Close embrace

[Gssh]

Now I understand why people don't do the way I expect them to do (see that like a personal preference). It's because they don't see the differences.

Ok. So now you have realized that nobody here (and at the milongas you have danced at) sees the difference you feel so strongly about.
Out of curiosity where are you going to go from here? I don't know how much time and effort you have invested in this (i would guess that you come from a ballroom background and have about 6 months experience in AT - some of the reactions in this thread are a consequence that anybody here who is active in his local tango scene has had a very similar conversation dozends of times), but this is in a way a crossroads - you can either decide to learn more about what differences are perceived in the tango world and what difference are not perceived (which is actually a nice way to think about figuring out what the essentials of any activity are - a dancer hears a different song than a musician, and what a percussionist hears is different from what a lead guitar player hears), or you can continue to suffer in an environment where the aspects of the dance that are important to you are not important to anybody else.
Most tango dancers have experienced this kind of culture shock - one of the reasons the tango community is fragmented is that while we are usually able to dance and enjoy dancing in a community that has a slightly different perspective on what tango it about, it is always an adventure when you visit a city or a milonga for the first time, and watch the dancefloor, and try to get a feel for the local style - open or close, offset or straight, diagonal or parallel, more circular, more linear, shared weight or not, and tons of more little, almost subliminal things. Some people retract into their own communities, some dance the same thing everywhere, some figure out a range within which they are moving stylistically. As somebody who likes sharing weight i understand that it sometimes aggravating to be somewhere where nobody shares your values (even when i am on danceforums people like opendoor keep telling me that i am "wrong" ), but i think it is also a great opportunity to learn to appreciate and understand what others do,
I hope you are going to find the tango that makes you happy. Gssh

 

[JohnEm]

Can't wait to see the responses to THIS post!

I'm not even going to bother.

Don't take the bait folks!

I didn't, bet you wish you hadn't either!
Still it's an entertaining read - sort of.

And of course there are diagonal movements
required by the leader in backward travelling ochos.
All of this no diagonal stuff reminds me yet again
of a teacher who insisted recently that the ladies
squared off the open giro as he liked to see neat
and tidy corners not a circular movement around the guy.
It was all about appearance ignoring the fact that
people are circular, some more circular than others.

Squareness is irrelevant in the embrace.
Tango, as we know socially, is not about appearance,
it's about senses, connection and intuitive movement.

As I understand them, milonguero ochos don't require dissociation. That seems to be the point of them, in fact, and it's the main difference between them and normal ochos.

Agreed but they can include pivots and disassociation depending
on the abilities of both partners but they don't have to.
The ones you refer to I think are those that are effectively
repeating back or front crosses almost or completely on the spot.

 

[Zoopsia59]

I didn't, bet you wish you hadn't either!

haha.. as I said.. so much for THAT resolve!

a teacher who insisted recently that the ladies
squared off the open giro as he liked to see neat
and tidy corners not a circular movement around the guy.

Ah yes.. the "chair" exercise. (practice your giro going around the 4 sides of a chair) Never mind that there's no requirement to get a full 360* around in a single 4 step sequence and that some leaders can't be gotten around that tightly by some followers. (leg lengths, size of the leader, etc)

In fact, I don't think I've EVER danced with a leader who I could have gotten 360* around in a single side,back,side,front sequence and I'm not particularly short.

The one thing the chair exercise is useful for is to illustrate that the steps should be as close to the same length as possible and should also be the same distance from the central point of the rotation (ie: usually, the leader) However, there are far better ways to instill these concepts than expecting a follower to go around the leader as though he is a 4 sided chair. (and really... it's not the end of the world if the steps aren't the same length)

 

[Peaches]

haha.. as I said.. so much for THAT resolve!



Ah yes.. the "chair" exercise. (practice your giro going around the 4 sides of a chair) Never mind that there's no requirement to get a full 360* around in a single 4 step sequence and that some leaders can't be gotten around that tightly by some followers. (leg lengths, size of the leader, etc)

In fact, I don't think I've EVER danced with a leader who I could have gotten 360* around in a single side,back,side,front sequence and I'm not particularly short.

The one thing the chair exercise is useful for is to illustrate that the steps should be as close to the same length as possible and should also be the same distance from the central point of the rotation (ie: usually, the leader) However, there are far better ways to instill these concepts than expecting a follower to go around the leader as though he is a 4 sided chair. (and really... it's not the end of the world if the steps aren't the same length)

Yes, that exercise is kind of useless in some respects, in that (like you said) no one ever expects to go the full 360 in one go and it's never really square like that. But, as you also said, it can be useful for other reasons. Steps the same length, maintaining distance from that central point. But the other thing I have found it to be extremely good for is to really focus on control of my own axis and balance, to really separate the step from the pivot, to work on really collecting (especially in the back step), to work on really pushing from one step to another instead of falling into it.

Like pretty much all exercises, they aren't meant to be taken straight from there onto the dance floor. They're meant to illustrate and drill one (or several) technique(s).

