Deconstructing a couple of "common sense" truths about AT

[Subliminal]

yes indeed..especially the first video.
Is this dance of Detleff and Malina in the same classification or do you
think that their lean takes them out of the Salon catagory? thks

Hrm. Interesting. To me it looks like they are switching between a heavy lean and separate balance points. I was trying to pay attention to her hips (no not for that reason ) because from what I understand apilado would allow her less freedom of movement. (Any followers want to chime in?) And there are times when her hips are fairly still, like she is pressing her legs down for balance. And other times they are free, like when he leads them to stand straighter to be able to do a figure that requires more movement. (Like the legwrap.)

That to me says Salon... because Salon style doesn't just mean separate balance points, it allows for adjusting the lean based on the movement.

 

[bastet]

Ah, Melina & Detlef!

The landing and departing on the straight leg, the straight but leaning in posture of both partners plus Detlef's embrace of Melina in the line with the connection (not lower down towards the waist) are all apilado. The degree of lean can change to increase the feeling of connection but the apilado lean is to make room for the feet within the embrace.

We get too stuck on all these categories and the argentinians seemingly don't recognise or use them in the way we do, to them it's all the Tango. My understanding of Salon (Villa Urquiza?) is it's mainly in apilado but as usual in tango you can see a variety of holds in videos of milongas. Salon can break out of the embrace into an open hold (no lean) for more expansive ochos and giros etc. But all social tango in BsAs may be regarded as Salon (living room in my Spanish dictionary and clearly related to saloon in English). I certainly practise in my living room and kitchen and anywhere else appropriate!).

Perhaps someone who has been or lives in BsAs can clarify more because I haven't (yet).

I do think it is true the Argentines (the ones I have taken and do take lessons from) seem confused by what I think seems to them a desire of others to classify to the point of keeping everything in it's own "box", for lack of a better word, with no allowance for variation. Whereas, they (Argetnine's) seem to do whatever is necessary at the time in the embrace for whatever movement they are doing.

Howver, Salon, as far as I understand the term, doesn't really have anything to do with saloons, but came about as tango began being danced in larger halls (Salons) further away from the city center (the suburbs) as opposed to the confiterias and tighter dance floors of the downtown areas.

 

[bastet]

Hrm. Interesting. To me it looks like they are switching between a heavy lean and separate balance points. I was trying to pay attention to her hips (no not for that reason ) because from what I understand apilado would allow her less freedom of movement. (Any followers want to chime in?) And there are times when her hips are fairly still, like she is pressing her legs down for balance. And other times they are free, like when he leads them to stand straighter to be able to do a figure that requires more movement. (Like the legwrap.)

That to me says Salon... because Salon style doesn't just mean separate balance points, it allows for adjusting the lean based on the movement.

IMO, there are quite a few things that can be done apilado, including pivot, even though it may feel odd since we are always being told to be on our own balance, especially to pivot.

But you can certianly change the amount of pressure in the embrace. You could also not change the amount of pressure, or grounding, or whatever else. I'm sure all of those choices you make do affect exactly what you will be able to accomplish in your dance. But you can lead leg wraps, certan ganchos and even sacadas without breaking in to open embrace, certainly.

Salon to most US dancers will probably mean separate balance point, no weight sharing and moving from open to closed.

In the US, I think many people tend to refer to a weight-sharing embrace that doesn't move to open as milonguero. The degree of weight sharing being variable. That does not mean the embrace doesn't or cant' shift when needed, but generally it doesn't break.

These are just definitions that people that I have spoken to or talk to define it, and so your results could vary in your own area.

 

[JohnEm]

Sorry, JohnEm but I just hate it everytime I see this myth proffered on a tango forum....it's like anything to distract from pure dancing. I refute it with this:

Well Mario that doesn't refute it all.
Tete was a law (though he only bends the rules) unto himself anyway. He had deep core strength, great balance despite his tummy and fast feet plus complete understanding of where his partner's legs, body and balance are. She is a real example too of body tone and no sag. And by the way, notice how Tete tips into an increased lean starting a new walk, typical of Buenos Airans but not here very often, too many other dance influences.

I can tell you doesn't detract from pure to dancing - it makes apilado work. No-one said this is easy, apilado is far more demanding of the body than other holds. The two bodies talk to each other, it's communication by feeling but without posture and tone, no hingeing at the waist, it doesn't work. To use a ballroom vernacular, the frame is not in the arms it's within the body.

