Salsa > Why one should learn patterns

Discussion in 'Salsa' started by lundasalsa, Nov 20, 2004.

  1. tacad

    tacad New Member

    Hey, I've had an epiphany! I've wondered why I can be free with foxtrot but not with anything else. It's because of all those Fred and Ginger movies I've watched. In foxtrot I'm not thinking moves or patterns but an idea I've had about dance that was inspired by those movies. And here's the kicker. I'm learning to incorporate the technique I'm learning in my class. Without losing
    Fred! But with other dances I don't have a model of inspiration in my mind and so all I'm left with is patterns.

    Soooo....., time to find a model of inspiration for cha-cha. actually I do have an idea on this from somewhere. Think I'll start doing it!

    And now time for class! :banana:
     
  2. Sagitta

    Sagitta Well-Known Member

    I'm curious...What idea do you have?
     
  3. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    ¡Desculpame! Guess my Castillano is even more rudimentary than I previously believed -- I thought "sereno" meant "cool" or more literally "serene". Perhaps you can enlighten me is it also some kind of light breeze?

    Actually, though I agree with a lot of what's at the heart of what you're saying here, the point I was trying to make was also a question of timeline, of new things coming from what has gone before. So for example Picasso couldn't have been there without the Impressionists, who in turn depended on what came before them. And if Picasso had painted just in an impressionist style, but 50 years later, it would have been unremarkable.

    Doesn't the same hold true on our own day-to-day dance creativity level? (In my case a fairly inexpert one! :) ) Aren't new moves based on old ones with a new twist that comes from the creative moment? And in time, don't those new moves become old moves?
     
  4. borikensalsero

    borikensalsero Moderator

    It's a tricky one, and very dependant on how we use it... El Sereno alone means the morning dew, to be an adjetive it would need an object/noun, a person or thing to be a charasteristic of. Ex. El es Sereno, La Persona es serena, la mañana es serena... But if we were to say just El Sereno, it turns the entire meaning of Sereno from an adjetive to a noun, hence, the morning dew.

    Indeed, we agree, you have painted it clearer. To come up with anything, we usually need prior knowledge of something that leads us to a new creation. We must note as well that we also need no prior knowledge or basis to come up with a new move. Let say you grab a girl, you have never danced before or seen anyone dance. You embrace each other and begin to dance face to face when suddenly you pull away and spin her. Where did that come from? You had never ever spun as a kid or saw anyone spin. That is what I really meant by “new” movements in the physical world. Even if the spin is based on 4 quarter, in the same direction, movements jammed together… Those are really rhetorical questions of course.

    I do agree that nothing is ever new, even if “new” to the physical world. In a physical world where every thing is already there nothing can ever be newly created that isn’t based on something old. All we are left with is new applications of ideas…
     
  5. tacad

    tacad New Member

    How do I describe this? This is going to be awkward.

    For foxtrot, I spring from one step to the next step at the same time I'm arching my body a bit to interact with my partner as we are moving. At this next step I seem to be gathering tension for my next spring. Again something is going on between my partner an myself. I'm preparing both of us for the next step. It is playful but sensuous. I'm moving around my partner a lot, changing the angles of our bodies, changing the curves of our bodies. I spend longer in the moment and milk it. When I do the same moves as if I learned them in class I stand much straighter from head to toe. My body is much more like a solid tree or something. there is no springing.

    For cha-cha I have in mind, but have not yet executed, a lot of sudden snappy turns and moves. A lot of the lead charging and making a dare to the woman, the woman comes right back and ups the ante, arms and hips waving a round. Almost like we are jockeying for position in a relationship, but both of us equal to the task and so the tension escalates. Again each move is packed with a lot of interaction, being daring, what will she do in response. I guess I think of foxtrot as more romantic and sensuous as though we are new lovers running through a park or whatever and we want to get to the other side but we have to stop at every step and carress each other just for a moment but the the playful side takes over and we circle each other laughing but our hands carress each other sensually, then off to the swings but we must stop again and tumble in the grass, but not just a tumble for I'm carressing her hair as we tumble.

    Phew! borikensalsero, you need no longer apologize for long posts. Expressing this stuff inside you is tough. And thanks sagitta for asking, I never really understood such expressions of dance and here it was all inside of me all the time. I guess this is kind of an example of what borikensalsero is saying: No one ever told me these things about foxtrot and cha-cha. They were inside of me.

    EDIT:Except I'm not really laughing or being playful all the time. Depends on the music too. Man, this stuff will drive you nuts.
     
  6. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    It gets stranger: Google and Babelfish both have "sereno" as "night-watchman" -- true I'm somethign of a night person :). But couldn't "El sereno" be a serene person, as "el moreno" is a brown one? :?:

    I think we do agree in spirit, and by saying slightly different things we're getting closer to the inner truth of what we mean.

