Lead/follow question from newbie

[BR-folk-square]

Background: I've been dancing 40 years, starting with internaional folk, then square and other forms. I dabbled in ballroom/swing/Latin for about a year, then got more serious for 5 months. Just recently I had 3 90 minute classes in Argentine. I delayed ballroom because I am uncomfortable with always being forced to lead, just because I am a man.

In other ballroom/swing/latin dances, I give a simple cue lead, like raising my hand and maybe changing grip slightly, and for the most part the woman knows what to do for at least one measure of music, often two or more. I have tried very hard to find a woman that will trade roles, even just a little bit so that I get to be follow some of the time, and even the strongest women absolutely always want to be played like a puppet. If not that I expect folk, square and other dance forms to die out within a few years, I would not force myself to tolerate always being the lead.

From the classes and watching an instuctional video, i suspect in AT the man has to lead almost every single step the woman takes by physically nudging her body in the direction he wants her to move. If this is true, I should probably give up and skip AT because that will distress me more than other forms of BR.

Carey

 

[Peaches]

I'm not so sure about physically nudging her, but yeah, the leader leads pretty much every single step. There are nuances, of course, but essentially that's the case.

I'd normally say not to be so quick to write off a wonderful dance like AT, but you seem pretty adamant about not liking to lead. If that's the case...yeah, it'll probably bother you as much as ballroom, if not more. (I kinda want to quibble about your description of leading, but won't. It's off-topic anyhow.)

Perhaps, if you're really interested in AT but not the leading part, learn specifically to follow. There are some women who lead, and some men who don't necessarily mind dancing with another guy (they seem to be very rare, though).

What makes you dislike leading that much?

 

[Ampster]

AT is pretty much ALL lead and follow. It's much harder for the leader because all traffic, floorcraft, movements, musicality, etc. etc. etc. all emanate from the leader. Leading in AT is not nudging (that would be reserved for Sumo wrestling), nor is it based on "Cues."

In AT, the practice is that the follower does not move until initiated by the lead. So, if you're irritated by leading cues, you'de probably have a much, much, much, much harder time leading everything, as is the practice in AT. Its also much harder because AT is not based on progressively memorized steps. No bronze, silver, gold steps here--NO. It is by its very nature, improvisational, making the necessity for lead and follow all the more critical.

BTW, leading in ballroom, is VERY different than leading in AT, especially if you dance in close embrace.

On the other hand, as Peaches mentioned, in AT (at least in Seattle), there are several women who lead. There are also men who follow, and dance with one another, expressly for the purpose of learning to lead/follow (Role reversal). Why? Because for one to lead well, one should know what the follower feels/experiences and vice-versa.

 

[Steve Pastor]

If there is any dance that is open to role reversal in lead/follow, it would be AT here in the US and Europe, based on what I have seen.
I think that because of the type of person who is attracted to AT (again, here in the US and Europe), they accept men dancing with men, etc. It's presented as a continuation of a tradition. But that same tradition is simply ignored by coutnry western dancers when it comes to men dancing with men on the American frontier.
Just this Sunday, one of the women who has been to Buenos Aires several times, and whom I enjoy dancing with was looking for a victim to lead (more or less her words).

I think you may be in Chicago? though, and I would expect less of the role reversal there than in liberal Portland, and you might have to look around to find the right teacher/venue where it is practiced.

In other ballroom/swing/latin dances, I give a simple cue lead, like raising my hand and maybe changing grip slightly, and for the most part the woman knows what to do for at least one measure of music, often two or more.

If you've been reading posts in this and other sections, you may know that there is a lot more to dancing that giving signals and doing things by rote. It's not easy, but it's very cool to learn how it works on that other level. It depends a lot on your teachers, though.
Even the idea of the woman being a mere puppet doesn't square with current thinking on dances such as swing, especially West Coast Swing, and AT (again, her in the US and Europe). It all relies on the teachers, however.

 

[Terpsichorean Clod]

In other ballroom/swing/latin dances, I give a simple cue lead, like raising my hand and maybe changing grip slightly, and for the most part the woman knows what to do for at least one measure of music, often two or more.

