Learning Leading from Patterns/Sequences

[dchester]

That's a really good idea. Too bad I can't still edit the OP.

There's always the chance that a particular pattern just doesn't work for you in part or in whole. Or the pattern just doesn't work in general. I've had a couple classes like that. I think to myself at the end, "Who would ever lead that? It's awkward even in the best of conditions." But even that can be useful information.

That's is something I typically will do in class, is to vary the pattern, and/or just do parts of it. Some teachers will smile and give me compliments when I do this, but some will just tell me I'm not doing the pattern correctly. Another thing this tells you right away is whether you know how to lead it, as the follower no longer knows what you are going to do (some followers don't like this either, but most understand when I say, I'm trying to find out if I'm actually leading anything.

One thing I liked about your steps is that you started out (step 1) with making sure the leader understands what the follower is supposed to do. A lot of teachers over look this, and IMO it is critical. How can you lead the follower, if you don't know what it is that she's supposed to do?

 

[jantango]

Adult men take up dancing late in life with no clue how to move their bodies, let alone connect with a partner or the music. Teachers show sequences to memorize. However, this memorization doesn't involve creativity or improvisation. They want to be patted on the back and told by their teacher how good they are in doing the sequence. This isn't dancing.

Tango starts with the music. When you know the music, you dance what you feel inside.

"If you don't know how to lead each movement, there's no point to the pattern." Exactly. Create your own. Your steps aren't important. You dance for the woman. If she dances, she's happy and makes you look good. The lead comes from the body. If a woman doesn't feel the lead from your body, she can't dance.

Those who like to learn sequences wouldn't believe how simply the milongueros dance in BsAs. They aren't worried about steps and sequences; they want to dance a feeling.

 

[Subliminal]

Adult men take up dancing late in life with no clue how to move their bodies, let alone connect with a partner or the music. Teachers show sequences to memorize. However, this memorization doesn't involve creativity or improvisation. They want to be patted on the back and told by their teacher how good they are in doing the sequence. This isn't dancing.

Tango starts with the music. When you know the music, you dance what you feel inside.

"If you don't know how to lead each movement, there's no point to the pattern." Exactly. Create your own. Your steps aren't important. You dance for the woman. If she dances, she's happy and makes you look good. The lead comes from the body. If a woman doesn't feel the lead from your body, she can't dance.

Those who like to learn sequences wouldn't believe how simply the milongueros dance in BsAs. They aren't worried about steps and sequences; they want to dance a feeling.

But how did the milongueros get to the point where it is that easy for them? Didn't a lot of them practice with each other, make up new patterns, steal patterns from each other, then eventually graduate to unconscious mastery after years of dancing? If there's an easier way to become a milonguero, I'd love to hear it. Ultimately, when you reach that point, patterns may not matter, but how do you fill in the space between complete beginner and milonguero?

 

[Mosca Negra]

Those who like to learn sequences wouldn't believe how simply the milongueros dance in BsAs. They aren't worried about steps and sequences; they want to dance a feeling.

It is a pity that it takes so very long for some leaders to understand how to dance simply and with feeling. Miguel Zotto, for example, can dance some very complicated figures on the stage, but on a crowded floor he dances with a seductive simplicity that makes you feel as if you are the only woman in the world.

 

[Subliminal]

1) This comes out of the Naveira syllabus. Once the group around him broke down all the diversity of tango figueres to these elemental moves. But as far as I remember, he is counting differently:

-plain steps (front, back, L, R)
-crossed steps (front, back, L, R)
-open step (side, L, R)

-broken steps (alteraciones, rebotes, boleos)
-and of course pivots (including circular colgadas)

I've heard this terminology before, but I've never quite found a use for it. I guess if you were trying to figure out all the different combinations of footwork, it makes sense. Maybe it's just that I'm more of a visual learner? If I see a step, I can usually replicate it. I don't think in terms of cross steps or plain steps, more like, she goes here, I go there.

2) Had a workshop two weeks ago with an argentine teacher. Since I´m a rather analytical orientated learner I asked him permanently this or that. Finally his nerves were rather shot and he stated: In older time steps were not explained at all. All milongueros learned movements by watching, imitating, or stealing. It usually happend that the guys sat lurking at the side of the dance floor. When by chance something spectacular could be detecte, it could happen that suddenly up to 10 guys jumped up heading instantly for the toilet (to reconstruct and assemble what they´ve just seen).

Hehe, neat story. I guess with the advent of youtube, that's not really necessary, is it?

 

[AndaBien]

...Those who like to learn sequences wouldn't believe how simply the milongueros dance in BsAs. They aren't worried about steps and sequences; they want to dance a feeling.

This has been my experience. I have found greater satisfaction in my own dancing as I have reduced the number of "steps" that I do. The more I focus my attention on the quality of movement, the more I enjoy dancing. I think most of my partners would agree.

As a teacher, I am fully aware of how most leaders desire to learn sequences. I am also convinced that this is counter-productive to learning tango. Learning sequences gives the illusion of learning tango. I don't think it gives the reality.

 

[Subliminal]

It is a pity that it takes so very long for some leaders to understand how to dance simply and with feeling. Miguel Zotto, for example, can dance some very complicated figures on the stage, but on a crowded floor he dances with a seductive simplicity that makes you feel as if you are the only woman in the world.

There are no shortcuts.

A great leader that has been dancing for years can dance simply and expressively because their body has been trained, their ear has been trained, and they have probably heard every tango song ever made which makes musicality much easier. They are confident in their abilities which shows in every step.

And it's also important to note, not all women are the same. Some enjoy the challenge of complexity. So there will always be leaders who wish to dance with them.

 

[Peaches]

It is a pity that it takes so very long for some leaders to understand how to dance simply and with feeling. Miguel Zotto, for example, can dance some very complicated figures on the stage, but on a crowded floor he dances with a seductive simplicity that makes you feel as if you are the only woman in the world.

And it's also a pity how many men mistake simple for boring. Simple is great...but it can be creative and varied and expressive. Which most men seem to miss, and instead dance the same way to every song...under the guise of dancing "simply." No nuance in the steps, no nuance in the movement, no nuance in the embrace. There is nothing _there_ to feel. If that's the case, I'll take interesting and not-simple, provided they know how to do it. It's also a pity that the idea of wanting different sorts of dancing at different times seems to elude so many people.

Furthermore, once...just once, I'd love to see someone really define what they mean by simple steps. OK, volcadas, colgadas...I'll grant that they could be excluded as being "not simple." (Never mind the fact that they are, in their own way.) But pretty much everything comes down to simple principles. Step in one of a limited number of directions, shift weight to a given degree, pivots. Simple...and yet encompasses pretty much everything. So...what is simple, and what isn't? Eventually, it seems to come down to "I don't like X, Y and Z." So it's back to someone's preference.

As regards the OP...makes sense to me. Patterns can be useful...particularly for people who need that sort of structure to learn. Hopefully they eventually learn to deconstruct them.

 

[Mosca Negra]

There are no shortcuts.

A great leader that has been dancing for years can dance simply and expressively because their body has been trained, their ear has been trained, and they have probably heard every tango song ever made which makes musicality much easier. They are confident in their abilities which shows in every step.

And it's also important to note, not all women are the same. Some enjoy the challenge of complexity. So there will always be leaders who wish to dance with them.

A good leader knows when it is appropriate to lead with simplicity or with complexity. I have never known a woman who does not enjoy dancing with a good leader. This is a topic we often share with each other. I will not presume to answer for all women as I am certain that there are women for whom complexity is their greatest joy.

It is relatively easy to draw a decent painting using a very complex paint-by-numbers approach; yet few hang in the Louvre.

 

[Subliminal]

A good leader knows when it is appropriate to lead with simplicity or with complexity. I have never known a woman who does not enjoy dancing with a good leader. This is a topic we often share with each other. I will not presume to answer for all women as I am certain that there are women for whom complexity is their greatest joy.

