Synchronous performances - do they fit to the Salsa spirit?

Hello,

I am wondering whether the spirit of Salsa is essentially compatible with the synchronous performance of two or more couples in many of the current dance performance groups that are seen at congress shows.

When only one dance couple is on stage their performance is about expression, about interpreting the music, about telling a story, about romance, about emotion. Yes, it is show dancing, but I really can enjoy it.

When two or more couples perform in a group then there comes one more factor into play: Synchronicity.

Now if synchronicity becomes a factor this can change the dance. Moves have to be executed very exactly and sharp, and this will not only need practise but drill. So when I began watching these shows I felt that showgroups would be better off if they would dance ballroom latin style instead of salsa because ballroom latin is familiar with these elements anyhow.

For me, Salsa dancing is much more orientated towards individuality, playfulness and spontaneous interpretation. Obviously not the best requirements for perfect synchronicity.

I admit I began to change my mind a little bit while watching more and more formation groups in salsa. Obviously they have success, people like them. I still like solo couple performances more but ... I also like to watch the big groups nowadays.

Nevertheless I would like to read your opinion about that. Is it just me?

If you see rueda de casino as part of Salsa, then syncronicity is definitly compatible with the spirit of Salsa because there it is important that all the couples do their moves syncron otherwise it ends in a huge knot.

Yes but Ruead is synchronization in the "big" motions - but not necessarily in between those. Except for proffesional Rueda shows of course but they also becomes stereotype. There is room for playfulness when you do it as an amateur.

I agree - I don't stereotype synchronized shows. People look like robots instead happy sexy flirty dancers.

/luc

Then there are performances with energy and dynamism...where people aren't copycat dancers but express themselves within the context of doing the same moves. Even though my Syracuse group isn't exactly synchronized at all times the energy and enthusiasm that they give off gets the audience excited and enjoying our performances.

Wouldn't you say that even most (prearranged, non-improuptu) solo performances at congresses have been choreographed?

Performing in general runs counter to spontaneity. Something spontaneous "arises from a momentary impulse" and is "not apparently contrived" (merriam-webster). Try throwing a few momentary impulses into the routine as a leader, and see how the follow appreciates it (note: she should still be following, but some moves in routines are simply not leadable without prior knowledge of the routine, plain and simple). A routine of course involves self-expression though. Even though the steps are fixed, the flavor and energy which each individual expresses is unique.

It's of course a matter of opinion, but given the option to watch a great solo couple at a club dancing versus 3 or 4 couples doing a polished routine that they have been practicing for months ... I would choose the latter.

having been on the scene for about a year, a little more, i have to say i'm sort of over the whole performance aspect. unless the group is really good, i'm usually bored fairly quickly.

I see synchronus performances as the teaching tool in schools a lot. Usually the beginners do a synchronized salsa or waltz (for instance) to get them 'on the floor'.

Big-time performance relies on the quality of dancing and the choreography to keep audience interest. The actual patterns of the group as a whole become another part of the 'look' (if not the biggest). In competition, you're judged not only as to how you look in the group individually, but how well the group works together, so there is an aspect of interaction. The 'salsa spirit' should be seen there...

Josh said:

It's of course a matter of opinion, but given the option to watch a great solo couple at a club dancing versus 3 or 4 couples doing a polished routine that they have been practicing for months ... I would choose the latter.

Click to expand...

Funny that, i'd opt for the former!

Pre-choreographed salsa tends to leave me cold...

ditto @ salseiro

but this discussion for me is so nuanced. I'm jaded now cos I've seen most that there is to be seen, but every once in a while there are those soloists or couples that just excite. They manage to create excitement and/or illusion of spontaneity because they give off a lot of energy, they wow the audience with skill and feats of athleticism. They have stage presence. they believe in their choreography, and that makes us believe it too. sometimes

Performance tradition has always pushed the evolution of social dancing. like it or not, most of the patterns and tricks and techniques learned by social dancers derive from performance criterium.
All that said, I used to look down on performance-driven dancers who couldn't adapt to social dancing. To me they seemed very confined. these days I recognize it's simply a matter of retraining, learning more skills, and I have seen many of my friends grow in their social dancing as well

I've had my chance to perform too, so I have a slightly different view of things now. Most performances, even mine, don't excite me, even if I love dancing, because I can see that it's mostly an act. And there are lots of bad actors on stage performing salsa. Just like dancing, some have the natural gift and charisma, and some don't. Some can achieve it through short-term training, but most can't.

Introducing synchronicity exposes this matter further. Like Boriken said a long time ago, you can always pick out the ONE dancer whose heart and soul is in the routine, he/she dances as if it's not choreography, they make you believe. But then juxtapose them with their fellow performers on the stage, and it just takes something away

So yeah the group can be good but most times it's quite tiresome to watch. It seems to benefit the members of group more than it does the audience, because they are trained in the process of being in the group by learning choreography and advanced skills. It's like watching your classmates do a recital, that's not very exciting, even if you know how much work they put into it. But still you cheer them on

Now, a single performer or couple, it's generally someone(s) very accomplished, so it tends to be more a good show than something to endure watching, with higher chance of individuality and spontaneity.

Performing groups are interesting...I've been checking out a troupe lately but I don't think that sort of working to perform is for me. I was curious to try it, see if I could keep from getting bored, but I'm not sure it goes with my style and personality. Also most people get into performing to further their skills, to become known, to travel, to be hired to teach, etc. I don't really need any of those things. I love to dance, and I love learning, but it's kind of a funny system...

yes, you're right. the performance thing is interesting to watch from a group dynamic perspective.

it seems to me that the performance preparation process does, generally speaking, benefit your average social dancer, who gets the opportunity to really focus on some choreography in ways that hopefully will carry over to their social dancing. it can give them confidence (crucial for me - i used to cringe if anyone was watching me on the social floor, let alone onstage. now i pump up the volume instantly if i see someone watching!) it exposes them to eyeballs - the spectators - and that can translate into more opportunities to social dance with a wider array of people.

on the other hand, i've seen SO MANY good social dancers who disappear when given choreography. i think this is especially true of social dancers with no formal dance training in their background. they don't have the body movement skills necessary to make someone else's choreography work for their body (i am guilty of this myself) so they usually appear stilted and a little awkward in performance.

the other unsaid thing about the proliferation of performance groups is that they can be big moneymakers for the instructors who run them. i think this has a lot more to do with the number of perf groups in new york than any other factor, including student interest.