Changing the embrace..pleasing or not?
- Thread starter Mario7
- Start date
Subliminal
Well-Known Member
Are you trying to say that sharing weight is impossible if you are alone, and that this walk is someway different than natural walk of a single human?Certainly there is.
Here is simple exercise. Looking at the mirror, lean forward with your entire body. Don't reach the point when you lose balance, but make sure you lean uniformly, strung, from the ankles, as some people enjoy putting it.
OK, now try to take a step, forward or backward. Something not so pleasant happens, right?You lose most of your balance. This kind of lean is simply not compatible with the natural human walk.
In this case I agree, but it doesn't mean wrong...
bordertangoman
Well-Known Member
tango with titles..and change of embrace!
[yt]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VyIytLlm5Oo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VyIytLlm5Oo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/yt]
[yt]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VyIytLlm5Oo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VyIytLlm5Oo&hl=en_GB&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/yt]
borisvian13
Member
Yes, all my posts on the topic are based on the distinction between sharing weight at the torso's level and leaning with the whole body. If you don't get (or accept) this distinction, there is no way to understand what I'm saying.
And yes, there is always a shared (through the hold weight) in open embrace, it's not much usually but it's there. For some bizarre reason, for a lot of people shared weight means " a lot of shared weight".
Still, there is a purely geometric explanation why constant uniform lean from the ankles is incompatible with any decent human walk which I hope will be clear for everyone. It consists of the following picture:
"/\"
Explanation: These are the two legs of a human being in the middle of a step. While making a step the angle which your leg forms with the ground changes from obtuse to acute. To be even more explicit , in the symbol above the angle at the front leg is acute and the angle at the back leg is obtuse. Obviously that fact of life is not compatible with the idea that one leans forward from the ankles above uniformly. The only way to achieve something like that would be to try to step with knees bent at constant angle throughout the step , a rather ugly sight, which I hope no one is advocating
Now if you tell me that by a constant lean forward from the ankles you mean something else (something metaphorical perhaps ?) you'll have to tell me what precisely (in terms of mechanics and anatomy) you mean and then I could comment on that and even apologize for taking your statements too literally
...
Consider these facts:
when we step forward the leg bends at the knee,
the foot is also "hinged" at the ankle
and the pelvis rises and falls as we walk, too.
Although the "milongeuro walk" is rather "stiff legged", ther eis some beding at the knee.
When the real world shows that something is indeed possible, the model that predicts that it is impossible needs, at the very least, some refining.
(I remember someone arguing that recovering a population once it had dropped to a certain level was not possible, as shown by his/their model. This came after presentations by people who HAD in fact dome what his model said coulnd't be done. Sadly, the conference organizers weren't wise enough to see that the model had problems, and basically talked down anyone who argued with them.)
Have you run the numbers on how much lean is needed to "share" x amount of weight? Even with that information in hand, you still have to consider how much "unsupported" lean is possible. How do we add "toe strength" and leverage to this model? I think we would find that the "real" unsupported" angle is not that great, and could reasonably be made up by action in the knees and pelvis.
when we step forward the leg bends at the knee,
the foot is also "hinged" at the ankle
and the pelvis rises and falls as we walk, too.
Although the "milongeuro walk" is rather "stiff legged", ther eis some beding at the knee.
When the real world shows that something is indeed possible, the model that predicts that it is impossible needs, at the very least, some refining.
(I remember someone arguing that recovering a population once it had dropped to a certain level was not possible, as shown by his/their model. This came after presentations by people who HAD in fact dome what his model said coulnd't be done. Sadly, the conference organizers weren't wise enough to see that the model had problems, and basically talked down anyone who argued with them.)
Have you run the numbers on how much lean is needed to "share" x amount of weight? Even with that information in hand, you still have to consider how much "unsupported" lean is possible. How do we add "toe strength" and leverage to this model? I think we would find that the "real" unsupported" angle is not that great, and could reasonably be made up by action in the knees and pelvis.
Peaches
Well-Known Member
This distinction is not making any sense to me at all. Could you, please, explain further.
