Look Mum! No hands!

[Pacion]

Something else I saw tonight at the Ballroom Blitz which reminded me of something - Christopher Hawkins and Hazel Newbury were dancing, her right arm around his neck, her left hand around his waist and he similar. Yet, they were dancing in this closed position, moving around the floor.

There could be two explanations I can think of - a) they knew each other so well to dance with, no really leading was required OR he was still leading/signalling with his body. Guys, have you ever tried to lead your partner without the obvious hand holds/arm action? Ladies, how did this feel for you, if you have ever experienced it? Are there certain dances for which this is ideally suited or some where it just would not work in a month of Sundays?

 

[ShyDancer]

I dance similarly sometimes.... during Waltz and any New Vogue dances.
And only ever with people I know well and am comfortable with as yes it does require body leads.
The way I do it both partners place their arms around the others back at waist level (Girls left arm and Guys right) with the other hands either holding the lower arm close to the elbow or letting it hang free.

Its quite a comfortable and relaxed way to dance, I enjoy it

I cant see it working for the Latin dances though as you need more space..you'd probably hurt each other :lol:

 

[MacMoto]

A bit different, but a good friend of mine and I sometimes dance salsa together (not solo shines) with no hand contact. We would go on the dancefloor without holding hands, and he would just start dancing. I would mirror his steps and move with him, and he would use his eye contact and torso/shoulders to signal CBLs and turns. It's limited of course so we don't do this for the whole song, but it's fun.

 

[MacMoto]

he was still leading/signalling with his body.

...

Are there certain dances for which this is ideally suited or some where it just would not work in a month of Sundays?

Of course, that's how lead-follow works in Argentine Tango -- lead by the torso rather than the hands/arms.

 

[Sabor]

as u indoubtedly know .. everything is possible mi lollipop.. its all up to the couple dancing and how much they be connected ..

u can lead/follow with so much but a gesture .. its not so much physically induced here as it is soul juice..

thats why.. U GOTTA HAVE/GET DA JUICY JUICE! :mrgreen:

 

[ShyDancer]

as u indoubtedly know .. everything is possible mi lollipop.. its all up to the couple dancing and how much they be connected ..

u can lead/follow with so much but a gesture .. its not so much physically induced here as it is soul juice..

thats why.. U GOTTA HAVE/GET DA JUICY JUICE! :mrgreen:

I have been waiting all day to hear Sabors response to this :lol:

 

[Pacion]

I have been waiting all day to hear Sabors response to this :lol:

:doh: :lol:

An alternative lead I have seen - I saw a salsa performance where Luis Vazquez lead his ex-wife Joby (now Joby Brava or Joby Martinez) with a scarf around her waist and he was holding the ends of the scarf. I have also seen an italian couple, known as D & G (Daniela & Graziano) from Italy who have danced with a cape around Daniela's waist and Graziano holding the ends. I enjoyed those performances very much as it made a difference from the handholds. Sure, it was choreographed and probably rehearsed a thousand times BUT, very effective and it looked so natural

Incidentally Daniela & Graziano are going to be at the NY/NJ "Salsa on the Hudson" congress.

 

[Another Elizabeth]

Something else I saw tonight at the Ballroom Blitz which reminded me of something - Christopher Hawkins and Hazel Newbury were dancing, her right arm around his neck, her left hand around his waist and he similar. Yet, they were dancing in this closed position, moving around the floor.

There could be two explanations I can think of - a) they knew each other so well to dance with, no really leading was required OR he was still leading/signalling with his body. Guys, have you ever tried to lead your partner without the obvious hand holds/arm action? Ladies, how did this feel for you, if you have ever experienced it? Are there certain dances for which this is ideally suited or some where it just would not work in a month of Sundays?

Leading with the arms is frowned on generally in standard. Many couples practice without arms or in various practice holds designed to let them focus on body movement, rather than arms, for leading and following. I bet Christopher and Hazel can dance together beautifully with their arms behind their backs. The position you describe would be very easy to lead/follow in for any experienced couple.