    Here I'd say that, maybe several thousand years ago, a guy first grabbed a girl (or was it the girl who did the grabbing? :) ) and they moved together in time to the music. And nearly as long ago (Maybe 5 minutes later? :idea: ) the first spin happened. But ever since, every move has been added to, and based on, what has come before.

    But I wouldn't say nothing is ever new. That first dance was new at the time, so was the spin. And that amazing move that I'm sure you came up with last night was new, even though its lineage goes all the way back to those first girl and boy dancers.

    Then there is me, an Anglo without the ritmo in my blood, but I feel it inside, and am inspired to move in a way different to what I have been taught. My fumbling inventions are new to me, though I'm sure there have been Latinos who have created them before. Nonetheless, I, like all dancers move in a way unique to myself, so even though I don't have a bunch of Cubans shouting WEPA, my version of these moves is new too.

    serenisimamente...
     
  7. borikensalsero

    borikensalsero Moderator

    lol... yeap, sereno implies after the night has passed. So I can see why at some time in history a night watchman was called sereno... as he worked all throught the night till el sereno in the morning...

    For el sereno to mean Serene person there has to be a verb present, something like (es). So the reason why it can't be a serene person is because there is no verb present. Example, The White House, and the house is white. Using sereno as El Sereno would equal to The White House while El es Sereno equals to the house is white. Sereno will always be a musculine subject, hence, why it seems to imply a man/male figure but truly never is a serene person, but rather a thing (El Sereno/the dew).

    Assuming that you got the name from Señor Sereno by Ismael Miranda? In this song he is actually talking about the night dew how it sends him to sleep. Back way there was a belief that we had to be home when el sereno started falling because it would cause ill effects on our health. Hence, why in the song he says "Señor Sereno porque me mandas a dormir". Mr Sereno (the dew) why do you send me to sleep.

    I totally agree with you saying something is new. I think we are getting closer to what we mean, and are losing each other because I haven't explained definition. When I say nothing is new is because of an idealistic/purist view. Before we have anything there must be energy, that energy becomes it's material manifestation in the form of matter, which means that everything comes from energy in the physical world... Which means the human form is nothing more than condensed energy/low level of energy. So while human form was new at some point, in an idealistic view it was old for all its parts were formed from the solid state of energy. But when you and I were born, we are "new". :)

    Now dance moves are the same, as they are nothing more than enhancements of bodily movements, however, I do keep in mind that us doing them for the very first time is called NEW to us.

    But in a sense of you and I doing moves or them popping as never before seen, yeap, to describe it and give it some kind of logical meaning for sense of understanding, we would have to say that the move is indeed NEW. Even if based on some previous form of movement which makes the move already old for it has used nothing that hasn't been already there; that of course is an idealistic and purist view. Kind of like saying that salsa comes from Africa, as a fact as that can be because those are the roots of the music, it didn't stop Salsa from being new in the late 60s, and said to come from cuba.

    It is a mixture of ideas with different meanings depending on result that I'm mixing into one, hence why I sound so confusing. New because the move is either new to the individual, new to the physical world, but old because it has not used anything that wasn't already created to the physical world. As the use of hands, feet, frame, lead/follow, etc to create it. A "new" built from the old, and why I say that idealisticly speaking nothing is new. For it to be new it would have to be created and as we know matter can't either be created nor destroyed, hence only change form... the old still old, it simply looks new because we haven't seen it before...

    Boy I talk a lot.
     
  8. SDsalsaguy

    SDsalsaguy Administrator Staff Member

    Funny... I don't see anyone complaining... :wink:
     
  9. danceguy

    danceguy New Member

    :wink: :lol:
     
  10. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    *sigh* I kind of assumed that if someone called themselves "El Moreno" (or "El Blanco") it would mean the brown (or white) one, and that El Sereno would be similar... Still 90% of people who will come across it as a DJ name are anglos :)

    No I got given it as a password for a salsa site I subscribe to and I thought it sounded cool :)

    Just because matter can't be created or destroyed, it doesn't mean nothing is "really" new -- the basic substance may be the same, but the form is new all the time. The form is something that is being created constantly, first energetically, and then manifested in the world of matter. The Cosmic Dance perhaps :)

    Me too :twisted:
     
  11. SDsalsaguy

    SDsalsaguy Administrator Staff Member

    Funny... I still don't hear anyone complaining... :wink:
     
  12. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    OK, completely off-topic, but what would "El Serenisimo" convey?
     
  13. alvaro

    alvaro New Member

    post about spanish ahead

    Yep, i had thought too that you were named after the 'señor sereno' song.

