V Embrace thoughts

[Dave Bailey]

So I've been thinking about writing something on the V embrace, and I wondered what people thought of it? I'm looking for advantages / disadvantages, and the implications of the V embrace on dance style, compared to (say) the parallel close embrace.

Any thoughts / preferences / tips?

[Peaches]

Just that, like everything else in AT, there aren't so much wholly different embraces so much as sliding scale in terms of arrangments. I don't ever think of it as a separate style, I don't think it has disadvantages/advantages compared with anything else, and I don't see any particular implications from it.

If anything, the only real "tip" I would say is to think of it less as a separate style, and just approach it like any other minor tweak to the embrace that you make from one partner to another. As in, don't make mountains out of mole hills. Take a bit of time to get used to the slightly different feel of it, and then realize that it.isn't.that.different. It'll be more comfortable with some leaders than with others, but that is nothing new regarding the embrace. Shrug...it's just another point along the continuum of ways of embracing a partner.

[opendoor]

unsorted random thoughts:

introduction on styles and tango history,
avoiding lean, dancing on axis, adjusting the pelvis,
head position (right temple at left temple),
walking difficulties vs. turning advantages,
volcadas on the leader´s deltoid muscle (ouch!),
adjusting of the follower´s left arm (slippery slope),

Addition: when I only used to dance apilado I put my perfume above the sternum. Now I put it under my left ear.

[Dave Bailey]

Just that, like everything else in AT, there aren't so much wholly different embraces so much as sliding scale in terms of arrangments. I don't ever think of it as a separate style, I don't think it has disadvantages/advantages compared with anything else, and I don't see any particular implications from it.
Well, my initial thoughts about these are that there clearly are differences in style between a couple dancing V and a couple dancing in parallel. Some movements are easier, some are harder.

For example:
- It's not so easy to do a lot of walking in V embrace
- Moves like volcadas, anti-clockwise giros, and crosses all make much more sense in V

This, to me, implies that people dancing in "V" are more likely to do the movements which are more natural in "V", and less likely to do the movements which are harder (e.g. clockwise giros). So there would seem to be a natural incentive to dance in a certain style with a certain embrace (I know, that's a statement of the bleedin' obvious!)

And yes, I would 100% agree that too much "classification" makes things too artificial. And of course it's a spectrum, not a binary / tertiary system.

But there's a real difference I've found between dancing with women who prefer V and women who don't. And, since I started to modify my own style with "V" dancers, I've found that dancing with them is far more fun.

So I think it's reasonable to say that dancing in a V does have certain characteristics which are different from (say) a parallel embrace.

[opendoor]

Renoire on V-embrace
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1346/962067066_d347c36fcb.jpg

[Peaches]

Well, my initial thoughts about these are that there clearly are differences in style between a couple dancing V and a couple dancing in parallel. Some movements are easier, some are harder.

For example:
- It's not so easy to do a lot of walking in V embrace
- Moves like volcadas, anti-clockwise giros, and crosses all make much more sense in V

This, to me, implies that people dancing in "V" are more likely to do the movements which are more natural in "V", and less likely to do the movements which are harder (e.g. clockwise giros). So there would seem to be a natural incentive to dance in a certain style with a certain embrace (I know, that's a statement of the bleedin' obvious!)

And yes, I would 100% agree that too much "classification" makes things too artificial. And of course it's a spectrum, not a binary / tertiary system.

But there's a real difference I've found between dancing with women who prefer V and women who don't. And, since I started to modify my own style with "V" dancers, I've found that dancing with them is far more fun.

So I think it's reasonable to say that dancing in a V does have certain characteristics which are different from (say) a parallel embrace.I will allow that possibly you find these things to be true, as a leader. Being that I only follow, I only speak of things from a follower's perspective. And, from that follower's perspective, what you suggest (bolded) has not been my experience at all. Whatsoever. Walking is neither harder nor easier, and I don't find any difference in volcadas or giros in either direction or crosses (?!?!). Sorry.

[dchester]

I will allow that possibly you find these things to be true, as a leader. Being that I only follow, I only speak of things from a follower's perspective. And, from that follower's perspective, what you suggest (bolded) has not been my experience at all. Whatsoever. Walking is neither harder nor easier, and I don't find any difference in volcadas or giros in either direction or crosses (?!?!). Sorry.
Actually, it's not my experience either. The giros (in either direction) if anything, seem to be little easier from the V.

[Dave Bailey]

Actually, it's not my experience either. The giros (in either direction) if anything, seem to be little easier from the V.
Well yes, that's what I said...

If you are slightly offset, if your upper body is twisted slightly, it's definitely easier to lead a cross, compared to being full-on in parallel. If you don't believe me, try it in both.

I'm slightly surprised that you guys don't think that the style of embrace and the style of dancing are related... :confused:

[dchester]

Well yes, that's what I said...

If you are slightly offset, if your upper body is twisted slightly, it's definitely easier to lead a cross, compared to being full-on in parallel. If you don't believe me, try it in both.

I'm slightly surprised that you guys don't think that the style of embrace and the style of dancing are related... :confused:
Sorry, I thought you said that clockwise giros were harder in the V. Pretty much any figures seem easier. Walking doesn't seem any harder in the V, but it's less enjoyable.

[AndaBien]

...If you are slightly offset, if your upper body is twisted slightly, it's definitely easier to lead a cross, compared to being full-on in parallel. If you don't believe me, try it in both...

I think the mechanics for leading the crusada are different, but not more difficult.

...I'm slightly surprised that you guys don't think that the style of embrace and the style of dancing are related...

I do think they're related. For me, apilado enables a much deeper, more intimate and expressive connection, while it makes lots of footwork more difficult, if not impossible. V, OTOH, allows for more footwork, but lacks in the depth of feeling that can be transmitted.

[JohnEm]

But there's a real difference I've found between dancing with women who prefer V and women who don't. And, since I started to modify my own style with "V" dancers, I've found that dancing with them is far more fun.

So I think it's reasonable to say that dancing in a V does have certain characteristics which are different from (say) a parallel embrace.
Haven't you answered your own question?!


If you are slightly offset, if your upper body is twisted slightly, it's definitely easier to lead a cross, compared to being full-on in parallel. If you don't believe me, try it in both.
Many who dance in the Vee will interpret walking outside as the lead into
a cross and the more exaggerated the Vee, the more the lady will feel the
intention/inclination to cross in order to arrive at a more comfortable, less
twisted position. Watch the Mundial videos to see how little outside walking
is done and how more often it results in a three steps walk into the cross.


I'm slightly surprised that you guys don't think that the style of embrace and the style of dancing are related... :confused:

For me they are and clearly your own experience tells you that too:
surely that's what matters most?

[LadyLeader]

One surprise with canyengue was the feeling of freedom when the abrazo was open about 120 degrees; my right cheek towards her left.

It was like standing on a hill facing the scenery and let the wind meet my face! Imprivisation came easily, it was more fun and playfully shared dance experience.

To dance strictly parallell is a more close situation to me.

[opendoor]

Actually, it's not my experience..

I know, but I thought DB meant the didactical perspective onto his students.

[Dave Bailey]

OK, I have now written up my thoughts (http://www.learningtango.com/Improvers/V-embrace.html)in (hopefully) a bit more of a coherent manner.

Feel free to have a look and let me know what you think.

[newbie]

So I've been thinking about writing something on the V embrace, and I wondered what people thought of it? I'm looking for advantages / disadvantages, and the implications of the V embrace on dance style, compared to (say) the parallel close embrace.

Any thoughts / preferences / tips?

What I heard Gustavo explaining (in a beginner class)
-) There is the full open embrace, lot of freedom, problem is, lack of intimacy.
-) There is the closed embrace, lot of intimacy, problem is, lack of freedom.
-) And there is the V embrace, freedom, intimacy, problem is, not facing eachother, one of the partners has to walk somehow sideways, like an egyptian.
-) So there is no perfect embrace, but all in all, the V-embrace is the most convenient one.

[Dave Bailey]

What I heard Gustavo explaining (in a beginner class)
-) There is the full open embrace, lot of freedom, problem is, lack of intimacy.
-) There is the closed embrace, lot of intimacy, problem is, lack of freedom.
-) And there is the V embrace, freedom, intimacy, problem is, not facing eachother, one of the partners has to walk somehow sideways, like an egyptian.