It is relatively easy to draw a decent painting using a very complex paint-by-numbers approach; yet few hang in the Louvre.

Fair enough.

I think this might be a little off-topic though. A to become a great leader, a dancer has to get there somehow.

 

[Subliminal]

Furthermore, once...just once, I'd love to see someone really define what they mean by simple steps. OK, volcadas, colgadas...I'll grant that they could be excluded as being "not simple." (Never mind the fact that they are, in their own way.) But pretty much everything comes down to simple principles. Step in one of a limited number of directions, shift weight to a given degree, pivots. Simple...and yet encompasses pretty much everything. So...what is simple, and what isn't? Eventually, it seems to come down to "I don't like X, Y and Z." So it's back to someone's preference.

It is an interesting question, isn't it? I remember a class I took with Monica Paz. 100% apilado, close embrace, no one would call it anything but traditional. One of the movements she demonstrated from Tete's repertoire was a swing of the follower's leg from a sidestep rockstep to land behind her in a cross. Not a very big movement at all, but there is one moment when the follower's leg is free floating rather than stepping deliberately, and there is a slight pull as each partner counterbalances the other. Very slight. A lot of people would still call that a form of colgada. Simple? Yes, actually.

 

[Zoopsia59]

IMO, the answer is that for some people, they may be needed (at first). Personally, I think all methods of learning need to be considered by teachers (we don't all learn in the same way, or in the same order).

The one thing that teachers need to emphasize though, is the pattern is just a means to a goal (some specific move or skill), and that message is not always being communicated.

Even in the OP, there should have been a step 7 IMO, which is to take the pattern apart, keep the bits that you like, adapt them to become part of your own dance, and experiment when various ways to get into different bits of the pattern, along with different ways to come out of the various bits.

Yep... totally agree here too... maybe I'm just in an unusually agreeable mood today...

 

[Gssh]

So how would you teach a beginning leader who had never danced before? What other methods are there that don't require patterns?

The finished product is a dancer who feels comfortable leading a vocabulary of moves that smoothly transition from one to another and also represent what they feel from a musical piece.

A 8 week course could look something like this


1) Walking solo to the music (including pauses, doubletimes, other rhythmic stuff that works with the music), Embrace as means of communication between two people, leading weightshifts, once the leaders have established where the weight of the follower is (or think they have) step forward - if she is where the leader thinks she is it is impossible to step on her! Enjoy this! Everything we were able to walk alone we can walk with a partner, too! Change partners, walk+stop+weightshift to the music in the line of dance, change partners ....



2) walking solo to the music, walk+stop+weighshift as a couple, right now corners are difficult, and if we wait for another couple to move we are a bit in trouble, too. So, bonus options: rocksteps, the perfect solution for waiting and turning, and in general a good default move, and sidesteps. talk about navigation and codigos


3) walking solo to the music, walking with all the moves in couples, repeat. Expansion of the idea of weighshifts: The leader establishes the followers axis, and pivots her by walking either clockwise or counterclockwise around her. walk around in couples, and throw this in.


4) walking solo to the music, walking in couples with all the moves we know up to now, then introduce ochos: this is just establishing an axis, pivoting the follower, and leading a backstep. The leader has two options: either sidestepping or also pivoting and frontstepping. Mention that forward ochos also exist, and watch overachievers figure out how to do them.