    Funny, i always had my doubts about that song. I thought about it in the 'night watchman' sense (the señor part) ... which didnt really make much sense, and borinken's explanation solves the puzzle! -- and i like more the song now, thanks borinken!.

    Where i grew up 'sereno' is not the word mostly used for the 'morning dew' -- we talk more about 'rocío', so i didnt think about that possibility at all. For talking about the morning dew we say 'rocío', but we wouldnt say "i fell in bed (ill) 'cause i got the morning rocío". No one will say that (and probably no one would understand the phrase!), but instead "i fell in bed (ill) 'cause i got the sereno". And although both words are 'synonymous' (acc. to dictionaries) they are never (as far as i can recall -and that's obviously limited- and where i grew up) interchangeable in a phrase.

    Also, ElSereno might mean --or better, convey the meaning-- you want in some places of Latin America. For example, in Chile they are used to say 'el Juan': here 'Juan' is someone('s name) and in most places saying 'el Juan' would be bad, you only talk that way to say something bad about that person, but in Chile is the usual way of talking!; besides, in Chile they dont talk about 'sereno'==dew, they talk about 'la helada' when its cold and the 'dew' freezes over the grass and when its not cold the'll just say 'it's all wet'. They'll understand 'rocío' and maybe even use it once in once in a while, but probably not sereno (never heard it in Chile).

    So, in Chile 'ElSereno' will be 'the calm one' (serene, cool, ...). I'm curious what it could mean in Argentina and Uruguay ...

    'El Serenísimo' sounds weird and conveys the meaning you want ... but it's not a cool nickname -- i think!

    To avoid what borinken told you about, you have to strip it from the 'the' saying simply "Sereno".
     
  14. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    ¡Muchas gracias amigo!

    Well I certainly don't want to be thought of as something that makes you ill! Interestingly, now I'm home I looked at my dictionary, and it only gives "night-watchman" and for "dew" it only gives "rocio".

    Guess I'll try dropping the "El"...
     
  15. alvaro

    alvaro New Member

    i'll need borinken's help here! ... even if when i heard people talking about 'el sereno' it was to avoid it or be careful about it, i don't have any bad associations with that word. Like if you carelessly expose yourself it can be harmful but it is not bad nor mean... i don't know. As i said, we dont use that word too much where i grew up.
     
  16. borikensalsero

    borikensalsero Moderator

    The only way for el blanco to really mean a person, is to be previously declared in the conversation. So, if you are talking about a person and he is the first thing ever mentioned, then you need no longer refer to the subject as in the English language, to which you can then use a characteristic of the person to refer to him without the use of a verb... So if I say, Jack is going to school today, I can then say EL Blanco is going to school tomorrow too, to which Jack is implied. Since the subject has been previously mentioned it is assumed that el blanco refers to Jack. However, if you do not give a subject anywhere in the conversation, El Blanco can only mean the color white.

    However, Moreno truly means black male. There is really no other use for that word, even if we can use it to describe something black, it is erroneous. Moreno is a black male. So I can say El Moreno and the entire world would know I am speaking of a black person, where as if I was to say El Blanco without a subject, everyone would take El Blanco to mean the color white, that is if further questions aren't presented to clear up the use of El Blanco.

    In spanish speech is implied, once subject is declared it is no longer needed. In English “the white” means nothing even if the subject isn't along for the ride, you would have to say the white guy. Not so in Spanish, but do know that subject must be declared before hand.

    Energy is the highest for of matter, it is already there as well. It is a religious/spiritual fact that humans can't create anything, neither can any other object made from energy... All form, all knowledge is already contained in the metaphysical universe, for if it hasn’t been created, it won’t have the Godly power to bring something completely new into the world. What truly happens according to metaphysical law is that form is finally manifested in its physical state because needed events happened. Kind of like physically speaking saying, I can’t do calculus if I never learn to add. The same happens with all physical form, it can’t be complex before it is simple. All form must go through stages of development before it becomes something physically said to be new. So in a sense the form is new to the eyes, not so to the world of the metaphysical.

    Form takes the same form as our life. Before we become anything we are nothing more than a thought, form the thought we “create” our new form of what we will become in the future. Note that form here is already living in your mind, not so in the physical. It goest from live in the metaphysical to live in the physical. Its “new” label is only so because it is now physically visible, and what is known as the “egotistical” state of being. Everything must be low level matter for humans to believe it as “live/new/real”.

    In science something is said to be new simply because it has never been seen before, however, science never takes into account a metaphysical manifestation of the form.

    Same with form or all knowledge, all form is already in the metaphysical world, that it becomes material only makes it "new" to the eyes. To which I can't disagree that "new" form is always being created because we as humans mostly act on that which our senses detect. That it truly is new is a completely different fact.

