I actually didn't know there was a formal name for the butt wiggle thing, so that's interesting to learn. I didn't like they were executed in either video, but I have seen some that I have liked. While it's not really part of my normal dance, I did take a class once where it was part of a pattern we did. We got into it, from the middle of the ocho cortado.
As I recall, the lead was sort of like doing side rock steps, with a little bit of tortion (or disassociation).
It would never have occurred to me to call it that, but as far as I can see it's just two or three rapid changes of direction without collecting the feet, plus the fact that the couple's knees are bent which makes it very obvious. Maybe in each case the woman is adding something of her own - she might be choosing, as part of the quality of her response, whether to point her knees in the different directions so sharply, or not. It's hard to know, but I think so.
I suppose that you could lead it in any way that you could lead any weight change without collecting - a fairly small movement of the body or shoulders. I don't think I'd follow it if it were led with the right hand, but I would if it were led with the body. I certainly know people who lead this and I'm pretty sure I have had it led on me, although it's not what I'm normally looking for in social dancing. It's physically very demanding, and not exactly flattering for a woman who's not a professional dancer or especially young. It's not my thing really, and not a type of dance I can do with complete sincerity unless I've got my head set for it in advance.
But if it were a lot smaller it might be fine.You could definitely lead a mini version of it in close embrace and make it small enough for social dancing. It would be a lot less obvious, it would be essentially just a quick double weight change with the feet apart, and the legs would be straighter - tricky to lead and follow, maybe, but not ugly or bizarre. In fact I'm pretty sure I've done little ones often, without them seeming at all unusual or attention-seeking, and of course they look nothing like this. I'm not 100% sure it's the same thing but it seems like the same basic principle.
I like another poster said, would never have thought to call that a fouette, since I only know the term as it applies to ballet.
I would never do that kind of back and forth twisting on my own when I've lost the lead.. The leader would be completely at a loss as to what I'm doing or how to get me back under control. If he has given me space to play while he waits, I MIGHT do something that pronounced, but only with a leader that I know well and we have extablished a dancing relationship that allows for me to take over and move very independently for a few measures.
I have had leaders lead something sorta similar, but they usually let it continue to corkscrew in the first direction or simply stop after the first 180 turn, rather than go back and forth.
as far as I can see it's just two or three rapid changes of direction without collecting the feet, plus the fact that the couple's knees are bent which makes it very obvious. Maybe in each case the woman is adding something of her own - she might be choosing, as part of the quality of her response, whether to point her knees in the different directions so sharply, or not. It's hard to know, but I think so.
I suppose that you could lead it in any way that you could lead any weight change without collecting - it would be essentially just a quick double weight change with the feet apart, and the legs would be straighter -quote]
I disagree that there is weight change involved. I would say that in both these videos, the follower is stopped mid-step so that her weight is evenly between both feet and she pivots back and forth in that "centered" place with no shifting of weight back and forth from leg to the other.
Typically when I have been led in a corkscrew of this type, there is downward presssure applied at the right point in my step so that I do not transfer weight completely to the reaching leg, then the downward pressure is maintained as pivoting movement is made so that I keep weight on both feet while being turned. If the leader wants me to continue turning past the 180, at some point eventually one foot comes off the floor (usually the back) and trails as the weight transfers to the other foot to continue rotation. Most of the time though, I've been led in a simple 180 in place, then move on to something else.
This back and forth would be the same principle, but with a changing pivot occurring while the follower is still firmly in the "centered between both feet" position. If you want to work on this, I'd suggest doing one direction at a time... figure out first how to stop her mid-step so that her weight is on both feet. Then figure out how to make her feet stay there, while still allowing her upper body to rotate thus achieving the corkscrew thing in the legs. Rotate her 180 slowly.
Only after you can do this would I suggest trying the full movement seen in the videos, because if you can't keep her from stepping for the 1st 180 turn, she's not going to go back and forth for 3 alternating 180 turns.
Then once you are able to alternate withuot her moving her feet, speed the whole thing up.
I think you could probably do it either way, but what I've felt and what I see in the OP's posted videos is not weight-shifted but centered over both.
I would think that leading it with rapid little weight shifts would be harder to keep under control... but then, I'm not an advanced leader.... maybe that's actually easier than keeping the follower still over a centered duel-weighted position.
If I stand up and try it on my own power, its easier to do it by simply rotating back and forth centered over 2 bent legs than by shifting my weight back and forth from foot to foot, even without lifting either foot.
On the other hand, maybe it looks better with the shifting, as in the 2nd video of your post. I would need more than just these couples to decide for sure, because some people can make anything look good, and other people, well, ... can't.
So, thank you very much for your analyzing and your comments, even if you dont like this move. On the basis of my yesterday night experiences with unfamiliar (right word? sorry my english) followers, I think they are rather lead by the hips and the torso than with the right arm.
Pablo K & Frauke (1:39) This Fouette is done out of the mirror position (espejo) and yet easy to lead, only by a weight change between the two legs and a slight turning of the torso. So every follower with a feeling for dramatic moments could understand what I intended.
Pablo R & M (2:47) This seems to require a high degree of torsion, bc it is done in the crossed (false) mirror and my right hand had to reach round the womans right rib arch, simultaneously standing twisted with changing weight from the right (front) to the left (rear) leg. (Posture is still my raw point) .... So my yesterday night experiences: one stopped moving, asking what this slight downward lead should mean, the other one could follow, but told me, that I was not standing upright due to my great torsion, and that it felt like I was going to overthrow her.
Miriam & Leo (1:00) I have not tried this one yet. But since it is done in a stopped sidestep (opening) this might be an easy position bc only a slight change of direction is needed as it is in the first example. I find the delayed contra body movements interesting when done slowly as shown.