Step projection - Proyección del paso

[itwillhappen]

Here's a very good one with Soledad Nani, who may just be one of the most creative leaders I've seen. I've seen her live a couple of times and she's exciting to watch.

Indeed: no exaggerated posture, smooth walk, sensitive to the music.
We would be laughing out loud if that girl tried to impress us with an "upper chest posture".
So is the footwork like a relaxed "Muhammad Ali Shuffle", not an aggressive "Dempsey Drop".

I suppose that might find mercy in the eyes of Susana Miller!
But ... is there any doubt that the "milongueros viejos" in general had never been willing nor able to dance this way?

 

[JohnEm]

This sentence has been wandering around in the back of my head, because i feel that it captures something important, but i was not able to relate it to how i think about the dance. I am still not sure i completely have it, but i feel the key for me is to think about how movement is conditional on the music. I think the weight transfer happens on the beat ("beat" in the widest sense - we have started dancing, and to some extent agreed on our musicality already), and the the follower either decisively shifts weight, or decisively doesn't shift weight and stays on the original base. As a leader i can (attempt to) float her/keep her between weight transfers, but that is me interrupting their natural relationship with the beat midway and extending it beyond what they expected. The thing i am playing with is not the dyads geometry but its relationship with the music. I am thinking of a few excellent dancers that i don't quite enjoy dancing with because they have amazing projection to the extent that they have basically no discernable relationship with the music anymore - as i am interested in active followers that tell me about their musicality in their dance these dances don't give me all that much. One of my teachers used to say that as a leader you steal the music from the follower.
Basically i think that the distinct change of bases and communication of ones intended weighttransfer is more important than projection - emphasizing projection helps with the play with the free leg (from a cynical perspective by making it unneccesary for the leader to understand and work with the followers musicality - otoh it opens up understanding and working with the followers body quite a bit). I think one difference is the question if we want to play with rhythm and the followers musicality, and the followers expectations/plans about the future based on them, or with geometry and the followers body, and the followers expectations/plans about the future based on our physicality and the impulses and the dynamics.
(of course these things are not actually seperable - but what we emphasize as the primary target, and what is the intermediate tool to get there changes our technique - is music one of the tools to play with geometry, or is geometry one of the tools to play with music. At least for me this has been shifting back and forth - there have been times where i tangoed to the sound of rain, and it was only about me and her, and there were times where we left the dancefloor frustrated with some ambient piece that didn't seem to offer us anything to dance to. )

Reading between the lines, because the lines themselves are so difficult to make much sense of - sorry.
Your dance has little correlation to mine, maybe even your taste in music is different to mine. So I'm not at all sure if my description of weight transfer is at all appropriate to yours. I'm talking about synchronisation, you seem to be talking something else entirely.

The only conclusion I can reach is that you are over-thinking this dance considerably.

 

[ArbeeNYC]

Indeed: no exaggerated posture, smooth walk, sensitive to the music.
We would be laughing out loud if that girl tried to impress us with an "upper chest posture".
So is the footwork like a relaxed "Muhammad Ali Shuffle", not an aggressive "Dempsey Drop".

I suppose that might find mercy in the eyes of Susana Miller!
But ... is there any doubt that the "milongueros viejos" in general had never been willing nor able to dance this way?

Not sure what Miller would think, although it's not exactly her style, it's far too dynamic and Nani opens the embrace periodically. Personally, I prefer Léna Lamorelle's approach to the dance but Soledad can be inspiring. Old school dancers didn't dance this way, no. You find a lot of dynamism in Vidort, of course, and Viquiera is also a very dynamic dancer, but still within the tradition. Also, Soledad needs a lot of room. The old milongueros danced on crowded floors.

 

[itwillhappen]

Old school dancers didn't dance this way, no. You find a lot of dynamism in Vidort, of course, and Viquiera is also a very dynamic dancer, but still within the tradition. Also, Soledad needs a lot of room. The old milongueros danced on crowded floors.

Maybe - we don't know whom to believe, don't know with methamorphose there memorization went through. Here did two of them demonstrate how they think they danced in the golden age:

 

[JohnEm]

Maybe - we don't know whom to believe, don't know with methamorphose there memorization went through. Here did two of them demonstrate how they think they danced in the golden age:

Where do you conclude that from?
Clearly this is an extrovert show dance, on a stage under the spotlight.
The commentary confirms the background of the dancers, los Arquimbau.
There is no reference to dancing in the Golden Age,
only to the show Tango Argentino of the 1980s.

 

[itwillhappen]

Where do you conclude that from?
Clearly this is an extrovert show dance, on a stage under the spotlight.

What do you think did we see in the video of Soledad Nani - social dancing in a ronda?
But you're totally right, I got misleaded by the name of the tango.
So we still don't know...