I think that's more or less consistent with what I'm thinking, although I'm not sure I'd agree with:
but all in all, the V-embrace is the most convenient one.
I think that depends on your definition of "convenient" really.

I certainly wouldn't say one is better than the other; and fundamentally they're all simply examples of points on a spectrum. Even in full parallel close embrace there's a tiny bit of offset and V-ish-ness, after all.

(Although I did attempt a "hug dance" as an experiment last week, both arms around the partner symmetrically.)

[opendoor]

-) There is the full open embrace..
-) There is the closed embrace...
-) And there is the V embrace...
-) So there is no perfect embrace....

I find it interesting, that he hasn´t got the category deep embrace? (Abrazo profundo)

[AndaBien]

...So there is no perfect embrace, but all in all, the V-embrace is the most convenient one.

In my mind, apilado is the perfect embrace, and convenience doesn't count for anything.

[JohnEm]

OK, I have now written up my thoughts (http://www.learningtango.com/Improvers/V-embrace.html)in (hopefully) a bit more of a coherent manner.

Feel free to have a look and let me know what you think.

It's your blog and your right to write what you like.
But I don't like the thinking behind it. You seem to have
ended up justifying the commercially promoted, populist
and visual "tango for export" trend that I find regrettable.

And in my experience a Vee embrace is not an embrace at all
but a hold of multiple points of connection and stressed arms.

[JohnEm]

(Although I did attempt a "hug dance" as an experiment last week, both arms around the partner symmetrically.)

In my view, it be great if beginners were started with "hug dancing".
Such a good way for both partners to learn how moving together
to the music feels and work out together what works.

[JohnEm]

What I heard Gustavo explaining (in a beginner class)
-) There is the full open embrace, lot of freedom, problem is, lack of intimacy.
-) There is the closed embrace, lot of intimacy, problem is, lack of freedom.
-) And there is the V embrace, freedom, intimacy, problem is, not facing eachother, one of the partners has to walk somehow sideways, like an egyptian.
-) So there is no perfect embrace, but all in all, the V-embrace is the most convenient one.

Gustavo? Gustavo who?

There is no perfect embrace it's true - but the in line (close) embrace for me
is undoubtedly best. Too few people outside Buenos Aires seem to dance
that way unfortunately. The Vee hold is easier to teach and easier for
learners, both men and women, to cope with in moving on classes.

The social and physical demands of the in line embrace regrettably makes it
a minority option in the teacher tango world.

[opendoor]

Gustavo who?

:bkick:

[Dave Bailey]

It's your blog and your right to write what you like.
Slight point of order m'lud, It's not a blog, it's a website; there are several contributors.

But I don't like the thinking behind it. You seem to have ended up justifying the commercially promoted, populist and visual "tango for export" trend that I find regrettable.
That's not my intention. I simply found that V embrace dancing did have a rational basis. Under some circumstances, it works quite well - for example, if you have a tall guy dancing with a short girl, it's often better to dance in a V than otherwise.

In other words, I'm developing an open mind on the area.

And in my experience a Vee embrace is not an embrace at all but a hold of multiple points of connection and stressed arms.
I worked on this tonight at a practica, and it turns out that you don't need to stress the arms at all, you just need to apply a (initially strange-feeling) level of offset with your partner.

In fact, frankly, once I'd got the hang of it, I quite enjoyed it after a while. I don't think that makes me an evil populist.

[JohnEm]

Slight point of order m'lud, It's not a blog, it's a website; there are several contributors.
Point of Order taken!


That's not my intention. I simply found that V embrace dancing did have a rational basis. Under some circumstances, it works quite well - for example, if you have a tall guy dancing with a short girl, it's often better to dance in a V than otherwise.
It's certainly true that there is often a practical limit to the height disparity
of partners dancing in line though there are argentines who seem to
effectively disprove that.

But Tango isn't necessarily rational, it's a dance of feeling and of connection.
In my experience people who learn to dance in the Vee rarely progress
to the in line embrace.


In other words, I'm developing an open mind on the area.
OK, but maybe your article doesn't read quite like that.


I worked on this tonight at a practica, and it turns out that you don't need to stress the arms at all, you just need to apply a (initially strange-feeling) level of offset with your partner.
That does depend on your partner as well but from my dancing experience
there may be teachers in the London area teaching toned right (ladies)
and left (men) arms. Certainly the Vee-style allows it and you can see
a range of performers using that and/or paddling arm leads.


In fact, frankly, once I'd got the hang of it, I quite enjoyed it after a while. I don't think that makes me an evil populist.
Hmm, not sure I was making you out to be an evil anything!

I don't happen to think it's remotely as good as in line but I'll accept that
it can be easier and less demanding physically but the partner connection
is different and less rewarding because the partners are more . . . remote.
For me . . . it's Tango Lite.

[UKDancer]

... In my experience people who learn to dance in the Vee rarely progress to the in line embrace.

Does anyone learn to dance in V-embrace; and is it 'progress' to move on to being in line? Do you really mean in line, anyway, or do you mean close or apilado? An in line embrace can still be wide open: the lack of an offset to the right is its only defining characteristic, surely? In a V-embrace, we usually have a marked offset + non parallel bodies, and some degree of V shape (not necessarily to a marked degree) seems to be the most commonly adopted embrace in social dancing around me. The people dancing in that style don't look frustrated that their ability has not yet enabled them to dance opposite each other.

[JohnEm]

Does anyone learn to dance in V-embrace; and is it 'progress' to move on to being in line? Do you really mean in line, anyway, or do you mean close or apilado?

An embrace is close - it's a hug and you cannot hug at a distance.
See the dictionary definition - an open embrace is an oxymoron.

And yes I do see it as progress, a progress that rarely seems to happen.
I started tango in a Vee and found it unsatisfactory, only by chance did
I discover the alternative. It took a lot of perseverance and practice, even
to the extent of completely rejecting dancing in a Vee.

I also see it as progress because in my experience almost anyone who can
dance inline can also dance in a Vee should the situation require but not
the other way round. I just choose not to dance in a Vee as it's tango lite.


An in line embrace can still be wide open: the lack of an offset to the right is its only defining characteristic, surely? In a V-embrace, we usually have a marked offset + non parallel bodies, and some degree of V shape (not necessarily to a marked degree) seems to be the most commonly adopted embrace in social dancing around me. The people dancing in that style don't look frustrated that their ability has not yet enabled them to dance opposite each other.
Why would they look frustrated? There is too much made of tango faces already.
Nor is it necessarily a matter of ability as unfortunately the dance of Buenos Aires
(apilado in line embrace) is rarely taught here. If not show school style tango,
the nearest social style we mostly get is the current tango for export
academic Salon style of the Mundial, sometimes for marketing called Villa Urquiza.
I could say that is tango for classes and competition whereas apilado
in line is tango for two in that it needs to learned by individual tuition
and/or practice by two. It isn't for watching, it's for dancing.

[Dave Bailey]

It's certainly true that there is often a practical limit to the height disparity of partners dancing in line though there are argentines who seem to effectively disprove that.
Yep, and I've updated my article to mention that.

In my experience people who learn to dance in the Vee rarely progress to the in line embrace.
I get what you mean - if you start out with the flashy stuff you're less likely to want to do the hard-but-essential stuff.

OK, but maybe your article doesn't read quite like that.
I've updated the article - have another look, especially at the conclusion, where I've put more caveats in.

I don't happen to think it's remotely as good as in line but I'll accept that it can be easier and less demanding physically but the partner connection is different and less rewarding because the partners are more . . . remote.
For me . . . it's Tango Lite.
Well, I think that's a little harsh, but I agree that it lacks some aspects which a lot of people insist are core to tango (connection, intimacy and the walk) compared to in-line.

[opendoor]

..I don't happen to think it's remotely as good as in line but I'll accept that it can be easier and less demanding physically but the partner connection is different and less rewarding because the partners are more . . . remote.
For me . . . it's Tango Lite.

Hi John, I can accept it, but for me not only dancing apilado is real tango. For me hearing the music is an as joiful thing. And, the longer I dance tango I am less often at milongas. Very often I simply dance alone at home, and I feel that can be pure tango, too.

