Active Following

[Subliminal]

To me having an active follower means she is projecting her presence and I feel a willingness to work with me on the dance. Adornos come at appropriate times in the music, or when invited. I understand the hijacking thing in theory, and I think i'd be ok with it with the right person. But right now it just irritates me. Heh.

 

[dchester]

To me having an active follower means she is projecting her presence and I feel a willingness to work with me on the dance. Adornos come at appropriate times in the music, or when invited. I understand the hijacking thing in theory, and I think i'd be ok with it with the right person. But right now it just irritates me. Heh.

For whatever reason, it often feels more like a willingness to work against me.

 

[Dave Bailey]

Reasons to embellish tango -- Performing on stage. I see no reason to use any in the milonga.

How about, to attract the next partner? You know, in the same way that the men save their flashy moves for when they're walking along the women's row?

(or so I'm told - I wouldn't know, I don't have any flashy moves)

 

[bastet]

On embellishments- I often wonder if we are again using the same terminology for what some people may consider entirely different things.

I often see more traditionally minded tango people use the words embellishment in the same sentence with ganchos, leg wraps and so forth. And I have certainly read posts from Jantango in the past where the word embellishment is used in the same sentance negating ganchos and leg wraps.

Jantago, if this is your meaning of the word embellishemt, then I don't think you are on the same page as most of the other people currently discussing the embellishment concept on this thread. Here is your reply on a recent post from someone about embellishments.

"There are many who are happy to teach them to those who want to pay for them. They are really unnecessary for the social floor. With a steady diet of tango for exhibition, it is no surprise that so many want to consume it. Once you see that most dancers in BsAs milongas dance all night without one leg wrap, gancho or volcada."

My understanding of what people on this thread are discussing as embrellishment would be something like toe taps, small lapiz, perhaps hooking your own foot in between an ocho or something, or perhaps "play" by the follow at a parada. There is nothing unsocial about that. My own teachers from BsAs (who teach and dance soical tango) use these. As long as the feet are on the floor, they are fine with it.

IMO, and I imagine most of the other people here, ganchos and leg wraps are movement led by the leader; they are not optional adornments by the follower.

 

[ant]

My understanding of an active follower is one that wants to bring her interpretation of the music into the partnership.

At one level she may feel that the leader requires some help with finding the best rhythm in the music they are dancing to.

At another it may mean she dances to the rhythm of one instrument and the leader to another and both are skilled enough to accomodate each other.

Or she may feel a certain mood in the music that she feels the leader has not found.

There are many reasons which have nothing to do with Show Tango or looking flash to the rest of the floor.

and generally takes the form of a slight stiffening of the followers body as an invitation to allow her to bring these things in. A sensitive leader will feel this and he can choose whether to accept or reject this invitation, just as the follower does when the leader invites her into a move.

I understand that some followers just want to surrender to the embrace and that is fine but some followers want to bring their musical ear to the partnership and if done in a way that allows the leader to accommdate this and he wants to I think that is fine to.

 

[dchester]

My understanding of an active follower is one that wants to bring her interpretation of the music into the partnership.

At one level she may feel that the leader requires some help with finding the best rhythm in the music they are dancing to.

At another it may mean she dances to the rhythm of one instrument and the leader to another and both are skilled enough to accomodate each other.

Or she may feel a certain mood in the music that she feels the leader has not found.

There are many reasons which have nothing to do with Show Tango or looking flash to the rest of the floor.

This is my understanding of it as well.

and generally takes the form of a slight stiffening of the followers body as an invitation to allow her to bring these things in. A sensitive leader will feel this and he can choose whether to accept or reject this invitation, just as the follower does when the leader invites her into a move.

I understand that some followers just want to surrender to the embrace and that is fine but some followers want to bring their musical ear to the partnership and if done in a way that allows the leader to accommdate this and he wants to I think that is fine to.

It's been my experience that when followers do this, it's more than an "invitation". Most are not at all happy if you do not comply.

However, the very few who are actually good at it, usually do give you an option. Coincidentally, those same very few are the ones who propose things that actually are good. I once danced a tanda with a person who was so good at it, that basically, I just wanted to see what she was going to come up with next.

 

[bastet]

I can't say what other people have been taught as "active following" but I can give you my own experience of it.

My lessons on active following were this: First I had to lead my leader in walking forwards. I was walking backwards, in the followers regular position and had to make him want to walk forwards.

Then I had to learn to lead him to lead me to do ochos. I had to not only make my own pivot but also use my body to make his body make the appropriate weight shifts and torso rotations to accompany my pivot.

Then I had to do the same thing with sacadas. That was a booger.

Then I had to go back and put it all together such that at some point he was took over the lead again, but yet I was still making the same amount of intent and effort in my own body when he led the movements. In other words- teaching the follower to be responsive, have energy and intent and not be a dead weight, more or less, regardless of embrace style.

The other things y'all are talking about to me seem a little more like #3 in Anda's list he gave previously and Zoopsia was also taklking about. That's the gray area, and a lot of leaders don't appreciate "suggestions" like this so you have to be careful who you make these nonverbal "suggestions" of changes in timing and so forth when you are dancing.

Personally, I don't think that surrendering to the embrace negates being able to actively follow, since I consider active following a different beast from making changes in rhythm or timing or dynamic to a leader.

 

[ant]

Personally, I don't think that surrendering to the embrace negates being able to actively follow, since I consider active following a different beast from making changes in rhythm or timing or dynamic to a leader.

Can you give some ideas as to what you consider to be active following within the context of surrendering to the embrace?

 

[dchester]

Personally, I don't think that surrendering to the embrace negates being able to actively follow, since I consider active following a different beast from making changes in rhythm or timing or dynamic to a leader.