Ballroom is not based on "cues". Though depending on the situation, it might be possible to get by with cues. The concept of leading every single movement/step certainly applies to all your dances, but I think AT is a great way to learn it. I eventually learned it through ballroom but I think I would have picked it up a bit earlier had I done AT.

I have tried very hard to find a woman that will trade roles, even just a little bit so that I get to be follow some of the time, and even the strongest women absolutely always want to be played like a puppet. If not that I expect folk, square and other dance forms to die out within a few years, I would not force myself to tolerate always being the lead.

If you haven't already, you might look into the same-sex dance community. It's called "same-sex" over here, but also includes female leader/male follower.

 

[Gssh]

Thats a tough one - while it is possible to dance the other role in AT I think it would be difficult to start off that way. There are a number of women wo lead almost exclusivly, and a (smaller number) of men who follow at one or two tandas an evening, but in my experience they tend to have started AT in the "natural" role, and then made the switch after having some experience. I don't know anybody who has danced exclusivly against stereotype.
It might be easier for women - a female leader can ask female followers for dances, while getting asked as a male follower might be difficult in a social setting. Even female beginning followers have trouble with that, i don't want to imagine what it would be like for a male beginner follower.

The best bet would probably be to team up with somebody who wants to lead, and spend a lot of time at practicas and classes to establish in the communities mind that you are a follower. For the female leaders i know it took somethign like half a year or so of going to milongas and leading to get slotted in the "leader" category. Of course now they have the problem that they are not viewed as followers anymore, and they don't get asked for dances, and they have to activly ask if they want to follow again - more similar to the way that leaders negotiate their occasional following than the way followers can expect dances to be offered to them.

Gssh

 

[hbboogie1]

Background: I've been dancing 40 years, starting with internaional folk, then square and other forms. I dabbled in ballroom/swing/Latin for about a year, then got more serious for 5 months. Just recently I had 3 90 minute classes in Argentine. I delayed ballroom because I am uncomfortable with always being forced to lead, just because I am a man.

In other ballroom/swing/latin dances, I give a simple cue lead, like raising my hand and maybe changing grip slightly, and for the most part the woman knows what to do for at least one measure of music, often two or more. I have tried very hard to find a woman that will trade roles, even just a little bit so that I get to be follow some of the time, and even the strongest women absolutely always want to be played like a puppet. If not that I expect folk, square and other dance forms to die out within a few years, I would not force myself to tolerate always being the lead.From the classes and watching an instuctional video, i suspect in AT the man has to lead almost every single step the woman takes by physically nudging her body in the direction he wants her to move. If this is true, I should probably give up and skip AT because that will distress me more than other forms of BR.

Carey

As you can see in this video following in argentine tango takes a lot of skill and practice. Given that you don’t want to lead you might want to consider square dancing it’s fun and all the moves are called out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-TIg6Tp_nQ

 

[BR-folk-square]

thank you for your response, clarifications follow

Thank you all for your responses.

I have tried very hard to find a woman who will lead, and been unsuccessfull, ditto asking some GLBT people where I might find someone. I did get an offer from ONE "T" to lead me for an evening, but I don't want to do it exclusively. I'd like to average maybe 20% though I'd be happy with anything in the range of 5% to 60%.

Actually i feel "guilty" that I really do enjoy leading, since it goes against my "equality" mentality. I HAVE also felt a real thrill during those rare chances I have gotten to dance follow: in private lessons, once at a swing dance, and twice in a class where the teacher made everybody dance the opposite roles to learn what it was like.

Once at an ECS club (bar) I saw a woman leading other women several times, and I asked her to lead me. She was game for a while but kept slipping back into follow, so after a while I said 'OK. we'll finish this dance normal'.

That would be my first choice, to go back and forth during ONE piece of music. Second would be to alternate with the same woman several times during an evening. Third would be to mostly dance normal, but sometimes (with other women) reversed. If I was doing that, I might also sometimes dance follow with another man, but I wouldn't want to do it ONLY with other men. That doesn't satisfy my desire that women can do what men usually do, as well as men do what women usually do.

