Contradictions in teaching “caminar”

[brunoalfirevic]

Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding the question or what is being proposed.

I'll try to explain myself better, although text is really not the best medium for that

When I say that all of these things are being led I mean that they happen according to the intent of the leader. When leader wants the follower to do a step, traspie or a pause - that is indeed what the follower does.

But how (for example) the in-place weight change is led in tango vs. how it's led in milonga is often different. In tango, the lead for that weight change is much more explicit than in a milonga. In tango, in the absence of clear input for the weight change, the follower will tend to remain on their established axis. In a milonga, follower will be more inclined to step on the beat unless there is a clear intention from the leader that she should not step.

This isn't really black or white and, in my experience, also depends on the tempo of a song. But it is something that I have noticed in many dancers across many communities. I also thinks it works pretty well.

 

[Gssh]

Yes, there are things in milonga (even in tango in certain cases), where one partner can remain more or less stationary and the other can move around them or play with rhythm. But I would like to see an example of this that is not simply an embellishment. I mentioned the case of enrosque, maybe even a calesita, but these are all led steps.

Hmm, if i walk double time straight forward and my partner walks single time do you consider this to be me embellishing the single time walk? Or simpler, if we both walk on different parts of the pulse would you describe this as us both embellishing the underlying single time walk using different embellishments (maybe even including using half time as a embellishment), but because the single time walk is still lead we are not fundamentally using a different rhythm? In that case i completely agree with you, of course we have to be on the same music, and navigation during the whole bar/phrase is lead, it is just that we embellish the single time walk differently. We might just be talking about semantics then - if we look at ladyleaders example:

I was doing H1---H3---H1---H3--- and so on
She could do H1-- H2H3---H1-H2H3---
She could do H1---H3-H4-H1---H3-H4- and so on
or we could do something else!


You would describe this as:
I am leading/ stepping H1...........H1........
I am embellishing my H1 .... H1 walk to be H1...H3....H1....H3
She is walking in synch with me on H1 ....H1, but embellishes as H1.....H2H3..H1....H2..H3

Correct? So yes, what i consider stepping on different rhythms in the music could equally well be described as leading a single time (or sometime half or quarter time) walk, and us both embellishing it different.

 

[latinjazz]

an active follower and a leader collaborating on keeping the couple moving to the music. 2) which structures tango as a dance were we take turns dancing is somewhat unappealing to me. This goes into questions of what active following is, if it even exists, if it desirable, and how to create more of it if it is desirable. We have been brainstorming about this on this board for years.....

And this goes into a higher level of dancing than mine...
Watching advanced couples dancing, it looks quite "democratic", so to say, but I cannot recognize what is lead and what isn't..
As a leader, what I know from Salsa is: When I dance with a follower with great dance technique but absolutely no active participation in the dance but "Following orders" - I get desperate waiting for the song to finish.
I tend to think that in Tango this is not so much the case, I see lots of follower activity (that looks immprovised and not lead) when I watch people dancing at Milongas...
But if you say there have been debates about this here probably better to leave the book closed... I'll look for those threads.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

Hmm, if i walk double time straight forward and my partner walks single time do you consider this to be me embellishing the single time walk? Or simpler, if we both walk on different parts of the pulse would you describe this as us both embellishing the underlying single time walk using different embellishments

I would say you are out of synch and need to get back into synch. I mean, if that's your thing, fine, but it's far different from an embellishment or toe tap or whatever by a follower in between steps. What is the H1, etc., supposed to refer to?

 

[ArbeeNYC]

I tend to think that in Tango this is not so much the case, I see lots of follower activity (that looks immprovised and not lead) when I watch people dancing at Milongas...
But if you say there have been debates about this here probably better to leave the book closed... I'll look for those threads.

Should be led. In workshops and classes, an experienced follower will do *nothing* without a clear lead. She'll simply stand there and wait for you to move. I don't know if I'm misunderstanding what's being proposed or am simply completely unfamiliar with the concept, but I'd like to see an example of how this works in practice. In the tango I know and love, there is a high degree of harmony between the two dancers. Doesn't mean they are doing the exact same thing, of course, but they are not each dancing their own separate dance!

 

[Gssh]

In the tango I know and love, there is a high degree of harmony between the two dancers. Doesn't mean they are doing the exact same thing, of course, but they are not each dancing their own separate dance!