Once I changed from apilado to V-hold. My spine discs forced me to. It was difficult to find good apilado dancing DPs, so often they use to hang on me like heavy sacks (especially dancers from BsAs). Totally different is the situation in Salón-V. All advanced dancers around here dance in V-hold, so you´ve got a great choice. Only Tamara still sticks to apilado in Hamburg. But browsing one of her vids I find that she´s dancing in a slight V with the VU-man Ramiro, too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzPiXTpHc-Y

[Dave Bailey]

Does anyone learn to dance in V-embrace;
Yes - although I suspect this kind of happens by default rather than explicitly. In other words, if you go to a class which largely teaches V-compatible movements (the cross, etc.), you tend to adopt a V embrace over time.

and is it 'progress' to move on to being in line?
Well... it's different (I'm trying to avoid value-based judgements here. Obviously :) )

Parallel / in-line dancing allows a lot more sensitivity and subtlety; it's much easier to develop sophisticated musicality in parallel, for example. So if that aspect of dancing is the most important to you, it's difficult to achieve in a V.

Do you really mean in line, anyway, or do you mean close or apilado?
What John refers to as "in-line" is (I presume!) simply close parallel embrace - it doesn't address the axis issue. That's a whole new area...

In a V-embrace, we usually have a marked offset + non parallel bodies, and some degree of V shape (not necessarily to a marked degree) seems to be the most commonly adopted embrace in social dancing around me. The people dancing in that style don't look frustrated that their ability has not yet enabled them to dance opposite each other.
Have they tried?

[Dave Bailey]

I started tango in a Vee and found it unsatisfactory, only by chance did I discover the alternative.
Ironically I started in parallel, tried V and thought it was stupid, and only now am I coming round to seeing it as a valid possibility. :D

I also see it as progress because in my experience almost anyone who can dance inline can also dance in a Vee should the situation require but not the other way round..
I think that's reasonable - once I twigged onto the basic concepts, it worked very well with my practice partner. So it's possible that a V embrace is straightforward, once you've mastered a parallel embrace.

[JohnEm]

Hi John, I can accept it, but for me not only dancing apilado is real tango. For me hearing the music is an as joiful thing. And, the longer I dance tango I am less often at milongas. Very often I simply dance alone at home, and I feel that can be pure tango, too.
Not sure I would call that pure tango, perhaps solo tango if that isn't yet
another oxymoron.


Once I changed from apilado to V-hold. My spine discs forced me to. It was difficult to find good apilado dancing DPs, so often they use to hang on me like heavy sacks (especially dancers from BsAs).
I have little doubt that dancing in a Vee makes tango easily accessible
to more people. It's also more visually appealing to onlookers and less
introverted. No wonder it's the dance of competition and teaching.

Odd isn't it that apilado now seems regarded as a dance by the older people
in Buenos Aires and yet its physical demands are those that are more appropriate
for starting when young. I have seen people unprepared for its requirements
in agony and I had to find strengthening exercises for my back and core muscles
to eliminate the aches and pains.

I don't like dancing with partners who dance like heavy sacks either.

[JohnEm]

I've updated the article - have another look, especially at the conclusion, where I've put more caveats in.
Yes, the balance is indeed better.

One little picky point to add.
The ocho cortado doesn't seem to be an action of salon dancers in the Vee,
it's signature movement of tango del centro apilado milongueros which ends
in a quarter turn rotation into the cross which is a natural result from the
parallel close embrace.

Do that with a Vee hold dancer and she will step forward across you expecting
forward ochos or an anticlockwise giro. Do the ocho cortado with a dancer
in apilado who is more used to Salon Vee and she will break the parallel
embrace and again step into the beginning of an ocho.

That's my experience of course, yours might be different.

[bastet]

Yes, the balance is indeed better.

One little picky point to add.
The ocho cortado doesn't seem to be an action of salon dancers in the Vee,
it's signature movement of tango del centro apilado milongueros which ends
in a quarter turn rotation into the cross which is a natural result from the
parallel close embrace.

Do that with a Vee hold dancer and she will step forward across you expecting
forward ochos or an anticlockwise giro. Do the ocho cortado with a dancer
in apilado who is more used to Salon Vee and she will break the parallel
embrace and again step into the beginning of an ocho.

That's my experience of course, yours might be different.

I'd have to agree with this. When I have had lessons with some very traditional, old school "Salon" dancers, ocho cortado as frowned on, but of course, I use it all the time.

As for the ladies who can't follow a square/flat cross (or whatever you want to call it) and who do the step through instead; if they were only taught one way, and don't have the experience of reading the difference between when the leader is asking for a square cross (cortado) or a step through, they will generally respond the first or only way they learned. Then again, some guys also don't understand the effect of their body position on whether the lead feels like a square cross or a step through (to someone experienced with both leads). So they may think they are leading a square one and still actually be leading the other (no matter how much you try to explain to them what they need to do to get the one they actually think they led...)

[UKDancer]

An embrace is close - it's a hug and you cannot hug at a distance.
See the dictionary definition - an open embrace is an oxymoron.

Hmm. My dictionary doesn't contemplate the usage of the word in tango, and while an open embrace might very well be an oxymoron by your usage, it has a perfectly well-established meaning (and general acceptance) in tango. Having said that, my dictionary gives 'Hold closely in one's arms, especially as a sign of affection', but makes no link with 'Hug' (which it separately defines to 'embrace someone tightly'. So to my pedantic way of thinking, an embrace needn't be a hug - unless I embrace them tightly.

But I remain doubtful that anyone learns to dance tango in a V-embrace, although they may adopt one later on. Nearly every beginner class or workshop I have observed (and there have been plenty of those) have the dancers directly opposite each other in a simple and open practise hold, and they frequently stay there for weeks. The tendency to move to an offset position (like BR tango) puzzles me, rather, because it introduces an assymetry in the embrace that makes certain movements more difficult than they would otherwise have been, and the tendency to move to a V shape moves still further away from the starting position.

If, instead, they had just come together, they would probably have found a better connection, and a better dance (I'm with you on that one), but I can't go for the idea that a V-embrace is a stepping stone to a higher plane of dancing - it's just a preference. Lots of tango is danced in a big open embrace, with or without offset or V, and anyone's tango is their own, and neither superior or inferior to anyone else's (in terms of a style preference, rather than skill or technique).

[UKDancer]

Parallel / in-line dancing allows a lot more sensitivity and subtlety; it's much easier to develop sophisticated musicality in parallel, for example. So if that aspect of dancing is the most important to you, it's difficult to achieve in a V.

I agree, but wonder why they didn't persevere with developing their first practise embrace 'properly', in the first place. I blame the teachers - that usually works. ;)

[Dave Bailey]

Yes, the balance is indeed better.
For comparison purposes, here's the far more anti-V article (http://www.learningtango.com/TangoOfZero/V-resistance.html) I wrote about a year ago...

One little picky point to add.
The ocho cortado doesn't seem to be an action of salon dancers in the Vee,
it's signature movement of tango del centro apilado milongueros which ends
in a quarter turn rotation into the cross which is a natural result from the
parallel close embrace.

Do that with a Vee hold dancer and she will step forward across you expecting
forward ochos or an anticlockwise giro. Do the ocho cortado with a dancer
in apilado who is more used to Salon Vee and she will break the parallel
embrace and again step into the beginning of an ocho.

That's my experience of course, yours might be different.
Mmmm... I think my experience is slightly different. My gut feeling is that the OC is easier in offset than in close, but I could be wrong.

[JohnEm]

As for the ladies who can't follow a square/flat cross (or whatever you want to call it) and who do the step through instead; if they were only taught one way, and don't have the experience of reading the difference between when the leader is asking for a square cross (cortado) or a step through, they will generally respond the first or only way they learned. Then again, some guys also don't understand the effect of their body position on whether the lead feels like a square cross or a step through (to someone experienced with both leads). So they may think they are leading a square one and still actually be leading the other (no matter how much you try to explain to them what they need to do to get the one they actually think they led...)

Which has prompted me into writing what I think is the most fundamental
difference between the apilado embrace and the Vee hold. Successful
apilado requires the lady to willingly commit to the embrace, the man
to lead from the chest, the woman to never break the connection herself
and allow her leg to follow her body to wherever her senses tell her.

The Vee hold is much more forgiving and probably more accommodating
of a wider range of abilities. Most dancers here are taught moves or at least
predictable movement. Apilado requires a different approach to allow more
improvisation to the music in the moment - all of which is rarely taught
though it can be learned.

Vee hold dancers seem to expect what they already know even if they are
in the embrace and for me it results in an unsatisfactory dance dilemma.
It was quite a while though before I worked out the problem and what,
if anything, I could do about it. My solution was to try and understand the
limitations and dance accordingly. But it results in a less rewarding dance
and effectively less tango connection. In other words, Tango Lite.