The way that you define it, I guess I would agree. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but I didn't realize there were such different meanings of the term.

 

[AndaBien]

...Then I had to go back and put it all together such that at some point he was took over the lead again, but yet I was still making the same amount of intent and effort in my own body when he led the movements. In other words- teaching the follower to be responsive, have energy and intent and not be a dead weight, more or less, regardless of embrace style...

I was a bit concerned about where the above description was going, until I realized it was a teaching methodology. I agree.

I imagine a conversation where one party talks and the other only listens. Boring. A conversation where both parties were responsive to each other would be interesting, or whatever adjective. A conversation where one party was always changing the subject would be exasperating.

In an open embrace I might enjoy allowing my partner more freedom to improvise, or suggest, as previously mentioned. But, I want to dance CE, and I want to make my dance coincide with the music. I almost always have a choreographic concept going on in my mind, and I would not want my partner interfering with it very much at all. I enjoy an active partner, and I think that can be done, should be, without interfering with the dance I am trying to give to my partner.

There doesn't need to be a reason for followers to do adornments, any more than they need a reason to dance tango: they simply want to. I've noticed that some people (myself) enjoying dancing with their feet, and other people don't seem to know that their feet are there, as potential contributirs to the dance. And that's fine.

 

[Mario7]

My understanding of an active follower is one that wants to bring her interpretation of the music into the partnership.
..At one level she may feel that the leader requires some help with finding the best rhythm in the music they are dancing to...
..Or she may feel a certain mood in the music that she feels the leader has not found.
..There are many reasons which have nothing to do with Show Tango or looking flash to the rest of the floor..

This sounds to me like plain competition...the follower knows how to lead better than the leader...this may or may not have to do with performance tango but it does open a whole 'nother can of worms in my opinion.. I have only felt this 'stiffening' and pull from women who were dance 'instructors'. I thanked them and moved on at the end of the song.:cheers:

 

[ant]

.. I have only felt this 'stiffening' and pull from women who were dance 'instructors'. I thanked them and moved on at the end of the song.:cheers:

It sounds like they gave you the option and you decided not to take it. I think thats fair enough.

This sounds to me like plain competition...the follower knows how to lead better than the leader

This is sometimes true and if it allows that leader to learn through the ears of the follower what is wrong with that?

On other occassions both the leader and the follower can relish the challange of following two different rhythms but neither are in competition.

 

[bastet]

Can you give some ideas as to what you consider to be active following within the context of surrendering to the embrace?

"Surrender to the embrace" to me is a loaded term and is going to be very subjective for a definition.

In my view, in a good embrace, we surrender to each other. We feel a part of each other.

At a recent festival I danced with a apilado dancer from out of town. His embrace was warm and inviting. I wanted to be invited. We felt like we had one single arm wrapping around us, completely encircled and we both worked together to keep that feeling going. It was really lovely. That's what I would consider "surrendering" and letting the embrace take the place of importance in the dance.

People seem to be reading the word surrender and automatically equate it with "auotomaton" for the follower, "dead weight", wanting to be moved and pushed around every step of the way. That is how I am reading people's explanation of what they think "surrender" means. And to me, it's more a mental thing, and my ability to do this thing that I think of as trying to become one with them very dependent on the leader's attitude and personality. Snotty, arrogant, overbearing leader? Not going to get "surrender" from me.

Jantango's definition of surrender might be entirely different from mine, as yours also might be. And mine may differ yet again from my friends definition.

Active following in the context of embrace, for me- just as I said- in the end the end result of the lessons I had, it was giving back the same energy you feel given, not being expected to be moved around like a cart horse.

Example- I see leaders dance with lots of energy and the followers not responding with the same. End result is the lead looks like he's dragging the follow around on the floor. One or the other would have needed to adapt.

Reverse example (and probably why female instructors tend to take the heat for this) - follow supplies much more energy than she is being given, end result is backleading because the follow in question didn't adapt back downwards from the energy they are probably used to in leads. Most leads don't appreciate this.

I won't give more than what I feel I am being given. I will be as responsive as I feel the lead is leading me. if he leads with a lot of energy, I respond the best i can to give that back. If he doesn't dance with much energy, I try to be receptive and responsive, but he shouldn't expect me to do back flips with non-existent leads.

 

[dchester]

"Surrender to the embrace" to me is a loaded term and is going to be very subjective for a definition.

. . .

People seem to be reading the word surrender and automatically equate it with "auotomaton" for the follower, "dead weight", wanting to be moved and pushed around every step of the way. That is how I am reading people's explanation of what they think "surrender" means.

To me, surrender means the follower is going along (or agreeing) with what the leader decides for the steps and the rhythm. She is not trying to change what he leads. Embellishments that don't interference with the steps or the rhythm, are absolutely fine.

This dead weight thing, I suppose can only be done if the follower surrenders, but surrendering doesn't require this (thus I see it as a different entity or attribute).

 

[AndaBien]

...People seem to be reading the word surrender and automatically equate it with "auotomaton" for the follower, "dead weight", wanting to be moved and pushed around every step of the way. ...

I like the idea that women surrender because they actively choose to, for the duration of the dance. Or, that they will permit the leader to lead them, for as long as they enjoy it. I wouldn't want them to be subservient.

...I won't give more than what I feel I am being given. I will be as responsive as I feel the lead is leading me. if he leads with a lot of energy, I respond the best i can to give that back. If he doesn't dance with much energy, I try to be receptive and responsive, but he shouldn't expect me to do back flips with non-existent leads.

An important point. Sometimes I dance strongly, and I want my partner to give back strength. Other times I feel like dancing gently, softly, maybe even hesitantly, because it's my expression of the music. When I do that I want my partner to feel that and dance similarly. I consider that to be active.