I completely agree - thats why i am am afraid that we are talking at cross purposes. If we draw music analogies the first violin is not disharmonous, or plays a different song, or is out of synch because they play more notes than the second violin. (As long as they stay within the "pulse" of the orchestra/ the piece they are playing).


I think we are actually talking about two different things simultaneously - let me try to disentangle:

1) Can we be in synch if we don't step identically? In simple cases it is quite obvious that we can - e.g. in a calesita/giro one partner does not step at all, and the other one steps a lot. If we are pedantic all the "invisible" weightshifts of the leader are the leader stepping three times where the follower steps twice, e.g. the conventional entry to the ocho is Leader: sidestep to the left, tiny sidestep to the right, sidestep to the left while the follower does sidestep to the right, backstep to the right. (this is probably the most common example where fancy footwork of one partner is invisible/not synched by the other partner, and we still stay in harmony - but all invisble weightshifts are examples were the leaders and followers footwork is independent of each other)
Would you feel different about this concept if the double time accent of the follower is completely under the control of the leader? e.g. if i lead a cross, but don't stop when she crosses but do a complete walking step, which will make her do double time walk, cross, weightshift walk , while i just do a single step? Or, if i lead lopsided progressive ochos while half timing her walk, i.e.

Follower:	Leader
pivot	dissociate
small step / cross towards 3 o clock	step towards 11 o clock
pivot	un-dissociate (associate?) during the step
step towards 11 o clock	same step continues
pivot	dissociate
small step/ cross towars 3 o clock	step towards 11 o clock, small outside saccada if this time we are moving from the crossed to the parallel system,
pivot	associate during the step
step towards 11 o clock	same step continues

so i am walking half her speed?

2) Should the follower do things that are not lead?
I think this is a tricky question, because it this becomes very conditional.
First i think everybody is ok with followers doing embellishments like toe taps (if they are not changing the geometry and pulse of the couple - which requires some skill).
If we are ok with this embellishment then we should in theory also be ok with the follower doing 3 steps instead of one - they still arrive at the same point, on the same leg, and if they are the theoretically perfect follower with perfect technique the leader will not even notice this.

Now i would say that the same way the invisibility of the leaders weightshift is often more a suspension of disbelief by the follower than them really not noticing the leader did something as leaders we should also offer the followers the same courtesy, and accept some degree of visibility of their footwork.

And now we are getting into even trickier territory - if we accept 3 steps instead of one can we accept 2? this changes the geometry of the couple, puts us into the cross system, and all kinds of weirdness happens. But as a leader who navigates a chaotic ronda we are accustomed to weirdeness, and of course we can deal with this, but is it good for the dance?

And this goes to the heart why these are advanced follower skills - they require the follower to understand the geometry of the couple, the music, the geometry of the leader. My teacher used to tell my partner that as soon - and only - when she knew that i as the leader was comitted to a step she could do whatever she wanted. How to figure out if a leader is committed? first musicality - if the leaders dance has a understandable relationship with the music then musicality serves to telegraph the leaders intentions, and the follower can be with, or even ahead of them. If the leader is not musical the follower is always playing catch up, and of course can't do things that are not lead. My teacher used to call this being "trustworthy" as a leader.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

Would you feel different about this concept if the double time accent of the follower is completely under the control of the leader? e.g. if i lead a cross, but don't stop when she crosses but do a complete walking step, which will make her do double time walk, cross, weightshift walk , while i just do a single step? Or, if i lead lopsided progressive ochos while half timing her walk, i.e.

I think this type of movement is still being led, however. That is, the cross is being led but the partners are moving at different rates of speed (at least their feet are). However, they end up in their expected places at the end of the sequence. The lead has to know where the follower is and anticipates her being there so he can move on to something else. (By the way, the above is common but often forces the follower to "catch up" to the leader in exiting the cross.)

2) Should the follower do things that are not lead?
I think this is a tricky question, because it this becomes very conditional.
First i think everybody is ok with followers doing embellishments like toe taps (if they are not changing the geometry and pulse of the couple - which requires some skill).
If we are ok with this embellishment then we should in theory also be ok with the follower doing 3 steps instead of one - they still arrive at the same point, on the same leg, and if they are the theoretically perfect follower with perfect technique the leader will not even notice this.