[Dave Bailey]

Nearly every beginner class or workshop I have observed (and there have been plenty of those) have the dancers directly opposite each other in a simple and open practise hold, and they frequently stay there for weeks.
Well that's a bit bleein' silly. It's easier to dance in close, once you get the posture right. Walking in open is hard work; you need better posture, it takes more energy, and the connection is more distant.

My view is that you need to get beginners hugging, as quickly as possible. Sure, you can have a few minutes of just walking in practice at the start, I do that, but a whole class? The only justification for that is if you're specfically teaching open-embrace dancing, or you're doing a movement which is easier to learn in practice hold.

The tendency to move to an offset position (like BR tango) puzzles me, rather, because it introduces an assymetry in the embrace that makes certain movements more difficult than they would otherwise have been, and the tendency to move to a V shape moves still further away from the starting position.
I think "V" and "offset" are pretty much the same thing. Or, more appropriately, they're roughly the same area on the "embrace spectrum".

If, instead, they had just come together, they would probably have found a better connection, and a better dance (I'm with you on that one), but I can't go for the idea that a V-embrace is a stepping stone to a higher plane of dancing - it's just a preference. Lots of tango is danced in a big open embrace, with or without offset or V, and anyone's tango is their own, and neither superior or inferior to anyone else's (in terms of a style preference, rather than skill or technique).
That sounds reasonable. And we can get far too carried away on definitions - the road to classification is paved with good intentions. :)

[Peaches]

But I remain doubtful that anyone learns to dance tango in a V-embrace, although they may adopt one later on. Er...I did.

[bordertangoman]

Well that's a bit bleein' silly. It's easier to dance in close, once you get the posture right. Walking in open is hard work; you need better posture, it takes more energy, and the connection is more distant.

My view is that you need to get beginners hugging, as quickly as possible. Sure, you can have a few minutes of just walking in practice at the start, I do that, but a whole class? The only justification for that is if you're specfically teaching open-embrace dancing, or you're doing a movement which is easier to learn in practice hold.




your view is why I'm a better teacher ;)

"You need better posture" absoltuley, otherwise you can become a good leader or follower who is constantly compensating for the lack of skill in the other person.

Some people needs lots of technique and posture reinforcement...some will never get it, sadly, and others have it naturally, some will get it for the duration of the class and will have forgotten by the next class.. I dont think a close-embrace early on is a bad thing, but it will mean a lot of ladies gettting their toes squashed ( sometimes their fault sometimes the leaders,)

"once you get the posture right" that's going to take some people several reincarnations..although I suspect they will come back as camels or fleas....

[JohnEm]

For comparison purposes, here's the far more anti-V article (http://www.learningtango.com/TangoOfZero/V-resistance.html) I wrote about a year ago...
I like this in your article:

Academically, I'm not a fan of the V. It feels like it restricts my freedom of
choice too much, and it feels artificial. I'm a social dancer, not a show dancer,
so I'm not really worried about how it looks to others.

But that's not my main problem. My main problem is that most of the followers
I dance with, who use this "V", push my left arm too hard. I think this is
because they're using my arm to create the dissociation, rather than
dissociating themselves using their own muscles.

But the problem is - this hurts. After several minutes of my arm being pushed back,
constantly, I can really feel an ache in my shoulder, and I have to go and stretch it.

And call me crazy, but I'd kind of not like to be hurt when I'm dancing tango.
So, ladies, if you're going to use the V embrace, please please please keep
the right arm pressure as low as possible. And if you can't power your own
dissociation, then don't use the V embrace, you're not ready for it.


I agree - it hurts.

[AndaBien]

I agree, but wonder why they didn't persevere with developing their first practise embrace 'properly', in the first place. I blame the teachers - that usually works. ;)

Students are often seduced by the cool steps. As many teachers are well aware, you can't teach something students don't want to learn. V-embrace allows cool steps.

I do consider it a mark of progress when a dancer gets tired of doing steps and realizes that there is something more available. I think it takes a more experienced and capable dancer to be able to give a good dance without using cool steps. In my experience, cool steps actually stand in the way of expressing nuance and feelings.

[LadyLeader]

I do consider it a mark of progress when a dancer gets tired of doing steps and realizes that there is something more available. I think it takes a more experienced and capable dancer to be able to give a good dance without using cool steps. In my experience, cool steps actually stand in the way of expressing nuance and feelings.

I agree!

For a while I have been wondering if there is a similar development path in tango steps as for the stages children have in their drawing skills?

What could the stages be then?

[Dave Bailey]

your view is why I'm a better teacher ;)

Pah, the ICT has a warrant out for your arrest, so I'm still ahead.

I dont think a close-embrace early on is a bad thing, but it will mean a lot of ladies gettting their toes squashed ( sometimes their fault sometimes the leaders,)
Cruel. To. Be. Kind. :D

[bordertangoman]

Pah, the ICT has a warrant out for your arrest, so I'm still ahead.


Lol :D

they seek him here
they seek him there..

that damned elusive BTM!!!

[Dave Bailey]

So, I did a bit more V embrace dancing at a practica today, and I've got some more thoughts...

Firstly, the name's probably wrong - the embrace I'm thinking of it more "offset" than "angled"; the woman basically fits tight under my armpit, but she doesn't really deliberately angle herself away on (her) right side. Any "opening" that happens, seems to happen naturally as a result of the armpit-snuggling exercise.

Secondly, the outer arm (leader's left, follower's right) seems to be naturalkly held further "out" than in close. Or, at least, it's not so natural to hold your elbows down. On a related note, the woman's arm is naturally further outstretched than the man's - because of the offset.

This second point is interesting because you need to use different muscles to hold your arm out, to the ones you use when simply resting your arms by your side with elbows down and the weight on the shoulders. So, it means that the outer arm seems to be, for want of a better word, "stiffer". Which may well explain why this caused me problems in a close parallel embrace - the follower is holding her outer arm tight by default, which causes pressure in parallel close embrace.

Thirdly, I noticed that it's just not easy to switch from one to the other - you can't just "shuffle around" elegantly, you need to break the embrace and then re-establish the new one. Which is similar to going from open to close embrace. (I also noticed that, yes, changes of weight and subtle musicality changes were definitely more difficult for V embrace than in close parallel)

In terms of movements, we worked on a nice little back-ocho-milonguero movement, and a few "pulse-forward" movements; one consequence of being offset is that there's more scope for larger foot movements forwards and back.

So, it's clearly a valid style, from what I've seen so far, and there's some nice movement possibilities in that embrace. For example, for the first time, I want to do crosses...

[opendoor]

...also noticed that, yes, changes of weight and subtle musicality changes were definitely more difficult for V embrace than in close parallel...

curious, ok, in apilado you´ve got the whole body front for connecting, but in V-hold you´ve got one body side and the leaders arm reaches a bit more far round the other side of the rip cache: so there actually cannot be less connection...??

[JohnEm]

So, I did a bit more V embrace dancing at a practica today, and I've got some more thoughts...

Firstly, the name's probably wrong - the embrace I'm thinking of it more "offset" than "angled"; the woman basically fits tight under my armpit, but she doesn't really deliberately angle herself away on (her) right side. Any "opening" that happens, seems to happen naturally as a result of the armpit-snuggling exercise.

Well many ladies do "snuggle" in there but I prefer those who don't.
Usually it is a result of her not keeping herself in front of you
so she ends up against the closed side of the embrace as she can go
no further round. I could go on more but I won't.


Secondly, the outer arm (leader's left, follower's right) seems to be naturalkly held further "out" than in close. Or, at least, it's not so natural to hold your elbows down. On a related note, the woman's arm is naturally further outstretched than the man's - because of the offset.

This second point is interesting because you need to use different muscles to hold your arm out, to the ones you use when simply resting your arms by your side with elbows down and the weight on the shoulders. So, it means that the outer arm seems to be, for want of a better word, "stiffer". Which may well explain why this caused me problems in a close parallel embrace - the follower is holding her outer arm tight by default, which causes pressure in parallel close embrace.
Another reason against it.

Thirdly, I noticed that it's just not easy to switch from one to the other - you can't just "shuffle around" elegantly, you need to break the embrace and then re-establish the new one. Which is similar to going from open to close embrace. (I also noticed that, yes, changes of weight and subtle musicality changes were definitely more difficult for V embrace than in close parallel)
Once you have a stiff armed partner you're stuck with stiff arms yourself.

