Abrazo - The Embrace
- Thread starter bordertangoman
- Start date
bordertangoman
Well-Known Member
yeah something else going on but hard to pin down, but as its common to 80% of the dancers there, with some notable exceptions, maybe its atmosphere as well.
I agree with you that I do like dancing with a good strong connection but i am equally comfortable with a light or open embrace...
maybe the moon was in the wrong phase.. I always dance better when its a full moon.
Well, it's not New England, but it's close enough. Ping me once your plans have finalized. I'll try to talk the wife into making the trek.
:car:
Oddly enough, many of the leaders who have been adopting this style DO bend forward. That's one of the reasons I can't find their chest to make a connection. I can find their left shoulder and/or their skull depending on height. That's about it.
One or two I can't feel at all. they are about 2 inches from me... too close to follow by watching their chest, too far to follow by feeling their movement. They want me to feel their lead by pressing my left arm down (or along) more firmly on their right arm. Not I mean their ARM, not the side of their body as in a V.
The "milonguero ochos" that DB was referring to are crossing ochos, not pivoting ochos. The ocho becomes a side step that crosses either in front or behind. If they travel backwards, they need to cross less and become more of a backstep. If they don't travel, they have to cross quite a bit. In neither case, is any dissasociating required.
(note: BTM calls these "fat old lady ochos" however, people with very large thighs actually have more trouble with them.)
I learned this way of doing ochos 1st because my first teacher taught milonguero. I still sometimes get lazy and don't pivot even when I could or should, but there are a couple of leaders around here with whom this method not only works, but is pretty necessary.
I think you missed my point. (and upon re-reading, I can see how my oint wasn't clear)
I didn't mean it's sad that he's teaching that you have to do the moves differently in various styles.. yes, of course you do.
It's sad that he's saying that the other way (ie: milonguero) is not the "current" way and seems to be discouraging his students from even learning it or dancing it.
When a teacher says to a class "There's another way you could do it" (and gives a rapid, half-hearted and therefore not very motivating demonstration) "but it's not the current way it's done" ... well, that pretty much ends it right there for many of those students.
THAT'S what I think is sad.
We aren't that far apart actually, only that dissociation allows a more
emphatic sidestep movement in the travelling back ocho and that depends
on your partners abilities. If I dissociate and pivot so can the lady but I
wasn't talking about pivoting.
Milonguero ochos and back crosses all require some dissociation,
otherwise the lady has to break the connection. It helps if the man
can dissociate too and that makes him feel (nearly) as good to you
as you do to the man. Go on, try and do back crosses keeping your
chest still and see your pelvis rotate, it is quite natural.
Disagree.
bastet
Active Member
I agree with your disagree Zoopsia. The are ochos where I am not led any dissociation at all and I cross behind and displace my front leg (basically a very small back volcada at that point) so I can cross in tight under myself. I can actually walk myself forwards from the back side when I do this and often use it as an exercize to get followers to learn to release their standing leg in a back crossing ocho because a lot of them have problems with that which is why most people find this type of ocho difficult.
Peaches
Well-Known Member
Ditto.I agree with you agreeing with Zoopsia's disagree.
Imagine you are looking down at the top of the body from above.
Imagine a line drawn horizontally from one shoulder to the other and another line drawn from hip to hip. (i'm speaking of one person here, not lines between a leader and follower)
The 2 lines are not parallel.
In practice what it means is that you are rotating your shoulders independently from the hips. That is why the 2 lines in the above illustration would cross each other at an angle rather than be on top of one another or parallel.
Now I understand why you are disagreeing with my claim
of some dissociation occurring in back crosses.
the pelvis turned to face a different direction than the chest.
of the upper body to face a different direction from the pelvis whereas
I was considering dissociation to be the separation of movement of the
pelvis and the upper body. Walking comfortably outside and maintaining
the embrace requires dissociation.
So I was considering the practicality of the dance and its movements
though I can accept that it is more natural in normal life to move the
pelvis separately from the upper body than to move the chest/shoulders
specifically and separately from the pelvis. In Tango you need to be able
to move separate parts of the body at will, naturally and without thinking.
In my experience your more typically narrow approach, which I had forgotten
I'd heard in lessons, tends to engage people's brains and make the whole
effort rather mechanical. Too much thinking!
You can still disagree if you like.
As a footnote, my view is coloured by own experience of struggling with
the dissociation required to lead milonguero (for the want of a better term)
giros from the chest within the embrace. In the end I accidentally found
that what I needed to do was connect with the muscles that rotate or
swivel the pelvis at will. At the time I had the movement but not the control.
The need to control my pelvis in order to move my chest independently
seemed perverse but in fact it's that control that enabled the separation.
of some dissociation occurring in back crosses.
Within the embrace, in a back cross you are in that position with
the pelvis turned to face a different direction than the chest.
But you are narrowly considering dissociation only as a separate rotation
of the upper body to face a different direction from the pelvis whereas
I was considering dissociation to be the separation of movement of the
pelvis and the upper body. Walking comfortably outside and maintaining
the embrace requires dissociation.
So I was considering the practicality of the dance and its movements
though I can accept that it is more natural in normal life to move the
pelvis separately from the upper body than to move the chest/shoulders
specifically and separately from the pelvis. In Tango you need to be able
to move separate parts of the body at will, naturally and without thinking.
In my experience your more typically narrow approach, which I had forgotten
I'd heard in lessons, tends to engage people's brains and make the whole
effort rather mechanical. Too much thinking!
You can still disagree if you like.
As a footnote, my view is coloured by own experience of struggling with
the dissociation required to lead milonguero (for the want of a better term)
giros from the chest within the embrace. In the end I accidentally found
that what I needed to do was connect with the muscles that rotate or
swivel the pelvis at will. At the time I had the movement but not the control.
The need to control my pelvis in order to move my chest independently
seemed perverse but in fact it's that control that enabled the separation.