If you are talking about one individual maintaining a lean such as that and moving then, yes, I would imagine it to be quite difficult.
If, however, you're still thinking about the original exercise you proposed, whereby one person leans forward over the balls of their feet (but still able to stand up and support themselves), then you are still incorrect. This is entirely possible and done all the time.
If, as your diagram seems to suggest, you are talking about the style of dance generally referred to as "apilado," where both partners are sharing weight, and have a shared axis between them, and neither can stay upright without counter-pressure from their partner...well, again you are wrong. That is exactly what apilado is, and the diagram, if I had to make one, would be much like what you've shown. Again, it is entirely possible for two people, together, to walk like that.
Is something being lost in translation?
Mario7
Member
Hmmm, I have to agree with 'peaches':shock:..And even though I've only been dancing 2 1/2 yrs...my best, unforgettable dances were all those as described above...I can't understand why this configuration is so hated by many forum posters, but yes, I do live in a Hollywood movie and yes, they are the bad guys......(Where's the cowboy ikon when you need it?)
Lui
Active Member
Once on this forum, someone used the shape of the eifel tower to descripe the posture of close embrache. This has been the best metaphor I’ve encountered so far. This exactly describes what I think to have recogniesed by all the oldtimers. A lean from the ankels and than a backwards correction at the hips to keep the torso straight upward. This way the bodies have a big comfortable area of contact and no doward force is exerted – walking works like a charm. Everybody may try this, taking a small step back and than leaning against a wall. There is no better alternative.
Leaning with a rigid body from the ankles into an upside down “V” is desirable for some effects but is not a very comfortable position to maintain a whole night. Nevertheless, it is certainly possible to walk in this position, otherwise nobody would ever get out of a volcada.
Leaning only from the hips is a funny European misinterpretation – don’t know, maybe some Americans do it too – as it results in sticking out one’s behind. Further, bending over - even slightly - will result in an back ache when maintained over any longer period. Nevertheless, there is a marvelous appliance of this posture in this ingenious choreography:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-63pyLPVjk&feature=related
Leaning with a rigid body from the ankles into an upside down “V” is desirable for some effects but is not a very comfortable position to maintain a whole night. Nevertheless, it is certainly possible to walk in this position, otherwise nobody would ever get out of a volcada.
Leaning only from the hips is a funny European misinterpretation – don’t know, maybe some Americans do it too – as it results in sticking out one’s behind. Further, bending over - even slightly - will result in an back ache when maintained over any longer period. Nevertheless, there is a marvelous appliance of this posture in this ingenious choreography:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-63pyLPVjk&feature=related
Subliminal
Well-Known Member
I think specific configuration of the torsos depends a little on partner height and physical fitness too. I was taught not to lean back, but rather to bend at the ankles then lift up with my core until it feels like I am supporting my partner. I have no clue what it actually looks like, whether my torso is upright or forward. maybe I'll get someone to record me someday... or perhaps I'm better off not knowing. Heh.
maybe I'll get someone to record me someday... or perhaps I'm better off not knowing. Heh.
Mario7
Member
I think specific configuration of the torsos depends a little on partner height and physical fitness too. I was taught not to lean back, but rather to bend at the ankles then lift up with my core until it feels like I am supporting my partner. I have no clue what it actually looks like, whether my torso is upright or forward.
Are you a man or a woman? It would help to know. Maybe you could change your ikon to give us a hint?
Thanks for bringing this up.
Yes, Americans do it, too.
If you work with a teacher long enough, I'd say you should be corrected periodically.
(Before there was video there were mirrors in studios, too!)
Yes, you don't bend forward at the hips.
The knees are "softened" to allow the forward "lean" along wih the "bending" forward at the ankles.
The stick figure model is very much a simplification of the reality, really an abstract. Sometimes simple models can make a thing easier to understand, and sometimes they are taken too literally.
borisvian13
Member
Yes, there is. A lot. Especially considering that you haven't even bothered to read my post till the end and have directly proceeded with the standard vague mantras
If you read my post you'll see that the "/\" doesn't refer to to two people leaning against each other but to the legs of one person being in mid-stride.
