambitious we are in our approach to dance, apparently value highly. Why else do we have these endless discussions about axis, walking, disassociation and other skills which we pretty much agree are the essential foundation of the dance?
OK, so if I got on the treadmill and started jogging, or went to the gym and started lifting weights, what tango related skills will that improve faster than spending that same time practicing tango?

I'm not criticizing anyone for doing whatever they think works for them. I just think a lot of people make the erroneous assumption of everything that applies to them must apply to everyone else. It's just not true, IMO.

Maybe it's true that if you were fat, you couldn't do all the same things you do now, but I've been fat for a very long time (including when I was in the Army), and I've been able to do pretty much anything that anyone else can do, (and sometimes better than average, which drove "fit" people crazy on the basketball court, soccer field, etc. when I was younger).

To be honest, tango is lot less physically demanding than a lot of activities I've done, and what surprised and still fascinates me is the mental/analytical challenges of it (at least for leading, as I don't know that much about what followers go through).

Dave Bailey

12-17-2010, 09:32 AM

Whilst I agree with your points:
OK, so if I got on the treadmill and started jogging, or went to the gym and started lifting weights, what tango related skills will that improve faster than spending that same time practicing tango?
Well, I think there are some targetted exercises that might help better than simply "practicing tango" - obvious examples are balance, twisting movements, and working on the lats (for dissociation).

So I think some targetted exercise would be good for Tango. In the same way that professional footballers (soccer players) do exercises that are not always about "practicing football".

dchester

12-17-2010, 09:58 AM

Whilst I agree with your points:

Well, I think there are some targetted exercises that might help better than simply "practicing tango" - obvious examples are balance, twisting movements, and working on the lats (for dissociation).

So I think some targetted exercise would be good for Tango. In the same way that professional footballers (soccer players) do exercises that are not always about "practicing football".
We're probably not far apart of this one. I do some balance exercises from time to time, but they are focused on improving my balance, rather than improving my level of fitness. Soccer does require a lot of running, so anything to improve your stamina & speed is a good thing for it, and it's a lot more strenuous than Tango, (at least for fat guys like me).

http://www.dance-forums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif

tangomonkey

12-17-2010, 11:04 AM

OK, so if I got on the treadmill and started jogging, or went to the gym and started lifting weights, what tango related skills will that improve faster than spending that same time practicing tango?

dChester, you might be surprised at the results. Cardio and weight lifting give you stamina. That makes every-day activities and activities requiring a moderate amount of fitness (ie, tango) easy, even effortless.

Whenever I slack off at the gym (or don't go for a few weeks) I notice it in everything I do. I do some specific exercises which help my tango (balance, core), but would do them anyway. I exercise to - hopefully - allow my body to age less rapidly than it would otherwise, since that is a well-documented outcome. Any tango benefits (imagined or real) are secondary.

I don't disagree (well, I do somewhat ;)) that time spent exercising would be better spent dancing/practicing tango, if the goal is solely to be a better tango dancer.

Steve Pastor

12-17-2010, 11:04 AM

Earlier in the thread the Tango life style was discussed. I recently came across a 1939 Western Swing tune that used son clave (as confirmed by TangoTime) and was looking at the history of that rhythm, and rumba, and came across this.

“I was born in the neighborhood called Simpson. You had rumba for lunch and rumba for dinner . . . so, you had to learn rumba . . . Young and old, with great respect, and consideration. It was a whole way of life. [In other words, we’re born with the rumba] and we will die with the rumba”—Chachá Vega.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumba#cite_note-13)

opendoor

12-17-2010, 12:02 PM

..and rumba, and came across this.

“I was born in the neighborhood called Simpson. You had rumba for lunch and rumba for dinner . . . so, you had to learn rumba . . . Young and old, with great respect, and consideration. It was a whole way of life. [In other words, we’re born with the rumba] and we will die with the rumba”—Chachá Vega[14]

Hi Steve, please note, that Rumba in this respect in not Rumba. The cited Rumba (cubana) is a creol way of life, kind of a religion, rhythm and rites merge. What everyone calls (international) Rumba is a slow Son cubano in reality.