Well, if they're able to do it, that's fine. But as you note, they still arrive at the same point, which is rather important. Most followers won't attempt that.

Now i would say that the same way the invisibility of the leaders weightshift is often more a suspension of disbelief by the follower than them really not noticing the leader did something as leaders we should also offer the followers the same courtesy, and accept some degree of visibility of their footwork.

I don't think it's a suspension of disbelief, it's simply a subtle weigh shift that doesn't cause the follower to move or even noticed it *as* as a weight shift.

And now we are getting into even trickier territory - if we accept 3 steps instead of one can we accept 2? this changes the geometry of the couple, puts us into the cross system, and all kinds of weirdness happens.

That would be something else, moving from system to system by the *follower* could lead to a lot of confusion. I don't see how that would work.

My teacher used to tell my partner that as soon - and only - when she knew that i as the leader was comitted to a step she could do whatever she wanted.

I'm really not sure I understand that or what it would lead to. What does "whatever she wanted" mean other than an embellishment or maybe inserting a quick short step in between her normal steps?

 

[opendoor]

.....And now we are getting into even trickier territory - if we accept 3 steps instead of one can we accept 2 ? this changes the geometry of the couple, puts us into the cross system, and all kinds of weirdness happen..

..That would be something else, moving from system to system by the *follower* could lead to a lot of confusion. I don't see how that would work..

For a while Chicho Frumbuli was my teacher and this really was a tough time. He ask me to lead 3 steps while doing 2 steps. Or taking 4 and leading the follower 6 at same time. Leading and following is not reading on coffee grounds. Its pure body control. Exactly that is the reason why I once started the projection thread. In projection there is no uncertainty. The leader definitely controls the followers movement.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

For a while Chicho Frumbuli was my teacher and this really was a tough time. He ask me to lead 3 steps while doing 2 steps. Or taking 4 and leading the follower 6 at same time. Leading and following is not reading on coffee grounds. Its pure body control. Exactly that is the reason why I once started the projection thread. In projection there is no uncertainty. The leader definitely controls the followers movement.

Well, you're talking about a very specific style of dance then if you refer to Chicho. How about we stick to some simple baseline tango milonguero instead. This is the problem with these discussion, my baseline is always constant, you are using a very different point of reference. Why not simply say, "in tango nuevo, or if you're dancing like Chicho, you can do this and that..."? Would be much clearer. I'm not denying that some of the principles may apply elsewhere, but you need a constant here or we end up talking past one another.

 

[brunoalfirevic]

Well, first of all, I want to give you props for laying out all of this in as much detail as you did!

Now i would say that the same way the invisibility of the leaders weightshift is often more a suspension of disbelief by the follower than them really not noticing the leader did something

Are you referring to the situation when the leader wants to switch weight to his other foot but does not want the follower to do so? In that case, I think the story about "hiding the weight change" is just something that is taught to beginners who have not yet wrapped their head around the difference between leader doing a movement and leading a follower to do a movement (and I think it harms both leaders and followers to not think about it the correct way from the start).

It is not the case that follower changes weight because she feels the leader doing the weight change - the follower changes weight because she feels the lead for her weight change. If the leader wants to change weight without the follower, he doesn't have to hide it from the her.

My teacher used to tell my partner that as soon - and only - when she knew that i as the leader was comitted to a step she could do whatever she wanted.

This part is interesting. At what point could even the leader tell he was committed? In the middle of the step there could be a reversal to produce a rock step, or the leader could simply stop the movement in the middle keeping the follower on both feet. And even later, towards the end of the step, he could slow down or stop the follower while she is stil finishing her transfer of weight to next foot.

 

[opendoor]

...the problem with these discussion, my baseline is always constant, you are using a very different point of reference..

Now I understand. Felt, my baseline also is constant, independently of commenting on milonguero, nuevo, neo, salsa cubana, or lindy hop. I‘m arguing from a technical point of view because I mean that technique comprises all sorts of body dynamics, let it be shared, independent or moving axes. I make a distinction between style and technique. I know that there are dancers that stick to only one style, but there are by far more dancers that are familiar with different styles and profit from the broader technical knowledge.

 

[opendoor]

..Why not simply say, "in tango nuevo..

