Crossing over from ballroom to Tango

[Dave Bailey]

The biggest problem I see in BR leaders coming to AT is that they want to hurry up and learn all the patterns so they can catch up to the other dancers. It's painful sometimes.

To be fair, a lot of non-BR leaders think the same also.

And if I'd spent 10 years learning a whole set of dance techniques and movements, I'd also really want to leverage that knowledge in any way possible.

And I'm not even saying that some form of "migration" is even impossible.

It's just that, so far, it seems that a migration approach hasn't really worked.

Is UKDancer around? It'd be good to have his feedback on this one.

 

[Steve Pastor]

Ampster, too, has in the past often shared his experience coming to AT from ballroom.

 

[opendoor]

..seems that a migration approach hasn't really worked..

If I´m not mistaken, it seems that there are more women around that came from BR than guys. Does someone share this view?

 

[Angel HI]

The biggest problem I see in BR leaders coming to AT is that they want to hurry up and learn all the patterns so they can catch up to the other dancers. It's painful sometimes.

Ampster, too, has in the past often shared his experience coming to AT from ballroom.

And, I as well. Though, AT and Latin are my specialties, I still coach/adjudicate many BR couples/comps. Here is my --very humble-- input....

There are too many variables to make a blanket assessment of the problem. Many things come to mind.

1. Most BR is taught, thus learned, rather poorly. Unfortunately, it is taught as a system of steps/patterns/rules/techs/ and logistics rather than as a living art. It is not the student's fault then that they come to know and dance it as such. This is part of the reason why BR is referred to so often as stiff/rigid/etc. The dancer is dancing, what we call in my studios, "from the outside in"... that is, dancing the rules, and trying to find a feeling from them.

2. AT is the easiest social dance on the planet... because it is one of the most natural movements on the planet. Now, understood, this is also what makes it so difficult. Most of us have, in many factions of our lives, forgotten how to simply accept something for what it is/isn't without any thought whatsoever. In a way, this is natural. We have become adults in an overprocessed world. Another thing that we say often in our studios is, "Approach dance, not with the mind of an adult, but with the eyes of a child". This is to say, don't try to learn, for example, a box step; simply learn to feel a smooth forward walk... that, oops! went sideways, etc. Don't process it mentally as an adult... just do it because it's there, much as a child would.

3. It is this that makes AT what it is. It is not a dance that became systematically inbred into a culture; it is a culture that simply birthed a dance. Now, that dance is as natural in that culture as walking down the street... the easiest movement in the world. It is not a dance of foot placements and leads and follows; it is a dance of natural movments and body positions. As the man moves 'here' his body moves 'like so', and the lady responds. That's it! No more... no less.

BR should (and is in too few circles) be taught as such. These are always the better dancers, and happier people. Sorry if this sounds all too philosophical or metaphysical, but I am convinced that it is where the transition from BR lead to AT lead must begin... by changing one's perception of what BR and AT are. Only then can one change hwo they are done.

 

[Peaches]

It is not a dance of foot placements and leads and follows; it is a dance of natural movments and body positions. As the man moves 'here' his body moves 'like so', and the lady responds. That's it! No more... no less.

This reminds me of a very interesting--and, ultimately, UNBELIEVABLY sexy/erotic--demonstration by two visiting teachers that I saw done in the course of a "tango weekend". The topic of their "class" was sensuality in tango, and how they interpreted that.

They started with the idea of just feeling--feeling your body, feeling your partner's body, feeling the music. They broke everyone up in (male/female) pairs, had one partner close their eyes, and put on music (Piazzola--"Oblivion", I think). The open-eyed partner then "explored" the closed-eyed partner's body with their hands. Not in a lewd way. Just...very sensual. Run fingers through hair, over the countours of their face, over hands, arms, shoulders. The obvious off-limits bits were, of course, off-limits. The partner with their eyes closed was just to feel it--feel being touched, feel the music, feel whatever emotions it evoked. and then the roles were reversed. Let me tell you...it is very, very interesting to try this with a stranger. Scary, but also very sensual.