In other rhythms, my classes now are sometimes teaching "hijack" moves where for a moment the woman does something different than what the man tried to lead, and that helps me a little...but it also makes me want to dance follow and hijack that particular move too..

I was brought up during the bra burnings of the 1960s and I was a very logical person, so I instantly accepted the what men can do, so can women, and visa versa. In square, english, and scottish set dancing, if the balance of men and women is uneven, nobody thinks twice about a person dancing the opposite role. Some newer English dances are even intentionally being written to be gender neutral, done in couples of all combinations.

OK, I don't know the offical terms, but in swing and tango we were taught, "do this so the woman will do that". Call them cues, leads, or whatever. In swing, it was typically raise hand on the last beat of the previous figure, and she does at least 3 steps to turn under back to place, then go back to doing the "basic" step until the next lead is given. I think at much higher levels, the man might sometimes modify that so she goes under but keeps moving forward or only turns half way, but still, the default if I don't give the next "cue", she will do a 3 step turn and back to where she was. In tango we are making it so the woman can not do anything but what we want her to do, and barring things like ochos that repeat, she never knows what the next step will be untill we let her know. So even at the beginning level, I am controlling her every step, not groups of 3-6 or more steps which feels more like master/slave than if she does some steps withoud specifally being made to. BTW, we've only done open embrace in class so far.

I have been to a "same sex" square dance, and they often did have reversed role couples, but I got the impression when I asked that the same sex "ballroom" community here was pretty much only same sex. Yes, I could try it. Parking is not good in those neighborhoods.

I have not found a teacher (or heard f from anybody else) that teaches anything other than the woman being a puppet, except for an occasional hijack (like escaping from a dip, or a broken ankle step in charleston).

--Carey

 

[bastet]

Thank you all for your responses.

I have tried very hard to find a woman who will lead, and been unsuccessfull, ditto asking some GLBT people where I might find someone. I did get an offer from ONE "T" to lead me for an evening, but I don't want to do it exclusively. I'd like to average maybe 20% though I'd be happy with anything in the range of 5% to 60%.

Actually i feel "guilty" that I really do enjoy leading, since it goes against my "equality" mentality. I HAVE also felt a real thrill during those rare chances I have gotten to dance follow: in private lessons, once at a swing dance, and twice in a class where the teacher made everybody dance the opposite roles to learn what it was like.

Once at an ECS club (bar) I saw a woman leading other women several times, and I asked her to lead me. She was game for a while but kept slipping back into follow, so after a while I said 'OK. we'll finish this dance normal'.

That would be my first choice, to go back and forth during ONE piece of music. Second would be to alternate with the same woman several times during an evening. Third would be to mostly dance normal, but sometimes (with other women) reversed. If I was doing that, I might also sometimes dance follow with another man, but I wouldn't want to do it ONLY with other men. That doesn't satisfy my desire that women can do what men usually do, as well as men do what women usually do.

In other rhythms, my classes now are sometimes teaching "hijack" moves where for a moment the woman does something different than what the man tried to lead, and that helps me a little...but it also makes me want to dance follow and hijack that particular move too..

I was brought up during the bra burnings of the 1960s and I was a very logical person, so I instantly accepted the what men can do, so can women, and visa versa. In square, english, and scottish set dancing, if the balance of men and women is uneven, nobody thinks twice about a person dancing the opposite role. Some newer English dances are even intentionally being written to be gender neutral, done in couples of all combinations.

OK, I don't know the offical terms, but in swing and tango we were taught, "do this so the woman will do that". Call them cues, leads, or whatever. In swing, it was typically raise hand on the last beat of the previous figure, and she does at least 3 steps to turn under back to place, then go back to doing the "basic" step until the next lead is given. I think at much higher levels, the man might sometimes modify that so she goes under but keeps moving forward or only turns half way, but still, the default if I don't give the next "cue", she will do a 3 step turn and back to where she was. In tango we are making it so the woman can not do anything but what we want her to do, and barring things like ochos that repeat, she never knows what the next step will be untill we let her know. So even at the beginning level, I am controlling her every step, not groups of 3-6 or more steps which feels more like master/slave than if she does some steps withoud specifally being made to. BTW, we've only done open embrace in class so far.