 

[JohnEm]

What do you think did we see in the video of Soledad Nani - social dancing in a ronda?

It's not dancing in a ronda, it's dancing using the whole floor,
forwards and backwards, round and around. Nothing wrong
with that in that context of a demonstration although whether
it's an appropriate demo for the audience I doubt but don't know.

Nor has it anything to do with milonguero dancing, there weren't
any "milongueras" leading - and very few even now. Milongueras
didn't exist in the Golden Age.

Soledad Nani is entertaining, inventive even, no doubt about that.
But her dance mostly irrelevant, especially to men learning to dance
socially. There is in fact much to criticise about the whole, including
her partner's stressed posture and the very non-Argentine "embrace".
Without wanting to enter an off-topic argument, this woman lead dance
is a very different tango.

Let's stop this off-topic discussion here.

 

[opendoor]

..commentary confirms the background of the dancers, los Arquimbau. There is no reference to dancing in the Golden Age, only to the show Tango Argentino of the 1980s.

This thread was planned to focus on technique, not on styles. So I find it insignificant whether someone is dancing stage tango like Arquimbaus, or tries to resurrect ancient dancing habits. And @John I think you remember my rating of GA dancing ("low point in tango history")

 

[ArbeeNYC]

Maybe - we don't know whom to believe, don't know with methamorphose there memorization went through. Here did two of them demonstrate how they think they danced in the golden age:

Hmm. I don't see how this is representative of los milongueros in B.A. It's basically a flashy showpiece. While there were several competing styles prevalent in B.A. in the 30s and 40s, this is a far cry from day-to-day dancing in a crowded milonga.

 

[JohnEm]

This thread was planned to focus on technique, not on styles. So I find it insignificant whether someone is dancing stage tango like Arquimbaus, or tries to resurrect ancient dancing habits. And @John I think you remember my rating of GA dancing ("low point in tango history")

So the circumstances of the dance is insignificant?
I have to disagree since the circumstances of tango
seriously affected how people danced. Despite your
claim earlier, step projection didn't have any relevance
to social dancing in the salons of BsAs. Social dancing
was crowded, over crowded even, and that imposes on
dancers a requirement to dance in the small space occupied
at the time, and a small space that moves with you.
Step projectors often have no idea and no ability.

And the sort of step projection you have borrowed from
martial arts has no relevance to dance, the requirements
are so different. For me this rather circular argument is
at an end. You are entitled to your (rather strange) opinion
but I don't have to agree with it any more than I have to agree
with your claim about the Golden Age being the low point
of tango as a dance. That claim is laughable.

In general social dances don't use your step projection,
it seems to be only tango variants that use it presumably
because its teaching outside BsAs has come from show dancers
who themselves are projecting the whole dance, steps included.
All the black originated dances dance into the floor - from
jives and swing to all the latin dances originating from Cuba.
And don't forget canyengue, an early argentine couple dance
danced into the floor before the days of salons for dancing
and acknowledged to be the forerunner of tango.

So if you want to persist in an argument about step projection,
why don't you tell us what is so good about it?










and only

 

[Gssh]

Reading between the lines, because the lines themselves are so difficult to make much sense of - sorry.

Sorry - i use this board almost as much for brainstorming with myself than anything else

The only conclusion I can reach is that you are over-thinking this dance considerably.

Of course - else i would be out dancing or practicing and not on here

 

[opendoor]

..why don't you tell us what is so good about it?

And actually this makes me wonder: Both of us are experienced and coveted dancers in the social format, one arguing pro, the other against projecting. Your breakdown was brilliant, but why does it make no difference on the dance floor in the end. Perhaps (besides the "low point thingy" , you remember my intitial question, if projection just was a terminological issue?).

 

[JohnEm]

And actually this makes me wonder: Both of us are experienced and coveted dancers in the social format, one arguing pro, the other against projecting. Your breakdown was brilliant, but why does it make no difference on the dance floor in the end. Perhaps (besides the "low point thingy" , you remember my intitial question, if projection just was a terminological issue?).

The two techniques are fundamentally different on the dance floor and the resultant dances. Step projection is biased to performance and generally I avoid such dancers.
But merely repeating what you said before doesnt address my question.

 

[Gssh]

This thread was planned to focus on technique, not on styles.

I don't think these are separable - Technique is style - biomechanics/how our movement works defines how our movement looks. (with some exceptions where people create a specific look in their dance that is not backed up by the corresponding mechanics). There are some principles that are universal, but i think projection is not one of them.

 

[opendoor]

....why don't you tell us what is so good about it?

But merely repeating what you said before doesnt address my question.

I cannot any more. We should ask a woman both of us have danced with!