"... 3 Greatest Dances To Learn ..."

[Peaches]

Heh. And I hate SF with a passion.

Could you explain this statement a bit further?

It is so difficult because they have such similarity

Edit to add: I guess I could make reasoned arguments for the three AT dances. From vals you learn fluidity, it's the "romantic" one of the three, and it seems to combine some of the always-in-motion aspect of milonga with some of the stateliness of tango.

Milonga teaches lightening fast weight changes, creativity under fire (for the leaders, at least), and requires excellent connection and following-sans-thinking, which I feel is almost a skill in itself. It's the playful release of the three.

And tango...well, tango is just pure elegance. What can I say? It's the foundation. Posture, carriage, waiting...it's all learned here. With the available time from the (generally) slower tempo, and the inherent pauses, the pressure is on to learn to dance even while not moving. It's the showcase for expression.

 

[Angel HI]

Heh. And I hate SF with a passion. Could you explain this statement a bit further?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angel HI
It is so difficult because they have such similarity

And tango...well, tango is just pure elegance. What can I say? It's the foundation. Posture, carriage, waiting...it's all learned here. With the available time from the (generally) slower tempo, and the inherent pauses, the pressure is on to learn to dance even while not moving. It's the showcase for expression.

For those who have learned and danced SF from the inside out not the outside in (from the concepts of movement rather than from a syllabus), we learn that you have answered your own question. Take your last statement above, and replace Tango with SF. Its rise/lower, something missing from AT (I don't say that negatively), is what gives it slower tempo, inherent pauses, and specifically its need to dance even while not moving.

Now, don't get me wrong. By no means am I going to place SF above AT on my Favori. I just list them side by side depending upon the mood if the day.

 

[NielsenE]

Seem like I'm going to be in close agreement with several..

SF or IR or Bolero AND AT or Hustle or WCS AND student's inspiration

SF for the reasons already explained -- it allows for the "best" journey/progression for understanding the movement of two bodies and involves nearly all the concepts needed for such. And as such will normally evolve along a very "technical" progression. If the student has no intent on learning standard, however, I think Bolero could be substituted for SF, since its another "universal" dance covering practically all concepts of moving two bodies as one and tends to require the same technical focus. If a latin-only person balks at learning Bolero, IR could be substituted, but SF is probably the better choice for them.

One of the Lead/Follow disciplines -- since you need to learn (and I beleive this needs to start from the beginning and not only after you've mastered the technique) how to move your self, your parter, or the couple. You need to learn the dialogue, you need to learn to dance rather than move. For a well-rounded (multi-style) dancer, I'd probably suggest not-AT, for a standard only dancer, then AT would be the best choice here.

Finally, I think the third dance will change. It should be whatever dance most captures the excitement and imagery of dancing for the student in question (and yes this will be different for each student, and will change over time for a student, and at times it might mean there's only two dances on their plate). This should be the training that helps them learn to let the emotions flow through their dancing; it should epitomize the reason they want to dance.

or in other words:
1) Two bodies moving as one
2) dancing as conversation
3) Physical expression of music and emotion