After the demo, the teachers did the same thing. To be fair, they were a couple off the floor as well. But it started with him touching her...and then the touching turned into "crowding" her space, for lack of a better term...and then giving her room...and by the end, he was definitely leading an actual tango. But it was never really leading the way we think of it. Instead, it was him moving into her space, or moving away and inviting her into his space, and turning, and it was all just very natural, sensual movement of two bodies moving together and following each other. Mind-blowing.

 

[opendoor]

3. It is this that makes AT what it is. It is not a dance that became systematically inbred into a culture; it is a culture that simply birthed a dance. Now, that dance is as natural in that culture as walking down the street... the easiest movement in the world. It is not a dance of foot placements and leads and follows; it is a dance of natural movments and body positions. As the man moves 'here' his body moves 'like so', and the lady responds. That's it! No more... no less.

Wonderfully said Angel. And Sebastian Arce said the same in a workshop on the embrace (it was announced as a workshop, but he lectured one hour on how men should hold women, cultural differences between european and argentine men a.s.o. included.)

 

[Angel HI]

This reminds me of a very interesting--and, ultimately, UNBELIEVABLY sexy/erotic--demonstration by two visiting teachers that I saw done in the course of a "tango weekend". The topic of their "class" was sensuality in tango, and how they interpreted that.

.....But it was never really leading the way we think of it. Instead, it was him moving into her space, or moving away and inviting her into his space, and turning, and it was all just very natural, sensual movement of two bodies moving together and following each other. Mind-blowing.

Yes. I have done the latter part of this exercise, often. We did the touching thing with a few more seasoned dancers, but very often we will lead an exercise where the man takes no or 1 step, and moves into the lady's space... not just in/out, but with some sort of position/rotation/posture, etc., and she must respond. Then, of course, we reverse the roles. It is indeed a very interesting, often intimate, and sometimes sensual experience.

Glad you got to do that, and more importantly, recognized the value of it (but then, 'you' would). PM me if more comfortable... tell me who the teachers were.

 

[Angel HI]

Wonderfully said Angel. And Sebastian Arce said the same in a workshop on the embrace (it was announced as a workshop, but he lectured one hour on how men should hold women, cultural differences between european and argentine men a.s.o. included.)

I appreciate the backup from you' and' Peaches. Very often when I give this lecture, I am looked at like I'm an alien, and even sometimes told (funny, mostly by non-argentines) that I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

[AndaBien]

...
1. Most BR is taught, thus learned, rather poorly. Unfortunately, it is taught as a system of steps/patterns/rules/techs/ and logistics rather than as a living art. It is not the student's fault then that they come to know and dance it as such. This is part of the reason why BR is referred to so often as stiff/rigid/etc. The dancer is dancing, what we call in my studios, "from the outside in"... that is, dancing the rules, and trying to find a feeling from them...

I completely agree. In fact, I would say that most dance is taught this way, and it only creates difficulty for students. However, as you mentioned, adult students usually feel more comfortable with this approach.

...
2. AT is the easiest social dance on the planet... because it is one of the most natural movements on the planet...

Well, I would say that the Ragtime One-step was the easiest social dance ever. But, AT can be very easy if students would quit struggling with it's perceived complexities, and if teachers would quit presenting complexities.

...Sorry if this sounds all too philosophical or metaphysical...

Not at all. I'm of the same mind. I do my best to teach AT in it's most simple form, which is how I dance it, and I try to convey to my students the rich possibilities of a simple dance. Indeed, being simple allows it to be all the more rich. But for some reason, many students have to go through struggling with the complexities and finally giving up on them before they are ready to delve into the rich, expressive simple dance. They have to die before they can be born.

 

[twnkltoz]

I completely agree. In fact, I would say that most dance is taught this way, and it only creates difficulty for students. However, as you mentioned, adult students usually feel more comfortable with this approach.