I have been to a "same sex" square dance, and they often did have reversed role couples, but I got the impression when I asked that the same sex "ballroom" community here was pretty much only same sex. Yes, I could try it. Parking is not good in those neighborhoods.

I have not found a teacher (or heard f from anybody else) that teaches anything other than the woman being a puppet, except for an occasional hijack (like escaping from a dip, or a broken ankle step in charleston).

--Carey

Interesting.

Maybe you just need to consider it from another angle.

Point one: It can be awkward to ask someone you don't know to do role reversal. However, once in a class setting, with people you meet and become friends with in a class, I've never seen anyone have a problem with occasional role reversed dance when they see that same person at a milonga. They are already friends and it's ok. I lead and follow myself and take an occasional round as a leader at milongas that are short on leads.

Point two: One reason I hate the term lead/follow is because it does give the connotation you have, and I think that gives people hangs ups that I don't think they should have. If you think logically, there is a person looking down line of dance and a person who can't see down line of dance, so someone has to direct the dance, so to speak, and I surely would prefer it's the person who has a better view of line of dance. I don't care if they are a guy or a girl.

From what I can tell, it seems as if you think just because a lady is following, she is a puppet (whereas I apply that term to follows who are physically manhandled by a lead to a new position, or to follows who act like "furniture"). But one teacher I had some years ago in tango invited us to look at the lead/follow concept this way (and for anyone who wonders, they were actually Argentine)...The leader proposes a step, the lady responds and the leader is obliged to accompany her to where he just asked her to go, thereby following her...The class was titled something like "The Man Leads, and Then He Follows". The point they were trying to make was that there is always and exchange and sharing of energies in tango, and to look at it as black and white, leader/follower, puppeteer/puppet was rather limiting and took away from the "coversation". I personally like this way of looking at it. I think it helps develop more sensitive leads and follows who view the dance as equal participation rather than "steps".

I hope this helps.

 

[Steve Pastor]

I was brought up during the bra burnings of the 1960s and I was a very logical person, so I instantly accepted the what men can do, so can women, and visa versa.

OK, but Spock Prime would tell you that humans are frequently not logical.
Also, the male/female roles in partner dances are to a large extent the result of differences in the relative sizes of men and women. And that is very logical.
I was just reading about early couples dances in Europe, and they sometimes featured the man picking up the woman, not the woman picking up the man.
I soemtimes amuse myself reading papers a sex roles in dance, wherein Western academics describe traditional cultures in terms of our own culture. They are often performing acts of cultural imperialism by projecting their values on these other cultures.

I'd like to average maybe 20% though I'd be happy with anything in the range of 5% to 60%.

When I was taking lessons here I Porland, there were often not enough women to go around. Us "regulars" got used to the idea that we would end up following quite often. Men "practice" with each other at practicas, enought to be noticable.
You will proabably find this more accepted in an AT scene assoicated with a university.

 

[BR-folk-square]

"Also, the male/female roles in partner dances are to a large extent the result of differences in the relative sizes of men and women. And that is very logical."

If I was infinately larger then the women, I would lead an infinately larger ratio of the time, namely all. since I am only a somewhat larger than the women on the average, I want to lead somewhat more of the time. And they keep telling us in class we are NOT pushing or forcing the woman, so mass/height should not be a critical factor.

"I was just reading about early couples dances in Europe, and they sometimes featured the man picking up the woman, not the woman picking up the man. "

I have done a folk dance where I pick up my partner, and have done so when she weighed more than me.

(sorry, I don't know how to get quoted text to be in a box like everybody else does....)

 

[dchester]

(sorry, I don't know how to get quoted text to be in a box like everybody else does....)

In post that you are trying to quote, click on the button (located in the lower right hand side) that looks a lot like this:

 

[Steve Pastor]

It's not real easy to describe how leading and following works, so various short hand explanations are used.

Skippy Blair's work applies to Argentine Tango, IMO, as well as other dances. She is well known for her work in West Coast Swing.