In tango-words: the role of rumba in Cuba would resemble the role of Candombe in Argentina.

Steve Pastor

12-17-2010, 12:16 PM

I know next to nothing about latin music, which is why I consulted TT!
If I remember right, though, there were actual candombe societies of people of African descent who made their music and dance together, as well as social bonding and "self help" (my words, not that of any source).
Here in the US, we still have neighborhoods, clubs, and churches that are based on ethnic origin, although as the generations go by, those associations weaken.
You would have to be very much into tango (Ha! as a Way of Life) to have an equivalent Tango experience. But, I guess that is the point of the people who talk and write about it.

opendoor

12-17-2010, 01:11 PM

think so, too ;)

Ray Sison

12-18-2010, 12:53 PM

think so, too ;)

Meine Meinung auch...

opendoor

12-18-2010, 01:14 PM

"We'll always have Paris..."

.. but "then we take Berlin" :cheers:

Ray Sison

12-18-2010, 01:36 PM

.. but "then we take Berlin" :cheers:

Ha ha! :cheers:

tangotime

12-19-2010, 10:37 AM

Hi Steve, please note, that Rumba in this respect in not Rumba. The cited Rumba (cubana) is a creol way of life, kind of a religion, rhythm and rites merge. What everyone calls (international) Rumba is a slow Son cubano in reality.

Actually, "Rumba" is a catch-all term that encompasses all of the indigenous dances and rhythms that are born out of the " Son " rhythm ( Like, Guaguanco, Guaracha, Guajira etc. which all are both styles of dance and rhythms)..

The Rumba which is danced "solo" is the indigenous style where the " call and response " theory emanates from.. All other forms are hybrids of Guaracha and Danzon .

Son dates back as far as one can tell ,to the early 1600s, introduced into Cuba by Teodra Gines .

The actual Clave instrument, is used in many other ethnic rhythms,as in " swing" and even in Maori culture, among others .

Ray Sison

12-19-2010, 01:24 PM

Actually, "Rumba" is a catch-all term that encompasses all of the indigenous dances and rhythms that are born out of the " Son " rhythm ( Like, Guaguanco, Guaracha, Guajira etc. which all are both styles of dance and rhythms)..

The Rumba which is danced "solo" is the indigenous style where the " call and response " theory emanates from.. All other forms are hybrids of Guaracha and Danzon .

Son dates back as far as one can tell ,to the early 1600s, introduced into Cuba by Teodra Gines .

The actual Clave instrument, is used in many other ethnic rhythms,as in " swing" and even in Maori culture, among others .

That's great dance history. Thank you so very, very much...

plugger

12-21-2010, 01:41 AM

I've been paying more attention to how "into the floor" is used in class. (My teacher had told me I was dancing "on top of the floor" when I was definitely not on the balls of my feet, and my knees were flexed. What was wrong?)
It has since come to mind that I was keeping much of my weight on my supporting foot while bringing the other foot forward. Then as my body passed over that foot I'd transfer weight to it. In a way, I was falling smoothly forward instead of taking well defined separate steps with a collect between them. The whole foot came down flat but it was placed softly and the teacher said she could hardly feel the step.
Later, when I remembered to put the heel down first, roll forward to the ball and push off to the next step, the feeling was very different, much more assertive and grounded. Both steps were "into the floor" but they felt different to me and to her as well.
I don't know if this has any bearing, but when I dance with a woman my height or taller I feel much more grounded than with a short woman. With a tall partner, I can easily step in a heel-roll-push fashion. With someone shorter I often feel barely connected (the contact point, my belly, is more round than my chest), and I feel a need to flex the knees and get down closer to the lady's level.
This becomes uncomfortable, so I tend to go back on the other kind of walk, letting momentum take me forward as if I were strolling down the sidewalk instead of making each step deliberate.
On the question of whether a dancer in apilado would fall if the partner pulled away, I'll say yes, probably, if this happened unexpectedly while they were moving. The follower gives a little bit of resistance as they walk, so that if he stops she will maintain her connection and not let her momentum separate them.
As to whether this would happen if they were dancing in place, I don't know. I've been taught that each partner should be able to stand without the other, but this is tango and -- blessedly -- there are a lot of ways to do it.