 

[Dave Bailey]

Re: Milonguero ochos:

Agreed but they can include pivots and disassociation depending on the abilities of both partners but they don't have to.
The ones you refer to I think are those that are effectively
repeating back or front crosses almost or completely on the spot.

Yes - it did occur to me that you can create hybrids between Milonguero ochos and normal ochos. But I've not mastered Milonguero ochos yet, so I'm not even going to try those - hybrids typically require you to be able to do both original forms well.

 

[jantango]

Milonguero ochos

Re: Milonguero ochos:

Yes - it did occur to me that you can create hybrids between Milonguero ochos and normal ochos. But I've not mastered Milonguero ochos yet, so I'm not even going to try those - hybrids typically require you to be able to do both original forms well.

Are you referring to leading or dancing milonguero ochos?

The man leads them, the woman dances them. Nothing could be more simple. He doesn't have to do anything with his feet. The man merely moves his body to lead the woman.

If a couple is dancing tango in an embrace, the upper torsos stay together throughout the dance and there is no separation. The simpliest way I can explain it is the woman does the ocho without turning her hips or pivoting her feet.

There is so much less effort required in tango milonguero than a separated style. If only more men would overcome their shyness about holding women close, they might find that they really like it.

How can you tell if a couple is dancing tango milonguero?
The man is doing very little while shows off his partner. That is the foundation of tango for the milongueros of BsAs: the man dances for his partner.

 

[Angel HI]

In fact, I don't think I've EVER danced with a leader who I could have gotten 360* around in a single side,back,side,front sequence and I'm not particularly short.

Yes, that exercise is kind of useless in some respects, in that (like you said) no one ever expects to go the full 360 in one go and it's never really square like that).

Have been reading this for a while just not wanting to get into moot contrivance. However, now, we might discuss something of note.

I never liked this exercise either, but it did come from the fact that, at one time (not too terribly long past), this giro was taught in a squared-like fashion that resulted in a 360* rotation.

The simpliest way I can explain it is the woman does the ocho without turning her hips or pivoting her feet.

This I find a wee confusing also because I have always been taught, from way back in the early '80s, that the technique of 'ocho' really meant to simply swivel. This is to say to allow the movement of the giro to cause/create the movement of the feet rather than to make it a didactic placing. If/When this is done well, then Jan's next point is most accurate....

There is so much less effort required in tango....

 

[UKDancer]

... I have always been taught, from way back in the early '80s, that the technique of 'ocho' really meant to simply swivel.

Is this term in the vocabulary of tango after all?

 

[JohnEm]

I never liked this exercise either, but it did come from the fact that, at one time (not too terribly long past), this giro was taught in a squared-like fashion that resulted in a 360* rotation.

It still is taught this way by certain teachers, those probably of
the show school tendency. Certainly it seems to be more or less
the standard way of learning/practising open giros. Practising
grapevines around a broom handle is better for molinettes.

Before going on to your next point, my theory (because I think it's all it can be)
is that open giros did start with performance tango of some sort and
adopted for spacious "Golden Age" salon along possibly with open ochos.
Both I was taught are "owned" by the lady including the step timing
of the giro. "Her" ocho starts from the invitation by the man to move from
the collected position, she steps, collects and swivels 180deg, waits for
the next invitation or whatever may follow.

All the talk about the influence of show & school tango on salon isn't about
anything new. Style variations of any dance have always had cross influences.
What used to be important was the influence on and by the larger dancing community.
It is how tango evolved into what it became.

Today however the influences are different. The tango dancing community is smaller
and more fragmented. The standardisation of school teaching is now the major influence
and the resultant commercialism seems to pervade competitions which themselves
have become marketing tools. Today's dance direction is indeed the result of the age.

This I find a wee confusing also because I have always been taught, from way back in the early '80s, that the technique of 'ocho' really meant to simply swivel. This is to say to allow the movement of the giro to cause/create the movement of the feet rather than to make it a didactic placing.

I've read somewhere that the name ocho came about from practising in
the dirt and the foot pattern left in it vaguely looked like a figure 8. The
lady's feet do roughly trace an 8 pattern from back cross to back cross.

But there is no swivel (nor pivot!) and as jantango says the movement
comes from the man's lead. It requires (Oh No!) body tone and connection.

If/When this is done well, then Jan's next point is most accurate....

Ah, but you missed the caveat:

There is so much less effort required in tango milonguero than a separated style. If only more men would overcome their shyness about holding women close, they might find that they really like it.

I do like it - now! However it isn't just men who are shy.
Despite coming from other dances, initially I found chest to chest embrace
a shock and felt very awkward and so did many/most ladies. It takes time
and isn't naturally part of us - just look at the ballroom "I'm having nothing
to do with your chest" hold.

 

[UKDancer]

If only more men would overcome their shyness about holding women close, they might find that they really like it.

I have been told, very firmly, that the closeness of the embrace is the follower's decision, not the leaders. If that is true (is it?), then all a man can do is invite a follower into an embrace and wait and see how close feels comfortable for her.

At my stage of development, I'm not sure that a slightly open embrace doesn't actually make it easier to feel where my partner's weight is. To the extent that the arms are the antenae 'amplifying' the signal from the followers body, it gives me simple contact points to concentrate on, whereas fuller body contact generates too much information that I cannot (yet) tune into very well.