At that point I was referring to tango milonguero. The context was: follower is taking different number of steps, or the follower’s reaction to weight shift of the lead. Please excuse my insistence on projecting. I learned to project from milonguero style teachers, for JohnM projection is of different origin, I know. So for me projecting and dancing apilado is one and the same. The problems you were discussing yesterday will not arise as soon as the leader is projecting.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

Now I understand. Felt, my baseline also is constant, independently of commenting on milonguero, nuevo, neo, salsa cubana, or lindy hop. I‘m arguing from a technical point of view because I mean that technique comprises all sorts of body dynamics, let it be shared, independent or moving axes. I make a distinction between style and technique. I know that there are dancers that stick to only one style, but there are by far more dancers that are familiar with different styles and profit from the broader technical knowledge.

I'm not sure this is true, though. I suspect that technique changes depending on what you are dancing. Training for ballet is rigorous and difficult but is not the best preparation for a tango dancer. What you're referring to is not exactly technique; you're describing movement within a specific dance. You can do the sorts of things you describe if you dance like Chicho and Juana, not if you're Ricardo Vidort. You see where I'm going?

 

[Gssh]

This part is interesting. At what point could even the leader tell he was committed? In the middle of the step there could be a reversal to produce a rock step, or the leader could simply stop the movement in the middle keeping the follower on both feet. And even later, towards the end of the step, he could slow down or stop the follower while she is still finishing her transfer of weight to next foot.

Ok, first to contextualize this: we are talking about advanced follower skills here, and when and how things like that work is really dependent on the music, the geometry and what we as a couple have done before. But big picture wise it works the same way as a leader can tell when a follower is committed, which is a basic skill all of us have developed - e.g. alterations work because we catch a follower before they commit, a rebound happens because we catch them during half-commitment, a saccada needs to be just after commitmen - by having the embrace. So just like we can't redirect do alterations on all steps at all times, a follower can't do any of these things at all times, it requires real sensitivity and understanding of what is happening. Thats why I brought up the "invisible" weightshift - any decent follower will know perfectly well which foot we are on, and what the geometry of the couple is - and they also don't pretend to be ignorant of the fact that we are in the cross-system now, but actively work with it. It is just a simplification for beginners to claim that the follower not also shifting their weight means that they don't follow this - they also actively help with making the geometry of the cross system work by dissociation and angulation of their steps and so on.

Besides sensitivity there is another channel of communication - one that is in my opinion often neglected when talking about tango: Tango is a dance, not an athletic exercise. Both the leader and follower are following the music. While a leader could in theory could do a reversal to produce a rock step anywhere, in practice, after we have established our musicalites, the leader has set some expectations about where they actually will do rock-steps. Just like tango music has a very strict form, but the specific way a song violates and plays with the form makes it great, so is leading strictly bound by the music, but the play around this limitation is important, and following is strictly bound by both the music and the leading, but playing around and within these limitations is where interesting things happen.

(this is why setting the embrace can already be dancing when with a musical follower - they are not just passively waiting for the leader and not doing anything without a lead, they can anticipate when the leader is going to start, and creates tension. If i as a leader thwart that expectation, then the tension ratchets up, and the follower will often start doing adornments to dissipate that a bit (and they also have all the time in the works, because they know what the next starting point could be). Sadly a lot of followers don't listen to the music, and it turns into "i am waiting, and getting bored, so i am waving my foot around, and i am out of geometry at the half bar, and even the full bar, but it doesn't matter, because the leader is going to do a pre-lead by "lifting" me so i know when i have to stop doing adornments anyway " - a very different game)

 

[Gssh]

You can do the sorts of things you describe if you dance like Chicho and Juana, not if you're Ricardo Vidort. You see where I'm going?

? Vidort is all about playing with the followers axis and timing, and weaving in and out of their footwork and nonstop saccadas - I think i got the idea of lopsided progressive ochos from him. Chicho tends to be actually mostly quite aligned with his follower pulse wise.


lets looks at this: he uses a volcada to switch from the parallel system to the crossed system at :23, then a double time for her to get back to the parallel system, then another off axis move at :27 where he offsets his and her footwork and systems three times so get into the cross system again and then he has her step twice while he steps once again and gets back into the parallel system using with a saccada at :29. Within 6 seconds vidort has shown more of this concept of the leader and follower moving in and out of synch and how that changes geometry than i think i have seen in any of chichos performances - Chicho draws movement out so he doesn't really need to do this to create his geometries.