Well, I would say that the Ragtime One-step was the easiest social dance ever. But, AT can be very easy if students would quit struggling with it's perceived complexities, and if teachers would quit presenting complexities.



Not at all. I'm of the same mind. I do my best to teach AT in it's most simple form, which is how I dance it, and I try to convey to my students the rich possibilities of a simple dance. Indeed, being simple allows it to be all the more rich. But for some reason, many students have to go through struggling with the complexities and finally giving up on them before they are ready to delve into the rich, expressive simple dance. They have to die before they can be born.

Absolutely. People tend to make things too complicated in BR, too, actually. When I explain things in a simple, straight-forward way, they can't grasp the fact that it can be that simple. They have to put up all these objections to why they can't get it because it's complicated. But it's not. It's simple.

 

[Peaches]

Indeed, being simple allows it to be all the more rich. But for some reason, many students have to go through struggling with the complexities and finally giving up on them before they are ready to delve into the rich, expressive simple dance. They have to die before they can be born.

I agree that this is true. However...too often I see "simple" being used as a cop-out for poor technique. Yeah, simple is great...if people have the rich, nuanced, exquisite technique to make it beautiful. Otherwise, it's just people shuffling around.

Technique can be developed very well through "fancy" moves and techniques. Good technique. If your technique is crap, it WILL come to light when you try to do something interesting. Get the interesting going, with good technique...and then go back to simple...and simple has a whole new feeling and depth and ease about it. But it's not just "getting it out of your system" or having "to die before they can be born". It's needing to develop the fundamentals underpinning the entire thing before that simplicity has any richness.

 

[bordertangoman]

Indeed, being simple allows it to be all the more rich. But for some reason, many students have to go through struggling with the complexities and finally giving up on them before they are ready to delve into the rich, expressive simple dance. They have to die before they can be born.

I agree that this is true. However...too often I see "simple" being used as a cop-out for poor technique. Yeah, simple is great...if people have the rich, nuanced, exquisite technique to make it beautiful. Otherwise, it's just people shuffling around.

Technique can be developed very well through "fancy" moves and techniques. Good technique. If your technique is crap, it WILL come to light when you try to do something interesting. Get the interesting going, with good technique...and then go back to simple...and simple has a whole new feeling and depth and ease about it. But it's not just "getting it out of your system" or having "to die before they can be born". It's needing to develop the fundamentals underpinning the entire thing before that simplicity has any richness.

i agree Miles Davis didnt become the brilliant minimalist jazz musician by avoiding complexity

 

[LadyLeader]

Technique can be developed very well through "fancy" moves and techniques. Good technique.

I think for many people the large movements are the only way to start dancing! It is like learning to read was for me - I was presented words with LARGE letters. Little by little I learned to read different sizes, types of letters - even the small ones and started to forget the letters and consentrate on the MEANING these letters were mediating.

I started as a nuevotype of leader. My primary source of joy were large movements and fast moving forward. These were the only things I was able to!

During the following years I learned to regulate my movements - I got small steps when I planned and long ones when needed. Today my primary source of joy are good movements for the available space and if the steps match perfectly the music, enormous joy is exploding inside me.

A new sense for movements has developed also - to perform an ordinary basic step can trigger a deep joy in me.

There maybe exists a development line for tango dancers?

 

[AndaBien]

i agree Miles Davis didnt become the brilliant minimalist jazz musician by avoiding complexity

I don't think complexity is the problem. It's people trying to do complex stuff while they don't have the technical skills to do so. And while they do have the technical skills to do simple stuff, but just haven't figured out yet that simple stuff can be fulfilling.

My favorite illustration of simple beauty is "Ashokan Farewell", by Jay Unger. Many people in the US will recognize it as the theme song to a TV series on the Civil War.

 

[LadyLeader]

And while they do have the technical skills to do simple stuff, but just haven't figured out yet that simple stuff can be fulfilling.

Exactly! Information about how the source of fulfilling is traveling during a tango life could be helpful. Teachers could point out the possibility and give exercises for transition to the next level.