Is social tango "art"

Is dancing polka on stage art? (No offense to our polka fans.) Is tango inherently different than polka?
Polka fans are too busy having fun to take offense (ok, I'm just talking about me)
Tango is inherently different than polka in that some people want it to not be "fun", because that is the zeitgiest in the milongas in central BA. (Milonga and vals aren't included - maybe)
 
Context, context, context. Art is concept given form and context with reality. If you're looking for an objective answer, then I have one for you... wasn't tango recently declared a part of humanity's cultural heritage by a world-wide recognized organization? There ya go, context. ;)

So yes. All tango is art.
 
Entertainment vs art. What's the difference, and is the difference meaningful. I'm sure we can all point to art that is not meant to entertain, and to entertainment that is not meant to be artful. I'm clear in my own mind that there is no on/off choice, but I am curious about where the fuzzy line might be drawn. Bringing the discussion back to tango, can some social dancing be thought of as art?

Burlesque was certainly entertaining, but I would not say it was art. Why not? "The Scream" was not meant to be entertaining, but I would easily call it art. Because of the emotional expression? Maybe so. Can a social tango dance have great emotional expression? Of course.

I'm just asking - is there a line, and if so, what is it?

I am going to risk sounding elitist or snobbish. I am neither, really, I'm not.

Entertainment is frivolous (but enjoyable!) and temporary; art is neither. People naturally have different ideas about what is and isn't art. It has something to do with how much they know about the subject. Bach, Beethoven, Mozart were great artistic and creative geniuses. Cee Lo Green is not, neither are the bulk of popular music and musicians great artistic geniuses. They are entertainers, very skilled but not the way, say a great classical composer, pianist, or orchestra conductor is. I can say these things because I've spent so many decades filled with music. But it will always come down to what someone likes. If you can't stand Bach but love Cee Lo that is absolutely fine. No judgement should be made, by either of us. I enjoyed listening to Cee Lo's "F(orget) You" - the first few times. Will I or anyone listen to it or him in 10+ years? Doubt it. I still listen to Bach pieces I've heard for dozens (hundreds?) of times over the past 40 years.

These are very broad statements and not absolute truths - and no offense is intended.

If I thought tango music was inferior I wouldn't give it a second thought or dance to it, let alone take on the El Choclo thread.
 
Forgive my ignorance of art history, but why do you say that? Was he the equivalent of a Sears portrait studio photographer, i.e. strictly commercial?

He sold only a few paintings in his entire life. Not only was he not considered an artist in his time, he wasn't even a "commercial" success as a 2nd rate wannabe. By almost any measure during his lifetime, he was a total failure as an "artist" with the exception of being extremely respected by a few of his peers. Other artist of the time held the opposite opinion of his worth although history has proven that those of his time who recognized his genius and contribution to the development of modern art were correct in their assessment.
 
I've thought about this thread some today and even considered replying as to what is "art" in my view. However, anything I start to write quickly becomes a candidate for a very different thread (the one on pretentiousness) so I will abstain.
 
I've thought about this thread some today and even considered replying as to what is "art" in my view. However, anything I start to write quickly becomes a candidate for a very different thread (the one on pretentiousness) so I will abstain.

Well that didn't stop me...:p
 
Art is when you deliberaty affect the emotions of at less one person.

So, you think that the exchange of emotions with your partner is a fundamental aspect of tango, then your tango is art.
 
Art is when you deliberaty affect the emotions of at less one person.

So, you think that the exchange of emotions with your partner is a fundamental aspect of tango, then your tango is art.

I like that. Well, I may not be trying to affect my partners emotions, but I am trying to express my own emotions to my partner.

There are times when my dance is merely craftsmanship. There are other times when my dance is deeply expressive and emotional. Only one person, my partner, gets to know that, but I don't see how that is different from being artistic.
 
I like that. Well, I may not be trying to affect my partners emotions, but I am trying to express my own emotions to my partner.