(1) A LEAD is an INDICATION of direction. (2) A "Lead" should come from "Body Resistance" and connection of Frame (CPB), rather than strength from arm leads.

RESISTANCE -
(1) "To oppose - to keep from yielding to." (Webster's New World Dictionary). (2) Any time one object touches another object there is a degree of "Resistance" created. It is this degree of resistance that becomes important in the dance

Teaching Note:
(A) The natural tendency to "yield" to a "lead" rather than to match the natural resistance is a real problem for new dancers. Resistance is NOT pushing or pulling. It is a matching "reaction" to the "action" of the lead. (B) The opposite extreme to "yielding" is being stiff and "unyielding" which creates even more of a problem. Matching the connection, from one person's "center" to the other person’s center is ideal.

http://www.swingworld.com/dance_dictionary.htm

 

[Gssh]

Actually i feel "guilty" that I really do enjoy leading, since it goes against my "equality" mentality....

That doesn't satisfy my desire that women can do what men usually do, as well as men do what women usually do......

So even at the beginning level, I am controlling her every step, not groups of 3-6 or more steps which feels more like master/slave than if she does some steps withoud specifally being made to. BTW, we've only done open embrace in class so far......

I have not found a teacher (or heard f from anybody else) that teaches anything other than the woman being a puppet, except for an occasional hijack (like escaping from a dip, or a broken ankle step in charleston).

--Carey

So to sum it up you feel that the lead/follow set up is a political/social statement, and that you feel personally uncomfortable with making a woman your "slave". An ideal partner dance would be for you something where the roles of the two partners are not only switchable, but identical.

I understand that perspsective intellectually , but from an engineering point of view i think it will be difficult to achieve. The main feature that distinguishes the leader role from the follower role is that the leader is choreographing in real time. All tango (or any dance really) is is a method of communicating a choreography and executing it.

Actually, even the folk and square dances have not solved that problem - by fixing the choreography or having the role of a caller they just make somebody outside the couple the "master" and both dancers "slaves". I guess that makes them equal, in a way .

Bigger chunks of preset choreography actually give the follower less freedom, because there can't be any consideration of personal preferences at all. In the best case in a good partner dance the leader choreographs the dance specifically for the follower he is dancing with, understanding from the followers movements and energy what choreography would be the most enjoyable. If a follower doesn't like volcadas, i will not lead a second one. If a follower goes all "wheeee" on a fast turn i will do more of them.

Contact improv creates complete identity of the roles, but they trade it in by limiting their potential choreographies, and requiring high baseline levels of trust, and willingness to cooperate and share the dance (and i have noticed that there is still a baseline level of choreography and lead/follow cropping up, paired with subtle dominance games that are imho much more negative becasue they are not acknowledged). (My opinion only, based on very limited expereince - to be honest while i find contact improv in theory very interesting i found it quite unsatisfying in practice for me).

I am not sure if tango is a good foundation for developing a identical-role dance. Something with a symmetrical embrace might work better. When playing around with a another leader i sometimes try to facilitate lead switching by doing a variant embrace that is symetrical: Both partners do "leaders" right arms (around the back), and "followers" left arms (on/around the shouder).

The bigger problem is how you would switch the responsibility for the choreography - there needs to be an agreement of what to do next at any point in time, and becasue it is real time it can't be negotiatied, one person has to be in charge of what to do (including an outside person, like when you have a fixed choreography).

I have traded roles back and forth when dancing tango, but that is not quite the same thing - either the leader gave up the lead, and then it was a (very quick) negotiation who would pick it up again, or the follower asked for the lead, and again it was a negotiation - in both cases there were "seams" where there was a (in the best cases almost imperceptible) moment of confusion when the new leader had to decide where the choreography should go. And somebody could hold onto one of the roles by either just not choreographing anything for their partner, or not executing any of the choreography that their partner suggest them.

Gssh

 

[dchester]

Actually i feel "guilty" that I really do enjoy leading, since it goes against my "equality" mentality.

My two cents: figure out how to deal with your "equality" mentality, stop feeling guilty, and embrace the joy in leading,

either that or dance to rock instead of doing tango.

:banana: