close or open embrace

[chanchan]

Given enough proficiency (ie, lots and lots of practice) you will be able to know where your partner has the weight. Sure a beginner will suck at it but then again, a beginner will suck at everything he does, hence, the definition. Having or not a shared axis, it will still be hard for a beginner to realize where the weight is, unless the lady is doing a mega apilado (which, will mean her dancing life won't go far).

I don't know what bad habits you are concerned about. Again, how long have you been dancing to make such claims? The reason I ask is that it seems you're making a big fuss about nothing. People learn by trying and failing. I have yet to know any great dancer that learned it overnight. Bad habits come from lack of discipline and bad teachers, not from lack of normal lack of sensitivity of body awareness beginner's have.

I have been dancing for four years, and since I was a beginner I noticed I never had that kind of problem when dancing apilado, but when dancing in axis i first needed to adquire enough proficiency before being able to know where my partern has the weight, and still I have problems if she is too light. So I say that it is more difficult, I repeat: not impossible, just more difficult.
We are talking about difficulty, not superiority of a style over another.

 

[dchester]

No.

In this country, whenever someone says "private class", that means a 1-to-1 session. That's the way everyone always interprets the phrase in my experience, in all dance forms.

Feel free to use your own interpretation of that phrase, but be aware you're in disagreement with the way that the rest of the UK uses it.

His terminology also is in disagreement with the way most of the US uses it.

 

[Dave Bailey]

Just to clarify--when you talk about a follower being "heavy" versus "light," I assume you are talking about the strength of the connection, not a "heavy follower" in the sense of being unresponsive and not carrying her own weight such that you end up with a sore back/neck/shoulder/arms/whatever. Correct?

Yes

 

[Dave Bailey]

His terminology also is in disagreement with the way most of the US uses it.

Well I can only speak with authority about the use of terminology in my country.

 

[chrisjj]

> In this country, whenever someone says "private class", that means a
> 1-to-1 session.

This thread has shown you that's untrue.

> That's the way everyone always interprets the phrase in my experience

I don't doubt it. But to many outside your experience, class means this

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/class .

To you, class clearly means the same as lesson. Fine - that USA-originating usage is certainly spreading - but I suggest denying the predominant usage does not help.

 

[Peaches]

Yes

Sounds like my kind of leader! I love dancing with a guy who will accept "a lot of connection" from my end, and who will match it. Love love love it. I don't care for it when guys are feather light, or who will back off when I try to establish a firm/"heavy" connection. (I will say, though, that learning to have that strong connection took me a good bit of time. I was so wary of being heavy, as in unresponsive or needing to be forced into moving, or of leaning that I tended to back off. It took me a while to realize that it was completely possible to have a strong/"heavy" connection and still move on my own, with power.)

Would you care to dance?

 

[Dave Bailey]

> In this country, whenever someone says "private class", that means a
> 1-to-1 session.

This thread has shown you that's untrue.

Apart from you, can you point to someone else who thinks that a private class is not a 1-2-1 class?

To you, class clearly means the same as lesson.

Yes, the terms are pretty much interchangeable for purposes of communications. But then I've only been involved in professional communications for a living for 20 years, so I'm no expert.

Oh wait. I am an expert.

Fine - that USA-originating usage is certainly spreading - but I suggest denying the predominant usage does not help.

I suggest you prove your assertion that there's a verifiable difference between the way people use "class" and "lesson" in everyday usage.

Oh wait. You can't.

 

[chrisjj]

> His terminology also is in disagreement with the way most of the US uses it.

So if in US a couple says "We're having a private class with teacher X", what does it mean??

I guess you can't be saying like David that it's a one-to-one session...

 

[Dave Bailey]

Sounds like my kind of leader! I love dancing with a guy who will accept "a lot of connection" from my end, and who will match it. Love love love it. I don't care for it when guys are feather light, or who will back off when I try to establish a firm/"heavy" connection.