There are times when my dance is merely craftsmanship. There are other times when my dance is deeply expressive and emotional. Only one person, my partner, gets to know that, but I don't see how that is different from being artistic.

I came to pretty much the same conclusion:

Is social tango dancing Art? Don't think so. I'm not performing or trying to convey deep emotional content...or am I? What about the relationship with my partner? Perhaps there is art at times.
 
I like that. Well, I may not be trying to affect my partners emotions, but I am trying to express my own emotions to my partner.

I assume when you dance that you want your partner to move in a way that reflects your movement and/or what she may hear in the music. I would also assume part if not all of your intention would be for her to give her feelings within this movement, whether that comes from you and/or the music.

Is it the music that produces the emotional response or a mix of you, your partner and the music? If the music is the primary sourse for you both to respond does that then make your individual responses art?
 
Art draws people into it, and as something more than entertainment, be it drama, music or any of the established forms. Dancing is one of the forms that can be experienced as both a spectator (and ballet might be considered the pinnacle, there), and as a participator. Those of us who dance tango (and I'm nearly one of you) will also recognise the intensly 'internal' aspect of the dance: there is much more than can be observed, indeed there maybe little or nothing that would hold the attention of a viewer, let alone be considered art.

An anecdote (while it's fresh in my mind). I was at a thinly attended social dance last night, and the DJ usually plays a couple of AT songs for the sake of the few who dance a little tango (not very authentically, as it happens, but BR dancers do like to dabble). On came Canaro/Maida's Poema (not an obvious choice for such a setting), and no one got up. I swallowed hard, and invited a BR dancer (not a tanguera) of a good standard to 'come for a walk with me to music', and we were the only couple on the floor, and off we went. Just walks, weight changes in place, little rocks, and small turns (more or less ocho cortado) but very gently (there isn't much you can follow if you have never danced tango, and don't know how the lead/follow process is meant to work). But we made a nice, simple dance. What made it work was the connection: this was someone I dance with very frequently, and she is used to the 'feel' of my lead, but she had never danced in CE before, but she followed very competently (all things considered).

Now here's the interesting thing. Not only was it obvious, the moment the music stopped, that our dancing had been watched intently, but a small group from one of my current BR beginner classes came over and asked, with obvious and genuine interest, what it was that we had been dancing. I explained, and a lady asked how my partner knew what steps to dance, and I explained a little further. 'It was lovely', she said, 'we must try that'. And they did. They asked the DJ to play it again, and now six of us got up: four of whom had never seen, let alone danced social tango, and we went a little walk around the room, stepping with the gentle beat, making some double-time steps with the music. There was a lot wrong with it (!), but afterwards, the ladies were all but glowing with satisfaction, and the men looked as though they had just experienced a breakthrough in their understanding of the nature of dance. 'I wish we could have filmed that', one of them said.

If only all art was as accessible.
 
I like that. Well, I may not be trying to affect my partners emotions, but I am trying to express my own emotions to my partner.

There are times when my dance is merely craftsmanship. There are other times when my dance is deeply expressive and emotional. Only one person, my partner, gets to know that, but I don't see how that is different from being artistic.

I wouldn't normally get involved in a thread of this kind especially
when my initial reaction was the very idea of social tango as art is
somewhat pretentious. Except some of the thoughts such as AndaBien's
strike a chord.

So, rather than Wikipedia, let's take three meanings (from many) of ART
from The Oxford English Dictionary.

1. human creative skill or its application
4. human skill or workmanship as opposed the work of nature
5. a skill, aptitude, or knack.

On all those counts social tango is an art but it isn't tangible like
a painting. It's certainly creative if you get beyond repetitious movement
and can respond meaningfully to the music. There is an art or a knack
in interpreting and moving as one to the music and I would argue that
it takes the abilities of two artists (man and woman) for that to happen.

But it isn't art for anyone else, and when the dance is over it's gone.
 

Dance Ads

Advertise on Dance Forums Reach dancers, teachers, studios, event organizers, and dance-friendly brands. View ad options
Back
Top