Ballroom style

Will you list what the BOTH dance styles are, that you are referring to?

Oh, loosely? BT and AT.

[But perhaps a relevant wider net would be Ballroom (and its subsets Modern and Latin--and their parallels in American Style), AT and its substyles (salon, fantasia, canyengue, nuevo, etc).
Only because the opinions seem to pertain to those subsets too...]





m
 
...Was wondering what kind of experience posters on this thread have in BOTH dance styles?
...

I danced many styles of dance before touching upon ballroom dance. I've taken ballroom lessons from various teachers before concluding that I did not enjoy the standardization/regimentation involved.

I've taken AT lessons from many and varied teachers for over 15 years and I enjoy the freedom to discover and express my own personal dance.
 
*shrug*

Yes, it's better than DWtS or SYTYCD. But to me it still looks like latin dancers playing with AT moves. That's fine, as long as they are having fun with their performance and the audience enjoys it. But I don't have to like it. ;)
THIS!

nucat said:
While it's a nicely executed show dance, I'd complain about that too if somebody called it tango.
And THIS!

For what it is, OK, fine. Not my cup of tea, but whatever. But what it is not, is AT.

As for my background--dabbled in social American style, attempted slightly-more-serious dabbling in Standard. Have studied AT with some seriousness for several years, although have stopped for the last two years for financial reasons. Primarily salon, apilado and nuevo, although have dabbled with canyengue (sp?). Never got into fantasia. I certainly know enough to recognize when AT technique is being used in an AT showdance and when it isn't--regardless of music, or shoes, or improvisation, or choreo, or anything else. I know enough to recognize the misconceptions flying around in each direction--both about ballroom (in whatever variety), and AT.
 
mini hijack...

Was wondering what kind of experience posters on this thread have in BOTH dance styles?

I've been watching this thread from the sidelines (popcorn optional), and it struck me that there seem to be some who are knowledgeable about one or other style, completely ill-informed of the other, and yet quite vociferous in their misinterpretation of the style they don't know about.

I don't mean any affront to posters of either style or this forum, just honestly curious, really.

(I'd hate for some readers who might not be as discerning as other posters to take ill-informed opinion as gospel truth and perpetuate them).

Sorry for the interruption...


m


@dchester- I'm assuming he meant ballroom and AT.

Maximus- I think it's a perfectly valid question related to the discussion. I danced social and competitive ballroom (American style) for over a decade and dabbled a little in Standard/Latin. I've danced AT only for the last 6 years so I believe I am at least able to see the differences and note what they are having had technical training on both sides of the fence.

I guess what kind of bothers me in this discussion was that at some point someone mentioned that if an AT couple attempted a ballroom showdance, performed with AT technique and styling, that it wouldn't be taken very well by people knowledgeable in ballroom. Yet this is exactly the same thing. The main issue I see is that most of the people posting here in the AT forum don't have years of competition under their belt, because that's not how AT works. So even though a dancer has undertaken serious training in AT WILL at some point be able to look at a video clip (regardless of how good the dancing is) and tell if solid AT technique is being used (because I can surely see when it is or isn't) that doesn't mean they teach and/or compete or have some other credential for themselves and it seems to me that's one possible reason perhaps they get called snobs or elitist as opposed to knowledgeable in their own arena?
 
when I have taken a.t. lessons I was instructed on these things too, including the angle of my body and neck and head as I lean in, the wrap of my left arm for the embrace.

I think the difference in these things in ballroom vs AT, is that in ballroom, there is agreement on what is correct, and in AT there is agreement on nothing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
a jillion other personal styles, (although that number drops quite a bit, if "sucks" is not counted as a style).

icon10.gif

Or as a well known teacher once said "Bad technique is not a 'style' "
 
What actually is AT?

[yt]GADaAmhZ8JY[/yt]

In my opinion, the perfect style. And they're just kids

compare youtube.com/watch?v=Zf6J-Hg_YWo
[YT]Zf6J-Hg_YWo[/YT]

These two are kids, too. It looks more argentinian, may be they´ve got better teachers, grimly determined parents, and a lot of role models all around them, they dance right from their birth, but is it TA? But what actually is TA then? A source of income, an universal art form, a folk dance, an elder style for former salseros, a dance for broken hearted people..
.
 
I think the difference in these things in ballroom vs AT, is that in ballroom, there is agreement on what is correct, and in AT there is agreement on nothing.

I WISH !!.. we have disagreement on many matters. This is true in all genres . The theoretical side of dance is always up for debate .

And in Salsa, its the most disfunctional of all ..( and yes, I dance and teach all 3 styles of Tango and several styles in Salsa ) .
 
....was wondering what kind of experience posters on this thread have in BOTH dance styles?
A good many, from what I know of them, have little or no experience of the BR world. They are not shy about sharing strong views (and they are usually not complimentary of the style or its practitioners). They tend to have strong views about every separate style of tango too, and seemingly, would wish to be considered knowledgeable about all of them. Hmm...