In terms of movements, we worked on a nice little back-ocho-milonguero movement, and a few "pulse-forward" movements; one consequence of being offset is that there's more scope for larger foot movements forwards and back.
Yes some movements will seemingly work better with certain partners
because the two of you are "locked" together.

So, it's clearly a valid style, from what I've seen so far, and there's some nice movement possibilities in that embrace.
Lots of variations are "valid", even the VU Vee(!), as long as we are all
dancing the music in harmony and can happily coexist on the floor.

It certainly is a valid solution when the floor is too busy for the linear
walking style Vee (VU) but you have a partner who doesn't know how
or cannot dance in the apilado embrace.


For example, for the first time, I want to do crosses...
I must ask this time why you don't want to do crosses and are you talking
inline crosses only? Surely you walk outside when crosses are more natural
anyway? However it sounds to me as if you've never had a teacher or
learned and practised for yourself how to lead them easily.

Perhaps it's one of those things missing from tangoandchaos.

[JohnEm]

curious, ok, in apilado you´ve got the whole body front for connecting, but in V-hold you´ve got one body side and the leaders arm reaches a bit more far round the other side of the rip cache: so there actually cannot be less connection...??

It depends on your own interpretation of what is connection.
All partner dances depend on connection to one another and to the music.
But they vary depending on the style.

The connection in a Vee is a hold as you've described - she cannot but go
where her leader goes until and unless he releases to open out. In apilado
it should be a chest connection and a participation of the willing in that
the lady actively maintains that connection in order to sense and place her
body wherever it is being asked to go next. At its best it isn't forceful
but it is totally involving. It is undoubtedly a different sensory experience.

Words can be inadequate to explain something you need to experience.

[Dave Bailey]

curious, ok, in apilado you´ve got the whole body front for connecting, but in V-hold you´ve got one body side and the leaders arm reaches a bit more far round the other side of the rip cache: so there actually cannot be less connection...??
Much less area to communicate with.

The most obvious extreme example is a fingertip-only open embrace - try leading a change of weight like that. Hmmm, actually, that's quite a good exercise...

[Dave Bailey]

I must ask this time why you don't want to do crosses and are you talking inline crosses only? Surely you walk outside when crosses are more natural anyway?
The point is, crosses seem to be easier in offset. So an embrace which is offset by default will naturally lead to more crosses. That's how it seems to work for me, anyway.

However it sounds to me as if you've never had a teacher
Curses, found out :)

or learned and practised for yourself how to lead them easily.
I can lead a cross. I can explain how to lead a cross. I just didn't enjoy them. In V, I do - they seem to happen naturally.

[JohnEm]

I can lead a cross. I can explain how to lead a cross. I just didn't enjoy them. In V, I do - they seem to happen naturally.

You mean they happen automatically? I do hope not when in line as
you can get in the Vee as opposed to being outside a partner when some
followers feel a real inclination to cross - not for nothing is it steps 3 to 5
in the choreography of the 8CB.

However inevitably it is your partner who is angled to the direction
of travel so at the right time only the slightest deviation in direction by you
will result in a cross. Try walking backwards yourself mimicking the woman
and feel the trajectory of your legs. The Vee has all sorts of consequences,
many of them very misleading for genuine improvised social tango. It's
one reason why we have so little of that here.

[Dave Bailey]

You mean they happen automatically?
Nope, naturally - as in, it's natural to do that step. It is, of course, still led.

The Vee has all sorts of consequences,
many of them very misleading for genuine improvised social tango. It's
one reason why we have so little of that here.
I'm not suddenly going to turn into V-man. I just try to keep an open mind.

[quixotedlm]

[love this discussion. as an AT beginner, i can relate to some of these, and it's much fodder for thought and experimentation. thanks folks!]

[Subliminal]

I have actually been staying out of this one. :) I really don't have much experience with the V. The way I was taught was to slide or open the arms as needed for the movement, but to stay squared up when in close. I pass through the V, but I don't hang out there. I may try it out sometime with a practice partner and see how it works.

[sixela]

Parallel / in-line dancing allows a lot more sensitivity and subtlety; it's much easier to develop sophisticated musicality in parallel, for example. So if that aspect of dancing is the most important to you, it's difficult to achieve in a V.

Why does anyone insist that as a dancer you're forced to use the same embrace all of the time? I confess I'm using a slight "VU Vee" when it makes sense (but not always without apilado!) and I'm very much parallel at other times. At what point does the "V" become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds to some on this list (express the answer in radians, please)?

Depends on the orchestra and the partner, and it all even adjusts within one dance without me thinking too much of it. I tend to lead crosses by "V"-ing slightly (or not, depending on how I lead them, which depends on the energy and the playfulness of the music and what I'm walking like), and if I want to avoid the cross I will "un-V" slightly to avoid confusion if I start in "V". I consider it part of the lead, actually, and it will even adapt to how partners react, think some things are ambiguous or not, or have a natural inclination to go on autopilot (e.g. in cross autopilot).

What I do really dislike is the "V with hand pressure". If you can't dance it in a relaxed way, there's probably something wrong with the embrace, or at least there is to me. It isn't arm wrestling.

[Dave Bailey]

Why does anyone insist that as a dancer you're forced to use the same embrace all of the time?
I dunno. Who said that?

I confess I'm using a slight "VU Vee" when it makes sense (but not always without apilado!) and I'm very much parallel at other times. At what point does the "V" become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds to some on this list (express the answer in radians, please)?
If I had to guess, I'd say it's because whilst dancing deliberately in a V makes sense in context, teaching in a V, at least initially, is problematic and can instill bad habits - in the same way that teaching in only-open embrace can instill bad habits.

What I do really dislike is the "V with hand pressure". If you can't dance it in a relaxed way, there's probably something wrong with the embrace, or at least there is to me. It isn't arm wrestling.
Yep, I'd agree with that also.

[Dave Bailey]

One thing that occurs to me - if V / offset embrace implies a "rotational" style of dancing, does that imply that it may be more natural to use it in something like Vals?

Or, do the apparent greater problems with connection under a V make things like quick changes of weight more problematic, so making vals better in close parallel embrace?

[Zoopsia59]

teaching in a V, at least initially, is problematic and can instill bad habits - in the same way that teaching in only-open embrace can instill bad habits.

Every embrace has the opportunity for bad habits.. just different bad habits.

For instance, in an open hold, it's easier to develop a habit of looking down, but it's harder to depend on the leader for balance. In a milonguero hold, it's easier to become accustomed to relying on your partner for balance, but you can't see your feet, so you don't get in the habit of looking down.

There are pitfalls all over the place in tango.. What's important is for the teacher to know what they are, not that there are no pitfalls inherent in the style.

[Peaches]

One thing that occurs to me - if V / offset embrace implies a "rotational" style of dancing, does that imply that it may be more natural to use it in something like Vals?

Or, do the apparent greater problems with connection under a V make things like quick changes of weight more problematic, so making vals better in close parallel embrace?I would wager that the perceived problems with connection you are experiencing are due more to your inexperience and lack of familiarity with the embrace, than from anything that is inherent in the embrace itself. Your experiences in this regard are certainly not universal.

As regards the rotational thing...again, I have never found anything in the V/offset embrace that implies a more rotational style.

[Peaches]

If I had to guess, I'd say it's because whilst dancing deliberately in a V makes sense in context, teaching in a V, at least initially, is problematic and can instill bad habits - in the same way that teaching in only-open embrace can instill bad habits.Disagree. Bad habits can be had in any style, in any embrace, period.

[Dave Bailey]

Every embrace has the opportunity for bad habits.. just different bad habits.

For instance, in an open hold, it's easier to develop a habit of looking down, but it's harder to depend on the leader for balance. In a milonguero hold, it's easier to become accustomed to relying on your partner for balance, but you can't see your feet, so you don't get in the habit of looking down.

There are pitfalls all over the place in tango.. What's important is for the teacher to know what they are, not that there are no pitfalls inherent in the style.
Fair enough... let's rephrase that to say that I think the specific bad habits in a V embrace may affect floorcraft adversely compared to the specific bad habits in a close parallel embrace.

[JohnEm]

One thing that occurs to me - if V / offset embrace implies a "rotational" style of dancing, does that imply that it may be more natural to use it in something like Vals?
The V/offset in itself "implies" nothing!