 

[Dave Bailey]

Are you referring to leading or dancing milonguero ochos?

Leading them, being a leader.

The man leads them, the woman dances them. Nothing could be more simple. He doesn't have to do anything with his feet. The man merely moves his body to lead the woman.

Well, yes. That's Tango, I believe. Unfortunately "simple" <> "easy", at least for me.

If a couple is dancing tango in an embrace, the upper torsos stay together throughout the dance and there is no separation. The simpliest way I can explain it is the woman does the ocho without turning her hips or pivoting her feet.

Yes, I think that's how I understand it also. But "understanding the concept" <> "being able to lead it well".

 

[JohnEm]

I have been told, very firmly, that the closeness of the embrace is the follower's decision, not the leaders. If that is true (is it?), then all a man can do is invite a follower into an embrace and wait and see how close feels comfortable for her.

As I've said earlier, the dance we're getting is the product of the modern age.
My teachers said otherwise, that we both have to willingly enter the embrace.
One of my friends, and a regular dance partner, says quite bluntly that
if you aren't willing to fully enter the embrace you shouldn't be doing tango.

Your teachers are trying to accommodate natural reticence in order to avoid
the consequences of the close embrace putting off pupils. The teacher should
be trying to find ways of acclimatising people to the embrace. At this point
jantango is liable to leap in with the counter view that it's the woman's role
to adjust to the man.

Someone has to lead in a partner dance and
that's the man's role from the very start.

At my stage of development, I'm not sure that a slightly open embrace doesn't actually make it easier to feel where my partner's weight is. To the extent that the arms are the antenae 'amplifying' the signal from the followers body, it gives me simple contact points to concentrate on, whereas fuller body contact generates too much information that I cannot (yet) tune into very well.

You're a ballroom dancer, arm leads are what you know
and what you're comfortable with. Your tango development needs to start
from changing the connection and ceasing using your arms as antennae.

I know there are teachers teaching toned arms and I don't dance with their
pupils. It comes from show dancing and/or ballroom influences. Good tango
teachers, even teaching an open style, teach a visual chest connection.
And you can practise with no arms involved at all.

 

[UKDancer]

Your teachers are trying to accommodate natural reticence in order to avoid the consequences of the close embrace putting off pupils. The teacher should be trying to find ways of acclimatising people to the embrace.

That's probably true. One class I attend regularly has the majority of its members attending as couples, and they won't rotate. There seems little point in the teacher driving them away by making them (the teacher has a living to earn, after all!), but it isn't much of an introduction to social dancing.

You're a ballroom dancer...

I would prefer to say that I'm a dancer who dances in a wide variety of styles. Ballroom has not been the focus of my personal development for some time.

... arm leads are what you know.

Good grief no! I spend much of my teaching time trying to get my pupils to stop using their arms in that way. It isn't good Ballroom style (never was and isn't ever going to be) and it's right off my agenda. We often practise with no hold at all and rely entirely on connection in the lower torso - not the same as tango, of course, but the principle is much closer than most ex-ballroom dancers would choose to acknowledge.

My reference to using arms in open embrace as 'antenae' comes 100% from the tango world, and I have also heard said by more than one tango teacher that the fixed stare at the leaders chest is a prop for beginners, and as soon as followers learn to stop doing it, the better. But then, anything anyone says in tango will be contradicted by someone else, so I'm learning not to take a lot of notice, except to try things for myself, and work out what works for me and those with whom I dance.

 

[UKDancer]

The teacher should be trying to find ways of acclimatising people to the embrace.

Any suggestions?

 

[JohnEm]

Good grief no! I spend much of my teaching time trying to get my pupils to stop using their arms in that way. It isn't good Ballroom style (never was and isn't ever going to be) and it's right off my agenda. We often practise with no hold at all and rely entirely on connection in the lower torso - not the same as tango, of course, but the principle is much closer than most ex-ballroom dancers would choose to acknowledge.

OK I think I understand, but maybe not. Here's my understanding then.

Ballroom has a frame and an arm and shoulder line that shouldn't be broken.
The lead is from the movement of the torso but it is nevertheless amplified
(your term I think) by the arms. Without the rigidity of the arms a whisk lead
probably wouldn't work and the change to promenade involves something
from the arms or hand. But there is no arm paddling as you might see
in Tango Nuevo.

I'll leave it there just as clarification as this is AT not ballroom.

My reference to using arms in open embrace as 'antenae' comes 100% from the tango world, and I have also heard said by more than one tango teacher that the fixed stare at the leaders chest is a prop for beginners, and as soon as followers learn to stop doing it, the better.

Don't know about a fixed stare but that visual connection augments the arms.
It's irrelevant if the men are taught arm leads rather than chest first and the
practising without arms makes the men really work on leading with the body.

But then, anything anyone says in tango will be contradicted by someone else, so I'm learning not to take a lot of notice, except to try things for myself, and work out what works for me and those with whom I dance.

How true. It is best in the long term to work it out for yourself.
It's your dance, not teacher's.