Then there are those who were once BR dancers, but who have now ‘seen the light’. Like most converts, too many of them exhibit rather more zeal than discernment in their views, and it is not hard to guess that they were probably never very good BR dancers, who didn’t progress much beyond the stage of novices, and never discovered how rewarding and endlessly challenging BR dancing can be. Many of this group have danced AT for many years, and for all I know, they may be very good at it.

For me, I claim no particular knowledge or experience of AT: I am a novice of around two years, but I take my tango seriously, and wish to improve. I teach BR full time, and therefore have not left one world for the other, but have feet firmly planted in both worlds. It is a rather odd and lonely place to be!

I think the difference in these things in ballroom vs AT, is that in ballroom, there is agreement on what is correct, and in AT there is agreement on nothing.
Dead right! I would wish that it were otherwise, but cannot see how it is going to happen.

But what actually is TA then? A source of income, an universal art form, a folk dance, an elder style for former salseros, a dance for broken hearted people...
All of those, by degrees, but principally, perhaps, a topic for another discussion?
 
compare youtube.com/watch?v=Zf6J-Hg_YWo
[yt]Zf6J-Hg_YWo[/yt]

These two are kids, too. It looks more argentinian, may be they´ve got better teachers, grimly determined parents, and a lot of role models all around them, they dance right from their birth, but is it TA?

It has 10x more AT than the dancing of the young couple we started with. I was quite enjoying it (once I had turned the sound off): but a shame she (nearly) fell out of that calesita. Principally, though, it reminded me why I don't like Gotan. As soon as the children start to count, I reach for a sick bag. Given the incessant driving rhythm of almost everything Gotan produces, they could have danced more rhythmically. Perhaps they should practise to D'Arienzo. I wouldn't have to turn off the sound, then, either. ;)
 
I WISH !!.. we have disagreement on many matters. This is true in all genres . The theoretical side of dance is always up for debate .

And in Salsa, its the most disfunctional of all ..( and yes, I dance and teach all 3 styles of Tango and several styles in Salsa ) .

The difference, perhaps, is that in the BR world, the disagreements are mostly in private between professionals (the amateurs are all experts, of course, and they bicker amongst themselves constantly in every dance genre). As far as fundamentals are concerned though, the technical requirements of BR are standardised and there is very wide agreement over what is correct. There is lots of room, in more advanced level work, for differences of emphasis and approach, but the technical development of the dance tends to be determined by top professional couples pushing the limits, which trickles down into revisions to the technique about 10 years later.

I hesitate to ask, but we have BT and AT - what is the third of which you write?
 
Ballroom and Argentine Tango

A good many, from what I know of them, have little or no experience of the BR world. They are not shy about sharing strong views (and they are usually not complimentary of the style or its practitioners). They tend to have strong views about every separate style of tango too, and seemingly, would wish to be considered knowledgeable about all of them. Hmm...

Then there are those who were once BR dancers, but who have now ‘seen the light’. Like most converts, too many of them exhibit rather more zeal than discernment in their views, and it is not hard to guess that they were probably never very good BR dancers, who didn’t progress much beyond the stage of novices, and never discovered how rewarding and endlessly challenging BR dancing can be. Many of this group have danced AT for many years, and for all I know, they may be very good at it.
For someone who seems able to take offence very easily,
this is pretty scathing about people you don't know.

I actually quite liked ballroom - after all I learned and danced it socially
for quite a few years. I was choosy, not liking Paso or Ballroom Tango
and the same in Latin, choosing not to Ballroom Jive (preferred the swing
dances) nor Samba. It didn't matter because I was only interested in
dancing socially but the social ballroom dance scene isn't great.

But AT is different in so many ways. Its lack of "rules" is advantageous
to its promoters, possibly disconcerting and confusing to newcomers.
My AT experience started with a form of fantasia taught by a teacher
intent on choreographing and performing shows using his students
though his website was all about lead and follow social tango.

Then by travelling three times as far in the other direction I learned
about the embrace, a so-called dynamic embrace and social tango.
Based on the knowledge gained and a resultant ability to dance in all
the various "holds", concentrating on tango within the embrace was
the key to improvement, and abandoning ballroom for the moment.

On that basis Ballroom frame and the Tango embrace are very different.


Edit for clarification as a result of UKDancer's comment later:

The basis meant is the knowledge of the various dance styles and
the comparison is between the ballroom dances of Waltz, Foxtrot etc
(excluding the Latin open hold pattern dances of Cha Cha and Rumba)
and the close embrace of Milonguero/Apilado form of Salon Tango.

Once you start considering show style tango, nuevo and the now named
VU style of Salon then such comparisons are not practicable as they
all require some sort of frame (meaning arm tone) and varying holds.

 

Dance Ads

Advertise on Dance Forums Reach dancers, teachers, studios, event organizers, and dance-friendly brands. View ad options
Back
Top