And Mario, I've seen your videos and refrained from commenting but now I will. My advice, for what it's worth, is to work on your body, practise Pilates or Yoga or the similar. Build your tone and your posture, stand tall. And then practice dancing like that. You want to dance apilado, you have to have the body for it. And before anyone retorts, I had to work myself on all that lot.

 

[JohnEm]

I do think it is true the Argentines (the ones I have taken and do take lessons from) seem confused by what I think seems to them a desire of others to classify to the point of keeping everything in it's own "box", for lack of a better word, with no allowance for variation. Whereas, they (Argetnine's) seem to do whatever is necessary at the time in the embrace for whatever movement they are doing.

Howver, Salon, as far as I understand the term, doesn't really have anything to do with saloons, but came about as tango began being danced in larger halls (Salons) further away from the city center (the suburbs) as opposed to the confiterias and tighter dance floors of the downtown areas.

My quote of the saloon was only pointing out the similarity, not identicality. In fact are larger halls called Salons in BsAs? Sunderland after all is a sports hall. But this irrelevant really.

Yes your understanding of Salon and location is the same as mine. The variation of hold was possible because of more space. Today though videos of Sunderland seem to mainly show the embrace.

And while Argentinians do what seems necessary it is within a general style of course and they largely return to the solid footfall in the compas. Long may that continue.

Better explanations than ever I can give on Tangoand Chaos.

 

[borisvian13]

OK, so let's recapitulate. What I'm proposing is that there are two (mechanical) elements necessary while dancing AT (any style).

A). Share weight through your torso's center (mechanics of the sharing depends on the embrace)

B). Stay firm on your feet (that is, do not share weight through your whole body's center.

(Needless to say, I say I see those two elements in all videos posted above, and in any video of decent tango dancing I've ever watched, but then of course different people see different things....)

Most of the responses seem to say that at least one or both or these elements are not really necessary in order to dance AT.(Some go even further and suggest that A) and B) are mutually exclusive).

An emotional response to all this would be: Well, is there any element (at the mechanical level) common to AT in general that YOU see, or it's just "anything goes?"

But let's not get that emotional So I propose two more statements:

C) The follower should be able to feel the movement of the torso's center of the leader in real time.

D) The leader should be able to move his legs independently, that is, so that the follower doesn't feel this movement transmitted through the leader's torso.

Any objections to these two?

 

[JohnEm]

But let's not get that emotional So I propose two more statements:

C) The follower should be able to feel the movement of the torso's center of the leader in real time.

D) The leader should be able to move his legs independently, that is, so that the follower doesn't feel this movement transmitted through the leader's torso.

Any objections to these two?

Ignoring the prior part of the post, no objections at all though perhaps (D) is a bit more subtle than your description. Essentially the leader should be able to move his legs/feet without conveying an intention to the partner. The end result is as you say.

 

[AndaBien]

...
A). Share weight through your torso's center (mechanics of the sharing depends on the embrace)

B). Stay firm on your feet (that is, do not share weight through your whole body's center.

Shared-weight vs not shared-weight, or some combination of both. I agree with this, but I want to toss my concept into the mix, which divides things up along a different line.

I tend to think of the distinction on a functional level, rather than a structural level. In shared-weight, the lead comes from the body and not the arms (e.a., Tete), whereas in not shared-weight the lead comes from the arms. Of course, there are also blends of both in the real world.

If the lead is coming from the body, then there must be a good connection between the two bodies, and an arm connection in that situation tends to diminish the body connection. I have some partners who use their arms a lot when I'm trying to lead them with my body, and that detracts from the body connection. If I were leading with my arms, then their use of arms would be appropriate.

 

[dchester]

There is ALWAYS shared weight in AT, that's what makes the purely physical communication between two bodies possible, The weight is shared ALWAYS by surrendering of part of one's balance at the level of the torso's center and NEVER at the level of the whole body's center ( well, except when the follower is led into a lean, of course). How much weight is shared and in exactly what geometric shape of course depends on the style and on the embrace (open, V-shaped, "apilado", etc...)
So what happens if we imagine that one's partner is suddenly removed? The other partner should feel disbalanced in some degree or another (depending on the the embrace, the dynamic of that particular moment of the dance) because he/she has surrendered part of his balance, but he/she should never feel close to falling, because he/she keeps the center of whole body for his/herself.