5) walking solo to the music, walking in couples with all the moves we know, introduce the giro as an extension of the ocho, suggest that they try getting out of the giro at any of the followers collections either by walking straight or transitioning into ochos


6) walking, dancing, introduce the cross system as a consequence of a hidden weightshift of the leader,


7) walking, dancing,introduce the cross, mention that it is very difficult, but common, warn followers that many leaders will expect it after 2 steps in the cross system, warn leaders that many followers will do it automatically after two steps in the cross system


8) walking, dancing, teach the 8cb with backstep so that the students are able to understand workshops/other classes that are based on the 8cb. Then as finish a mini milonga with tandas and a dancefloor that is as small as possible


Sadly this contains two patterns: the cross (because it is danced, but not lead all the time), and the 8cb because a lot of workshops start with the teacher saying something like "and after the 3 we do X"
Gssh

 

[UKDancer]

A 8 week course could look something like this


1) Walking solo to the music (including pauses, doubletimes, other rhythmic stuff that works with the music), Embrace as means of communication between two people, leading weightshifts, once the leaders have established where the weight of the follower is (or think they have) step forward - if she is where the leader thinks she is it is impossible to step on her! Enjoy this! Everything we were able to walk alone we can walk with a partner, too! Change partners, walk+stop+weightshift to the music in the line of dance, change partners ....



2) walking solo to the music, walk+stop+weighshift as a couple, right now corners are difficult, and if we wait for another couple to move we are a bit in trouble, too. So, bonus options: rocksteps, the perfect solution for waiting and turning, and in general a good default move, and sidesteps. talk about navigation and codigos


3) walking solo to the music, walking with all the moves in couples, repeat. Expansion of the idea of weighshifts: The leader establishes the followers axis, and pivots her by walking either clockwise or counterclockwise around her. walk around in couples, and throw this in.


4) walking solo to the music, walking in couples with all the moves we know up to now, then introduce ochos: this is just establishing an axis, pivoting the follower, and leading a backstep. The leader has two options: either sidestepping or also pivoting and frontstepping. Mention that forward ochos also exist, and watch overachievers figure out how to do them.


5) walking solo to the music, walking in couples with all the moves we know, introduce the giro as an extension of the ocho, suggest that they try getting out of the giro at any of the followers collections either by walking straight or transitioning into ochos


6) walking, dancing, introduce the cross system as a consequence of a hidden weightshift of the leader,


7) walking, dancing,introduce the cross, mention that it is very difficult, but common, warn followers that many leaders will expect it after 2 steps in the cross system, warn leaders that many followers will do it automatically after two steps in the cross system


8) walking, dancing, teach the 8cb with backstep so that the students are able to understand workshops/other classes that are based on the 8cb. Then as finish a mini milonga with tandas and a dancefloor that is as small as possible


Sadly this contains two patterns: the cross (because it is danced, but not lead all the time), and the 8cb because a lot of workshops start with the teacher saying something like "and after the 3 we do X"
Gssh

I don't know whether it's just a matter of language usage and what we understand by a 'pattern', but I find that whole schedule to be entirely pattern-based.

The sequence seems odd too: we're dancing back ochos, but not in cross system for another two sessions, and we're dancing the giro 'pattern' having not covered the front ocho (except for the self-discovery of the 'overachievers').

I get a better idea of a learning methodology that avoids patterns from the approach described in David Turner's 'Passion for Tango' book.

I agree that it's useful to include the 8CB though, not because it is a useful pattern to lead, but because many teachers make constant reference to it.

 

[UKDancer]

I posted this earlier, but on the wrong thread (duh!):

...there have been several suggestions that patterns are of little use in learning to dance tango, and more than one request for someone to put forward an alternate strategy that will enable the clueless beginner (for whom the 'anything is possible' philosophy is just white noise) to develop their ability to dance the typical vocabulary of the language of tango, without using patterns.

For me, I watch more experienced dancers, and I see them executing patterns just about all the time. The most common pattern is one of a series of 'simple' walking steps, usually ending with some rhythmic play that takes its lead from the musical phrasing (most frequently syncopation). Perhaps others wouldn't think of that as a pattern at all, but watching the same couple throughout a track with the same phrasing structure, it's interesting to see how often such a device might be repeated. Maybe it's the leaders favourite track, and he has got into the 'habit' of feeling the song in that way - I don't know.

What is the learning strategy, in practical terms, that avoids patterns as though a plague, and what is the teacher's role, particularly in a class rather than private lesson setting (where I can see the non-pattern approach being far more accessible)?