As an asymmetric hold certain actions are made more difficult and it seems
to typically result in linear walking and rotations (mainly anti-clockwise?)
on the spot. Those people who freely rotate in both directions, such as
Jorge Dispari with La Turca and Javier with Geraldine, seem to use the Vee
embrace quite flexibly allowing considerable freedom of movement for the
lady in the clockwise turns. It's a way of overcoming the restrictions
of the Vee so it depends on what your view of Tango is.


Or, do the apparent greater problems with connection under a V make things like quick changes of weight more problematic, so making vals better in close parallel embrace?

Yes.


I think it should be remembered that close embrace milonguero (or
TangoVoice's preferred "Tango del Centro") was a result of the packed
floor conditions in central Buenos Aires with little room to move. It's ironic
that Vee is being considered here as a rotational style when the milongueros
evolved a relatively static (only very slow progression round the floor) but
turning style so they could still dance the music within their own space.

You need a much closer embrace for that and real mutual sensitivity
which has to be acquired through an appreciation of the principles
and then much practice.

The busier our own floors become the more important it may become
to acquire those skills already needed at certain events in London.

[Dave Bailey]

The V/offset in itself "implies" nothing!
Adopting a style of embrace does, I think, imply adopting a style of dancing - it doesn't force such a style, but it does push people, by and large, in that direction. Embrace and music are surely two of the key factors influencing dance style? Or am I missing something? :confused:


As an asymmetric hold certain actions are made more difficult and it seems to typically result in linear walking and rotations (mainly anti-clockwise?) on the spot. Those people who freely rotate in both directions, such as Jorge Dispari with La Turca and Javier with Geraldine, seem to use the Vee embrace quite flexibly allowing considerable freedom of movement for the lady in the clockwise turns. It's a way of overcoming the restrictions of the Vee so it depends on what your view of Tango is.
I suspect we're agreeing violently again - that's pretty much what I was saying, but in a different way. Embrace influences movement, and movement influences style.

Hmmm... I've got a practica tonight, I'll have a go at Vals in both embraces and see which feels better, the best way to test these theories out is to try them after all.

[sixela]

I dunno. Who said that?
The whole thread hangs on the very idea that there is 'an' embrace that people use, and seems to forget that embraces are not as rigid as the embrace between parts of a single rigid body.


If I had to guess, I'd say it's because whilst dancing deliberately in a V makes sense in context, teaching in a V, at least initially, is problematic and can instill bad habits - in the same way that teaching in only-open embrace can instill bad habits.

Every embrace has its possible perverse effects. Yes, they are different for each embrace. I would personally tend to think of the "best" embrace as 'as parallel as possible', but for some steps exactly parallel isn't possible.

So I wouldn't "teach" a "V embrace" in the sense that I'd say "you must dance in V" (even though I've had BsAs teachers who insisted on it) but I'd tell people to dance what was comfortable for them in a given context and tell them what the "V" allows (and that includes a means of actually leading the cross quite naturally).

If you're teaching dissociated ochos, just to give one example, it's hard to enforce the embrace as completely parallel - that's why ochos milongueros developed, and you'll see that even dancers who use that embrace and those ochos still have a microscopic 'V' at times.

And a 'small V' is actually a lot less detrimental to the embrace than what I sometimes see: couples who obsessively avoid any 'V' at all and end up parallel but offset much too much after they did something impossible for the embrace they were having.

[Dave Bailey]

The whole thread hangs on the very idea that there is 'an' embrace that people use
The thread assumes that there is something which can be defined as a "V" embrace. Nowhere in the thread is it stated that people will only ever adopt that embrace during a dance or between dances.

and seems to forget that embraces are not as rigid as the embrace between parts of a single rigid body.
No, you're reading far too much into that. Your initial assumption:
Why does anyone insist that as a dancer you're forced to use the same embrace all of the time?
is incorrect. No-one, anywhere, has insisted that.

So I wouldn't "teach" a "V embrace" in the sense that I'd say "you must dance in V" (even though I've had BsAs teachers who insisted on it) but I'd tell people to dance what was comfortable for them in a given context and tell them what the "V" allows (and that includes a means of actually leading the cross quite naturally).
Yes, that seems completely reasonable as an approach.

What confused me is why you think I (or anyone) would take a different approach?

I'm simply trying to explore the possibilities, advantages, and restrictions of a different style of embrace, and trying to clarify where such an embrace is useful, and where it's a disadvantage.

That's all.

I'm neither promoting nor decrying that embrace.

[JohnEm]

Every embrace has its possible perverse effects. Yes, they are different for each embrace. I would personally tend to think of the "best" embrace as 'as parallel as possible', but for some steps exactly parallel isn't possible.
Since my preference is for in line I would choose not to do those "steps"
because by preserving and leading from within that embrace only the
movements that are possible will be lead. And I happen to believe that
the in line embrace offers a greater inventive potential for musical
interpretation in the moment together than any other relationship.


So I wouldn't "teach" a "V embrace" in the sense that I'd say "you must dance in V" (even though I've had BsAs teachers who insisted on it) but I'd tell people to dance what was comfortable for them in a given context and tell them what the "V" allows (and that includes a means of actually leading the cross quite naturally).
This isn't the place for yet another debate about the cross so I'll just lodge
my disagreement and that there are ways of leading the cross from within
the embrace that feel entirely natural to the lady - indeed that is the
essence of it.


If you're teaching dissociated ochos, just to give one example, it's hard to enforce the embrace as completely parallel - that's why ochos milongueros developed, and you'll see that even dancers who use that embrace and those ochos still have a microscopic 'V' at times.
Is there a misunderstanding here? Milonguero ochos as back crosses
(which is what I think you have in mind) came about as a consequence of
cramped floor conditions with little space and little room to move. Many of
the other movements within the embrace actually require dissociation.


And a 'small V' is actually a lot less detrimental to the embrace than what I sometimes see: couples who obsessively avoid any 'V' at all and end up parallel but offset much too much after they did something impossible for the embrace they were having.
A slight Vee may indeed be preferable to having your partner disappear
under your armpit. But I prefer neither. For instance, because of the
physical relationship, in my experience clockwise giros are next to
impossible within the Vee which is why you see couples open out for them
or at least adopt a more flexible relationship.

[sixela]

Since my preference is for in line I would choose not to do those "steps"
because by preserving and leading from within that embrace only the
movements that are possible will be lead. And I happen to believe that
the in line embrace offers a greater inventive potential for musical
interpretation in the moment together than any other relationship.

I don't. But not only is that a matter of preference, it may even be perfectly true for you and not for someone else. "Elke vogel zingt zoals hij gebekt is".

I don't have to confine myself into a parallel embrace to interpret the music, I can't help but do it even if I'm free to do fancy stuff; I have rarely had *one* follower fail to tell me I danced in quite an original way, and that's because I rarely plan ahead and let the music carry me (sometimes I'd be hard pressed to recognise the patterns I'm dancing myself, frankly).

Someone else with too much freedom to do fancy moves that he learned by rote learning can tend to do those fancy moves instead of interpreting the music, and he'd certainly dance better if he restrained himself (I'm not suggesting that you are fencing yourself into a parallel embrace because you couldn't cope with something else, just that some do and that others actually should ;) ).


This isn't the place for yet another debate about the cross so I'll just lodge
my disagreement and that there are ways of leading the cross from within
the embrace that feel entirely natural to the lady - indeed that is the
essence of it.
We have no disagreement. I'm just saying that a 'V' provides a natural way of leading the cross, not that it is the only one. In fact, it's not the only one I lead at all.


A slight Vee may indeed be preferable to having your partner disappear
under your armpit. But I prefer neither.That is, of course, entirely your prerogative and I don't object to people dancing in that style at all (they're still a joy to look at if they're connected with the partner and the music).

But what I sometimes see are people who do dance with embrace A because of dogma and do steps B when it clearly doesn't work. If you are determined to mix water and fire and end up in a ridiculous non-embrace, then the 'this other embrace is the Spawn of the Devil and this is the True Embrace' dogma doesn't excuse it. There are two ways out of it, some flexibility (but that's the Devil Tempting You, innit?) or simply not doing stuff that cannot be made to work with whatever you prefer. Some stubborn people, though, don't think they have to pick sides.

For instance, because of the
physical relationship, in my experience clockwise giros are next to
impossible within the Vee which is why you see couples open out for them
or at least adopt a more flexible relationship.No argument from me. But I did a lot of clockwise giros yesterday (given the exercise during the lesson was based on clockwise giros) without obsessing too much on what the angle of the V was. My dance partner (which I hadn't danced with for ten years, so we were certainly not correcting each other's mistakes out of habit) also didn't think too much about it; we just made sure it worked.

There were lots of subtle movements that adjusted the V naturally, come to think of it, including a micro-colgada occurring naturally because the leader's intention to rotate changed but he still filled the space of the follower, and that changed whatever V there was quite effortlessly but radically (if I remember correctly, after that the lady did a cortado while the leader did a counter-movement forward and back, and that definitely had a lot of V but finished completely parallel).

I see neither Dave, you nor I really disagree much on anything, except on definitions. I hope you don't mind my violent disagreement, I find it very enlightening, more than simple "hear, hear" messaging ;).

[JohnEm]

I don't. But not only is that a matter of preference, it may even be perfectly true for you and not for someone else. "Elke vogel zingt zoals hij gebekt is".
Yes, each to their own!


I don't have to confine myself into a parallel embrace to interpret the music, I can't help but do it even if I'm free to do fancy stuff; I have rarely had *one* follower fail to tell me I danced in quite an original way, and that's because I rarely plan ahead and let the music carry me (sometimes I'd be hard pressed to recognise the patterns I'm dancing myself, frankly).

Your idea of tango and mine are different, one of the many problems
of discussing such a personal experience as tango.


Someone else with too much freedom to do fancy moves that he learned by rote learning can tend to do those fancy moves instead of interpreting the music, and he'd certainly dance better if he restrained himself (I'm not suggesting that you are fencing yourself into a parallel embrace because you couldn't cope with something else, just that some do and that others actually should ;) ).
No, it certainly isn't fencing in though it is my choice having experienced
all the many different embraces/holds. And I have a basis for my own
assessment having arrived at tango from other dances.


We have no disagreement. I'm just saying that a 'V' provides a natural way of leading the cross, not that it is the only one. In fact, it's not the only one I lead at all.
Walking outside in the inline embrace can have the same effect.

That is, of course, entirely your prerogative and I don't object to people dancing in that style at all (they're still a joy to look at if they're connected with the partner and the music).
Ah, there is a clue. I don't dance for others to watch, though sometimes
they clearly do, for me this dance is for two partners' involvement and
enjoyment. Onlookers are merely bystanders.


But what I sometimes see are people who do dance with embrace A because of dogma and do steps B when it clearly doesn't work. If you are determined to mix water and fire and end up in a ridiculous non-embrace, then the 'this other embrace is the Spawn of the Devil and this is the True Embrace' dogma doesn't excuse it. There are two ways out of it, some flexibility (but that's the Devil Tempting You, innit?) or simply not doing stuff that cannot be made to work with whatever you prefer. Some stubborn people, though, don't think they have to pick sides.
Then they don't understand what it is they are doing. There are bad dancers
of every style as indeed there are better and best ones too. As my concern
is social dancing, my only concerns are coexistence with others on the floor
and hopefully the presence of a few potential partners who are willing
and like the style of dance I prefer.

No argument from me. But I did a lot of clockwise giros yesterday (given the exercise during the lesson was based on clockwise giros) without obsessing too much on what the angle of the V was. My dance partner (which I hadn't danced with for ten years, so we were certainly not correcting each other's mistakes out of habit) also didn't think too much about it; we just made sure it worked.
You can't obsess about the angle of the Vee and seemlessly perform giros
clockwise. One solution is in fact both partners turning around each other.
Watching it though you can see the purposeful leading intent of the steps
in order to achieve the aim. It's not how I prefer to dance as my one intent
in that regard is to allow my free leg to follow my body and not to lead it.

There were lots of subtle movements that adjusted the V naturally, come to think of it, including a micro-colgada occurring naturally because the leader's intention to rotate changed but he still filled the space of the follower, and that changed whatever V there was quite effortlessly but radically (if I remember correctly, after that the lady did a cortado while the leader did a counter-movement forward and back, and that definitely had a lot of V but finished completely parallel).
Yours is definitely a very different dance to mine - I gave up all that stuff
some time ago now.

I see neither Dave, you nor I really disagree much on anything, except on definitions. I hope you don't mind my violent disagreement, I find it very enlightening, more than simple "hear, hear" messaging ;).
Not at all - if only all such "violent" disagreements were in such good spirit.

[Dave Bailey]

So I played around more with this embrace last night at a practica, both with my normal practice partner, and with a few others, to a variety of music including milonga and vals.

Firstly, I'm getting less and less sure it should be called a V embrace - the actual angle of V-ishness is relatively small, and mostly this seems to be a natural result of the offset, rather than any attempt to create an angle. So I think I'll call it an "offset" embrace from now on; that seems more descriptive.

(interestingly, one of the problems with this embrace I found with one partner was that she was actively trying to create this "V" angle, and that distorted the embrace, making it more difficult to communicate with her).

Vals was perfectly fine under an offset embrace. I only had a few dances with it, but it seemed OK. I had assumed Vals might be better with offset, but I didn't really find it any better-suited to the music than a non-offset embrace, so I'd provisionally simply say it's like Tango - that is, offset is another style, and it's valid to dance in that style if you want to.

Milonga, I found more tricky under offset, but that may simply be due to the fact that my personal milonga style is very much traspie-based and has very few steps in it. So I'm not that keen on milonga in that embrace, but that's possibly down to my own limitations.

[sixela]

Ah, there is a clue. I don't dance for others to watch, though sometimes
they clearly do, for me this dance is for two partners' involvement and
enjoyment. Onlookers are merely bystanders.
But if you dance, the only thing I can derive pleasure from is to see you having fun (being slightly selfish for a moment). Unfortunately, I haven't been able to share other couples' pleasure telepathically ;).


Then they don't understand what it is they are doing.

Yes. And the worst people who don't understand what they are doing are the people with a dogma in their spine telling them that they're 'Right'.

[opendoor]

..And I happen to believe that the in line embrace offers a greater inventive potential for musical interpretation in the moment together than any other relationship.

I don't. But not only is that a matter of preference, it may even be perfectly true for you and not for someone else. "Elke vogel zingt zoals hij gebekt is".

JohnEm, you should remember that the V-hold was prior to the parallel one. Only when Tango moved to smaller locations or when Tango became a mass phenomenon, the embrace adjusted to the space resourses available then.

A fine example for dancing in V-hold is El Indio Benavente

Wvci7yTkbYI
youtube.com/watch?v=Wvci7yTkbYI

[JohnEm]

JohnEm, you should remember that the V-hold was prior to the parallel one. Only when Tango moved to smaller locations or when Tango became a mass phenomenon, the embrace adjusted to the space resourses available then.
And your point is . . . . ?

A fine example for dancing in V-hold is El Indio Benavente
Sadly, I think you are serious.

[opendoor]

..you are seriousReally? I didn´t noticed any irony in the preceding posts. But as a german it is likely that I´m a bit behind in this supreme discipline. :sad:

[JohnEm]

Really? I didn´t noticed any irony in the preceding posts. But as a german it is likely that I´m a bit behind in this supreme discipline. :sad:

It's nothing to do with you being German nor me being British.
All of us from a different cultures thousands of miles away have difficulty
understanding the tango movement in BsAs with its many many facets.

You posted a video of El Indio performing a rehearsed street dance, often a
rather raw version of performance tango designed for instant attraction of
passers by, rather like a leaflet dropped through your door has to in the
five seconds it takes to walk it from the door to the wastebin.

We weren't talking performance with a constant partner but social dancing
with ever changing ones and that's quite clear from DB's posts.

[opendoor]

First, no offense meant, at all! And a beer at the bar, the next time we meet, ok?

..We weren't talking performance with a constant partner but social dancing
with ever changing ones and that's quite clear from DB's posts.

But that´s wrong! We were talking on didactics (Dave was the opener) and on technical advantages. And in this sense, taking a look on a stage master really is much closer to the core of this thread than all your posts together. You turned this thread into a confessional document, not me!

[Temza]

So I've been thinking about writing something on the V embrace, and I wondered what people thought of it? I'm looking for advantages / disadvantages, and the implications of the V embrace on dance style, compared to (say) the parallel close embrace.

Any thoughts / preferences / tips?
As a leader I find that the V embrace obstructs my view so much that it is only suitable for dancing on a very, very empty floor. In our recent milonga we had 1 sq.m. per person, so I don't see how anyone can dance in the V embrace in these conditions.

The V embrace is very good for tango on stage. It gives the impression of close physical connection but is better than the parallel close embrace because the audience can see the faces of both partners.

[sixela]

A fine example for dancing in V-hold is El Indio Benavente
More V than I tend to use most of the times, except in wild abandon on a relatively empty floor (the difference isn't subtle; this borders on disconnection and almost moves into open embrace at times; I might just do this, as I said, but I would no longer just consider it just a V-embrace).

That just goes to show how difficult it is to hold conversations like this: how much "V" is a "V-embrace"?

It's a continuum, and what I already consider a "V-embrace" is certainly not going to cause the issues Temza is talking about. Yet we continue talking about "the" V-embrace as if it were living in the Platonic world of Ideas.

[JohnEm]

First, no offense meant, at all! And a beer at the bar, the next time we meet, ok?
I'll look forward to it!


But that´s wrong! We were talking on didactics (Dave was the opener) and on technical advantages. And in this sense, taking a look on a stage master really is much closer to the core of this thread than all your posts together.
None of us have been talking absolutes, only expressing thoughts based on
personal experiences, no-one is exclusively claiming perfection.

I don't see how a performance couple who repeat choreographed (or at
least rehearsed through frequent repetition) dancing have any relevance.
He may be a stage master - I wouldn't know - though he is good at the
attention seeking large dancing. They do confirm opening out for figures
which would in any case be inappropriate on most social floors.

The point remains that the Vee is a variable embrace of figures to impress,
and the inline (apilado) embrace is one for you and your partner alone.
It could be argued that the Vee is an outward looking dance and the inline
one is internal and almost private. That is not to say that some other
dancers don't combine the merits (and maybe some deficiencies) of both.
That to a certain extent seems to be what Detlef and Melina are teaching -
a linear walking dance with turns in close parallel embrace.

Temza has just offered another additional valid opinion about the Vee
as a performance hold - I don't altogether agree with the Vee in itself
causing difficulties socially, only the anti-social difficulties that might
result if El Indio came along and danced as per your YouTube clip!

[sixela]

The point remains that the Vee is a variable embrace of figures to impress,
That's judging on presumed intent only. It's certainly not true for the best social dancers that I know that use a V embrace; I know people who dance few steps that would mandate such an embrace but who still use it successfully, and who are you to say they've got the 'wrong' embrace for what they're doing?

You made a choice for a given embrace for a reason, but that certainly doesn't mean that others made a different choice for the opposite reasons.

Of course, you can choose to redefine terminology to only call 'V-embrace' the particular embrace coupled with the showy steps, but that's petitio principii (begging the question).


and the inline (apilado) embrace is one for you and your partner alone.
I disagree that "V" entails no apilado and that inline embraces are always "apilado".

These aspects, as far as I'm concerned, are pretty much orthogonal, and they only cease to be when someone wants to shoehorn a multidimensional space onto a two-dimensional line (with "us" on one side and "them" on the other, usually, although I confess that at least you don't seem to ready the pitchforks).


It could be argued that the Vee is an outward looking dance and the inline
one is internal and almost private. It's the kind of sweeping generalisation that sounds nice but doesn't stand under scrutinity, and it's also loaded with emotion (what is an "outward looking dance"?) and judges by mere intent.

Someone who doesn't want to talk in absolutes shouldn't argue that absolutes could be argued ;).

Your inline embrace certainly sounds internal and almost private and for you and your partner's benefit. But that doesn't say much about someone else's embrace, I'm afraid, since they aren't clones of you.

As far as I can tell, whether people dance for the two connected partners vs. the audience has more to do with personality and attitude than the embrace they've chosen (you wouldn't believe the clusters of inline+apilado dancers who're only obsessed with making sure they Look Correct to the audience as Disciples of the True Church, and in their obsession to never colour beyond the dotted lines forget to dance. Fortunately, there are others).

There may be some correlation, but from the sampling I've seen it's weak; and it certainly isn't causation.

[JohnEm]

That's judging on presumed intent only. It's certainly not true for the best social dancers that I know that use a V embrace; I know people who dance few steps that would mandate such an embrace but who still use it successfully, and who are you to say they've got the 'wrong' embrace for what they're doing?
I wasn't and didn't intend so.


You made a choice for a given embrace for a reason, but that certainly doesn't mean that others made a different choice for the opposite reasons.

Of course, you can choose to redefine terminology to only call 'V-embrace' the particular embrace coupled with the showy steps, but that's petitio principii (begging the question).
I accept readily the fact that the Vee can be understated though then
I really don't see the point of it other than social reticence.

I disagree that "V" entails no apilado and that inline embraces are always "apilado".
Not sure I did and variations occur in the progress of the dance anyway.

These aspects, as far as I'm concerned, are pretty much orthogonal, and they only cease to be when someone wants to shoehorn a multidimensional space onto a two-dimensional line (with "us" on one side and "them" on the other, usually, although I confess that at least you don't seem to ready the pitchforks).
Glad you recognise that.

It's the kind of sweeping generalisation that sounds nice but doesn't stand under scrutinity, and it's also loaded with emotion (what is an "outward looking dance"?) and judges by mere intent.
Not for nothing is the Vee the dominant, now almost exclusive hold of the
Mundial, judged entirely by sight. The rules of Buenos Aires salon
competition are themselves two dimensional resulting in a dance
necessarily restricted by those rules into a concentration on elegance
for appeal to the judges who seem to be teaching potential competitors
how to best exploit those rules in order to do well.


Someone who doesn't want to talk in absolutes shouldn't argue that absolutes could be argued ;).

Your inline embrace certainly sounds internal and almost private and for you and your partner's benefit. But that doesn't say much about someone else's embrace, I'm afraid, since they aren't clones of you.
Agreed and have not claimed otherwise. I speak only my own experience.

As far as I can tell, whether people dance for the two connected partners vs. the audience has more to do with personality and attitude than the embrace they've chosen (you wouldn't believe the clusters of inline+apilado dancers who're only obsessed with making sure they Look Correct to the audience as Disciples of the True Church, and in their obsession to never colour beyond the dotted lines forget to dance. Fortunately, there are others).
We are not in disagreement, read my last post again referring to merits
and deficiencies of the embraces though it was not that specific.


There may be some correlation, but from the sampling I've seen it's weak; and it certainly isn't causation.
You make a case there is nothing absolute in tango and that's true. Then
you make a case against generalisation and, while I'll admit that is less
than ideal, we talk generalisations about others whenever any dance
is discussed. Only personal experience can be expressed specifically
and that can be difficult enough.

[Temza]

People dance what they were taught. A majority of teachers are not social dancers, they are performers, so no wonder a lot of people dance in an open or V embrace, with the woman's head turned to the right. If this woman goes to dance in BA, she must be prepared that the leader might politely take her head into his hands and turn it so that she looks over his right shoulder.

[opendoor]

..It's a continuum...

good idea, an continuum starting at the parallel position. Only the head thing doesn´t fit in here, because in V-hold you put left to right, instead of right to right in Apilado.

[JohnEm]

good idea, an continuum starting at the parallel position. Only the head thing doesn´t fit in here, because in V-hold you put left to right, instead of right to right in Apilado.

Continuum:

Apilado in line heads right to right, lady looking over man's right shoulder.

Lady moves her head slightly by turning it to slightly her right
so temples touch

Lady moves head in line with man's head forehead to forehead,
chest connection now mainly lost.

Lady now remakes physical contact by moves her left side to connect
with partners right. Heads stay in contact so lady now has her left temple
or forehead to man's right temple.

Voila! Apilado to the Vee in continuous sequence.

And the occasional restless partner has done something very similar.

The reverse doesn't seem to occur so seemlessly.

[opendoor]

Lady moves head in line with man's head forehead to forehead, chest connection now mainly lost.
Lady now remakes physical contact by moves her left side to connect
with partners right. Heads stay in contact so lady now has her left temple
or forehead to man's right temple...

Lets call it V-ee-fication

[sixela]

Suddenly I have visions about alien reptiles stealthily disguised as apilado dancing humans...

...let's not call it V-ee-fication, let's just stick with "conversion". A side effect of it is that your giros are going to flip to counterclockwise.