 

[Chris Stratton]

Leading with the arms is frowned on generally in standard. Many couples practice without arms or in various practice holds designed to let them focus on body movement, rather than arms, for leading and following. I bet Christopher and Hazel can dance together beautifully with their arms behind their backs. The position you describe would be very easy to lead/follow in for any experienced couple.

I feel the need to jump in here for a minute and point out what I think is a very important difference:

Leading WITH the arms, vs leading THROUGH the arms.

The first, actively using the arms to move your partner around, is I think a fault in most cases - yes, there are a few situations where small intentional changes in arm position are warranted, but mostly the arms are not active.

On the other hand, leading through the arms is very, very important in my mind. Many intermediate dancers seem to over-stress body contact as a means of leading, and really distort themselves trying to achieve it. At the same time, their arms are so floppy that they aren't really achieving any connection there - and may in fact put their elbows behind their backs (a big no-no) in at attempt to maintain contact.

I think that the main leading action comes from the man's body, but is transmitted from his body to hers primarily through their arms. This requires both dancer's arms to be somewhat connected to their torsos - which is good practice anyway. And this allows the partners to use whatever body spacing is most appropriate for the present development of their posture and foot action.

Yes, you can do lead and follow with just body contact. But I've also experienced having a top coach lead me - quite clearly, and I'm speaking as a leader who does little following - through things using only one hand. Everything I needed to know was in the connection of his left hand to my right.

 

[Another Elizabeth]

Yes, I'll agree that you can lead/follow a lot with the arms. And I didn't really mean to imply that the lead comes from the body contact, but really from the body action, which can be felt with many different body parts at once, including the arms. Dancers like Chris and Hazel (and even those at a far lower level, who are nevertheless very experienced) develop a sort of telepathic awareness of one another's bodies, so that it's difficult for them to say how information is communicated when they lead or follow - they just say things like, "I feel him shift his weight to here, so I go there," or "I suggest with my body that she move this way." And the best dancers seem to be able to drop out different parts of the dance hold and still have the full range of communication. Intermediate dancers sometimes see that the arms are not needed, and conclude that they should stick their bodies to each other so the "channels of communication" are always open that way. In fact, by gluing their bodies together, they mostly shut down communication through that channel.

But the OP sounded like s/he thought that all lead/follow occurs in the arms, so that if they're not there, you can't dance. And that's definitely not true.

 

[Pacion]

I feel the need to jump in here for a minute

Is that all you are going to give me :wink:

Thanks Another Elizabeth and Chris for your input. Another Elizabeth, you wrote: "But the OP sounded like s/he thought that all lead/follow occurs in the arms, so that if they're not there, you can't dance. And that's definitely not true."

OP? :?

 

[Another Elizabeth]

OP? :?

Original Post (or Original Poster, depending on context)

 

[Pacion]

OP? :?

Original Post (or Original Poster, depending on context)

Thanks, that was me :wink:

But the OP sounded like s/he thought that all lead/follow occurs in the arms, so that if they're not there, you can't dance. And that's definitely not true.

No, I didn't think all lead/follow occurs in the arms (or using hands) but I was reminded of it last night and wanted to share and get some discussion/additional thoughts

Similar to Chris, I have been very fortunate to experience a lead from a top salsa teacher with one of his fingers connected to one of mine. In salsa, unless it is your SO (at least for me anyway), dancing that close to someone where your bodies are touching for such an extended period of time just does not happen. Therefore, it would be unusual to get the lead purely with the guy using his body - is my experience.

 

[Another Elizabeth]

No, I didn't think all lead/follow occurs in the arms (or using hands) but I was reminded of it last night and wanted to share and get some discussion/additional thoughts

OK. I got that from your statement that one explanation for their being able to dance well in that position was that "no real leading was required". I just wanted to point out that lots of leading could have been going on, contrary to that idea. Also, the arms in the position you describe can be used pretty effectively for sensing where partner's weight is. If they are used to lead/follow on the basis of weight shifting, rather than sensing certain amounts of force in the hands and arms, then it wouldn't even require a readjustment to dance well in that position.

And I think you answered your own other question in this last post - Salsa is a style that doesn't lend itself to dancing without arms, while standard works pretty well.