I'll admit it took me a while to realise that the energy offered in the connection must be matched (by both partners). If it's not, one of us may fall over

(I will say, though, that learning to have that strong connection took me a good bit of time. I was so wary of being heavy, as in unresponsive or needing to be forced into moving, or of leaning that I tended to back off. It took me a while to realize that it was completely possible to have a strong/"heavy" connection and still move on my own, with power.)

Yeah - it seems to be a common problem with followers who've had a lot of experience in other dance forms. They tend to zoom off at the slightest touch, which loses the connection.

Would you care to dance?

I'm not going over to America, it's full of foreigners.

 

[Peaches]

I'm not going over to America, it's full of foreigners.

Uh, excuse me, it's pronounced "furr'nurs."

 

[bordertangoman]

I'll admit it took me a while to realise that the energy offered in the connection must be matched (by both partners). If it's not, one of us may fall over


Yeah - it seems to be a common problem with followers who've had a lot of experience in other dance forms. They tend to zoom off at the slightest touch, which loses the connection.


I'm not going over to America, it's full of foreigners.

worse than that its full of Americans, too.

 

[chrisjj]

> I suggest you prove your assertion that there's a verifiable difference
> between the way people use "class" and "lesson" in everyday usage.

One involved in professional communications for so long should know the impossibility and futility of such proofs.

For demonstration I'd rather rely on your common sense, so I'll ask you the same question as I asked dchester.

You're saying

In this country, whenever someone says "private class", that means a 1-to-1 session

but if a couple told you "We're having a private class with teacher X", what does it mean?

 

[Zoopsia59]

Apart from you, can you point to someone else who thinks that a private class is not a 1-2-1 class?
.

I'm probably going to regret this, and frankly, I think this conversation has gone beyond silly, so I'm not sure why I'm taking the bait... I must be hungry.

But to me a Private Class means an agreed upon time slot of instruction arranged specifically with a teacher for any given number of people that is not open to public registration or attendanceand in which no one other than those who made the prior arrangements can participate or "drop in".

The number of people is irrelevant, but is more than one. It is most likely small, but can be quite large, as in the case where my partner and i taught a class at a large private birthday party as a treat for the guests from the hosts. It was a "private class" in every sense of the term.

To me a on-on-one is a "lesson". I have had private instruction in a variety of disciplines from music, to dance, to skating, to help with scholastics. I never refered to them as a "class" because in my mind, "the class" refers as much to the people in it as it does to the instruction. It implies more than one person or in the case of dancing, one couple who are there together. One person is not a "class". You can however call something a "class" that only one person attends if the intention was to have more. Holding a class and having only one person show up doesn't mean it wasn't supposed to be a class.

And just as "class" refers to the students as well as the event, "the lesson" also refers to the material as well as the event.

So really, they're all just words, and as long as we clear up miscommunications that arise form the rather frustrating lack of consensus in languages as common as English, does it really F'*#&@*) matter who is "right"?

So class, today's lesson is: Can't we all just get along?

 

[dchester]

I'll admit it took me a while to realise that the energy offered in the connection must be matched (by both partners). If it's not, one of us may fall over


Yeah - it seems to be a common problem with followers who've had a lot of experience in other dance forms. They tend to zoom off at the slightest touch, which loses the connection.

We were all having a delightful conversation on the difference between a class and a lesson, along with what a Private means (and other fascinating semantics), and then you want to hijack the thread and talk about Tango.

Isn't there a tango forum some place, where you could have those discussions?

 

[AndaBien]

We were all having a delightful conversation on the difference between a class and a lesson, along with what a Private means (and other fascinating semantics), and then you want to hijack the thread and talk about Tango.

Isn't there a tango forum some place, where you could have those discussions?

Yes, please. I'm discussing topics here because I want to learn more about tango, not because I want to prove a semantic point. I belong to no linquistic forums and I'm not interested.