I don't want to make this too long so I'll leave room for objections now ...
But in my next post I'll try to explain why I think that this is not a purely academic point or something like that, and why this reiterated common "truth" has had quite bad impact on the AT community as a whole...

While I'll agree this is true for the way that I dance, I don't think it is true for how everyone dances. In some workshops I attended on the Villa Urquiza style of dancing, it was made quite clear that the "weight sharing" was simply an illusion, and it was demonstrated by the leader moving away from the follower (and seeing her not react to his sudden absence). Now I'm not going to claim that there was never any pressure, put simply that there wasn't always pressure.

Of course, the apilado embrace is quite different from the embrace for Villa Urquiza style, as there is always constant pressure (and some people call that milonguero style). I think of Villa Urquiza style and Milonguero style as sort of two extremes of close embrace dancing. However, IMO most people freely adjust the embrace from one to the other (and even more so, all the shades in between).

 

[Steve Pastor]

Well, I happen to be a real physicist too, by the way:smile:.

Excellent!
Would you review this thread, The Apilado Equation?

http://www.dance-forums.com/showthread.php?t=16623&highlight=apilado+equation

PS OK, well, I see I never got around, in that thread, to using "vectors", etc to quantify "weight sharing" and "angle" of lean.

 

[Steve Pastor]

So where is the center of mass of the whole body? A bit above the waist level. Well, that's exactly the part of the body which doesn't lean foward in the correct tango posture and it's even slightly (very slightly!) behind. The leaning forward begins at level of the center of the torso, which is significantly higher.
In other words, the vertical straight line from your center of gravity into the floor is NOT in front of your body.

As someone has already pointed out, the "leaning forward" starts at the ankles. And, I just checked again, and I can achieve a pretty far lean forward on my own. So much so that my center (yes, the place you describe within the lower part of my torso or thereabouts), appears to be above the front portion of my feet. (Modesty prevents me from posting a picture!)
This is why often when evaluating partners, I find that they aren't going to share any significant amount of weight with me. They LOOK like they are sharing, and, as you wrote, they ARE sharing some, but not enough to faciliate the benefits of apilado.

(As for that, the "You will fall over without your partner" thing is MY definition of apilado, but I think it is very useful for describing the style since it eliminates the LOOK of the thing.)

Thing is, when the two bodies are joined this strongly, they begin to function as one. Although MY "center of gravity" is still within my body, and my partner's is still within hers, the joined bodies have created a new center, and that one, I argue, exists at the junction of the two bodies.
Let me stress that we are now talking about a new, combined "object"; the couple.
And where is the center of gravity of a "pyramid" shaped body with 4 legs?

(I'll stop here, resisting the temptation to go into "single axis" turns in apilado and the near opposite in "open", the colgada. (Also know as Swinging!))

 

[Steve Pastor]

C) The follower should be able to feel the movement of the torso's center of the leader in real time.

D) The leader should be able to move his legs independently, that is, so that the follower doesn't feel this movement transmitted through the leader's torso.

Any objections to these two?

These are good (although I am convinced that the woman "filters out" things that she can feel, but knows are not meant to be a lead).
I would also add quotes around "Real Time", because there's that whole thing about how long it takes to perceive things, etc.
Also would be less specific and would say movement in the leader's torso, because you can lead things without moving your center.

 

[borisvian13]

Good, now a very short post:

C) implies A).
D) implies B).

The proof is left to the reader as an exercise

 

[Mario7]

As someone has already pointed out, the "leaning forward" starts at the ankles. And, I just checked again, and I can achieve a pretty far lean forward on my own. So much so that my center (yes, the place you describe within the lower part of my torso or thereabouts), appears to be above the front portion of my feet.

The above description is VERY important to a real close embrace dance (milonguero). It took me over a year and a half to get it and no other exhortations about lifting the rib cage, sternum or whatever worked..not even close.

 

[Lui]

So everybody is out there to find the exact, everlasting and exclusive description of the true archetypes of styles?

Well, before you try to catch a pitch-black cat in a pitch-dark room, you might want to check if that beast is even in there.