JohnEm

12-21-2010, 06:20 AM

I've been paying more attention to how "into the floor" is used in class. (My teacher had told me I was dancing "on top of the floor" when I was definitely not on the balls of my feet, and my knees were flexed. What was wrong?)
"On top of the floor" sounds like a dancer's description and not very helpful.

Like many tango descriptions, all of this "into the floor" is a description from observation,
not necessarily what is actually felt. Apilado suffers the same, resulting in the exaggerated
perception and image from show dancers.

Such descriptions come from choreographers, chattering teachers
(and presumably from some of us on this medium who only have words)
when the argentinians had no need for that sort of communication.
They felt it, they coached one another by doing not talking.

However so far I've neither found nor heard a better description of the walk
when in the embrace than on Tango and Chaos. I have to guess that Rick McGarrey
learned much of this walk from Ricardo Vidort and there were probably
few better sources at the time.

Even Ricardo Vidort could talk misleadingly, as he seemed to say
"always lead with the toe". In fact I think he was actually emphasising
not leading with the heel as watching video of him confirms usually
a whole footed floor landing on "compas".

Many teachers bring other dance influences to tango and think they are better.
Some definitely don't like the walking down into and solidly contacting the floor
but if you commit forward in the embrace, it undoubtedly is form following function.

I was no different when I first saw that sort of tango but changing that perception
was worthwhile. So it's a dance, but for men it's flat-footed.

It has since come to mind that I was keeping much of my weight on my supporting foot while bringing the other foot forward. Then as my body passed over that foot I'd transfer weight to it. In a way, I was falling smoothly forward instead of taking well defined separate steps with a collect between them. The whole foot came down flat but it was placed softly and the teacher said she could hardly feel the step.
This description is difficult to understand so hopefully you know what you mean!

The falling smoothly forward is ok so it seems that it's the following foot
(your own feet) causing the problem - maybe.

Later, when I remembered to put the heel down first, roll forward to the ball and push off to the next step, the feeling was very different, much more assertive and grounded. Both steps were "into the floor" but they felt different to me and to her as well.
Using the heel in a forward leaning forward walk results in double bump
and inevitably it's the heel strike that will be on the beat. If you are able
to roll onto the ball of the foot then probably you still are not committing
forward and into the floor.

I don't know if this has any bearing, but when I dance with a woman my height or taller I feel much more grounded than with a short woman. With a tall partner, I can easily step in a heel-roll-push fashion. With someone shorter I often feel barely connected (the contact point, my belly, is more round than my chest), and I feel a need to flex the knees and get down closer to the lady's level.
This becomes uncomfortable, so I tend to go back on the other kind of walk, letting momentum take me forward as if I were strolling down the sidewalk instead of making each step deliberate.
All of us in tango have an ideal height range of partner.
But even with a shorter partner you should never compromise
your posture.

On the question of whether a dancer in apilado would fall if the partner pulled away, I'll say yes, probably, if this happened unexpectedly while they were moving. The follower gives a little bit of resistance as they walk, so that if he stops she will maintain her connection and not let her momentum separate them.
As to whether this would happen if they were dancing in place, I don't know. I've been taught that each partner should be able to stand without the other, but this is tango and -- blessedly -- there are a lot of ways to do it.
Yes the extent of lean changes according to what is being danced.
There are many different ideas of the dynamics of the lean and the forces involved.
Not enough followers provide that resistance in the walk, but it is quite a skill.
Given that very few teachers concentrate on connection, it isn't surprising.