    Note again that both religion and science say that matter can't be created, for in all religion a state of "God" created the world and as Christians describe it, “rested”. In science matter is already there only changing forms, the new is the label we give to its changing state... So for a form to be truly new it would have to be created out of define intervention, which isn't the case for this entity known as God already created everything. For science specifically state that no matter is ever being created. In science the form is "new" as it looks different, however, when broken down, it can only be said that the form is indeed old, no scientist would ever disagree that this new form is indeed composed of energy that has been around for billions of years. For it doesn't matter how it looks everything it is made up of old energy. That still doesn't take away the fact of it being "new" to our eyes, hence, said to be "new". It isn't that it was newly created but that it becomes physically visible.

    I can never, materially speaking, argue the fact of something being “new”. But when thinking metaphysically, there is only one option but to understand that anything that will ever be created is alive in its metaphysical form before it becomes physical reality. For if that wasn’t the case it would mean that, scientifically speaking, matter is being created or that there is more than one entity God like creating new “universal dust”.

    Note that for a from to be energetically created, matter in its highest form would have to be created, which again leads to matter being created and that ins't the case. Changing forms is the key, the new is only new because it changed forms, not that it is truly new, even if I agree that to the eyes and the physical world is new.

    Two definitions one deals with the physical, the other with the meta... In the meta all already is, in the physical it has yet to become so... The meta is the highest state beyond energy, in the physical well...
     
  17. borikensalsero

    borikensalsero Moderator

    Rocio and Sereno are the same thing... Except that some places make a distinction for sake of understanding. Sereno, is used to mean Rocio when falling at night and once on the floor in the morning, it is called Rocio. However, they are one and the same. Rocio, because it has been spread through the floor, as in "lo rociamos".. It has been spread through something. That Sereno becomes the Rocio simply because it fell eeverywhere on top of the earth.

    The bad/harmfull of it is only a myth that was held by our great great gradparents. As, don't get exposed to it because you'll get sick... It isn't a fact though...

    I can still remember my grandma and father scaring me as a kid about it. :D
     
  18. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    Thank you for the Spanish lesson :) As I say, perhaps I should drop the "El", but I don't think you can change your name in these forums...

    Curiously, my Spanish teacher, who learnt her Spanish in Spain, says that there moreno/a means a brown-haired person.

    Well it has to be said that, as history shows us, one person's religious/spiritual "fact" is another person's heresy. You are saying that creativity comes from the divine or metaphysical state, through us, to the physical world; others would say that this source is something that, though deep within, is still a part of ourselves, and thus we are all mini-creators. Maybe it's just a question of perception, of where one draws the line as to the boundaries of the self.

    I'm not disagreeing with you here, just being aware that different people see things in different ways.

    As to all new things being "already" there in the metaphysical world, before becoming manifest in the physical, doesn't this imply a sense of time in the metaphysical? To me, if there is a place where everything "already" is, that must be outside time. And of course, outside time there cannot be anything new or old. But in time, when calculus is first discovered, it is new, and the person who discovered it can be said to have created a new tool for understanding the world. Otherwise there is no meaning for the words "new" or "create".

    My this discussion has come a long way from patterns... *wipes brow* I'm wondering if we're at the point where everyone else's eyes are starting to glaze over.... :) is it time to lighten up? :cheers:
     
  19. borikensalsero

    borikensalsero Moderator

    You are very welcome, BTW, it is a historical fact that brown/black haired person is though of as Moreno. That is its white-European meaning. It comes from thousands of years of blond blue eye ruling. Today, still to mainstream Caucasian USA, when they say he is dark, they truly mean a black hair person. Like Ben Afleck is know in Hollywood as a tall handsome dark male. Lol… I’m still shocked when my white and European friends speak of me as a dark male.


    Spiritual/religious/science really isn’t much other than different perceptions of the same. Which to each person is what counts. The physical is though off as what can be manifestation of the spiritual in 3D. hehe Yes the metaphysical is deep within us (our soul, to others the mind). In the metaphysical there is no time or space things just are, everything exists as they are, the timing becomes a factor when transferred to the physical and the mind takes a hold of it.

    Talk about getting way off topic, I apologize! as spirituality and the perception of reality truly are my number one topic to speak of. I can go on for days and forget this is a salsa forum. Hehe… But that is where patterns reside some form of thought that we have to get to, through either deep thought or the absence of.
     
  20. ElSereno

    ElSereno New Member

    I think at this point we're saying pretty much the same thing :)

    Hey don't apologise to me! One of my major subjects of interest too, and if it's too far off-topic no doubt a moderator will send the thread somewhere else. :arrow:

    Anyway, as I say we've probably sent everyone else to sleep by now :)
     

Share This Page