Solid basics are important. if you don't have them, they get in the way of whatever else you're trying to do. But alone they can only make you an average dancer. If you want to stand out you need something more. Preferably more than one thing. Preferably the things tango teachers can't teach.
Tango Diaries
- Thread starter Bailango
- Start date
pianistamediano
Forum Master
That's the main pitfall of continually refining one's dance — I can say myself that the more I dance and work on my dance, the greater the heights of pleasure I experience, but I experience that less and less, which has made me more and more selective over the years.
Unless one is a professional, I feel it best to have one or two or only a few USPs, and specialise in some area or niche.
I'm headed to one of those events right now — in fact, I've just got off the plane! The thing is that a lot of people go there to spend time with friends and favourite dancers they might only be able to see once or twice a year, and I'm going there because my friends will be there.
Breaking into such a scene has its benefits, but it may very well be more trouble, energy, time, and frustration than it's worth for the vast majority of dancers.
Personally, I applaud your resolution towards improving yourself. There are countless Chinese proverbs related to lifelong learning, the values of patience and perseverance, the time it takes for a proper education, etc. which I won't repeat here, but I am very much a firm believer in them.
That said, find your happy place and stay there; I've seen how toxic discontent can be. I might be moving to a region where tango is small and there are probably only one or two dancers that might be able to give me the experience I seek, so I (with trepidation) look forward to the learning opportunities and adjustments I will have to make.
What do you mean by things teachers can't teach?
I agree 'solid basics are important', but it depends when and how they're taught. As explored in the threads What is tango doing wrong... years of learning to walk BEFORE learning some 'dance' elements, does not make a good social dancer (whatever some 'maestro' opined). Nevertheless it needs to be included within the teaching programme.
@Rabbit can answer for his perspective, but for me it's developing your own style, or steps instead of copying what some great dancer of the past did, it's evolving your own approach. As an example giros/molinettes did not necessarily exist back in the early days; a person was credited with developing that step (Petaca IIRC, but possibly not true). Even the 8CB was the work of a committee! Similarly volcadas... Nuevo might be considered in a similar light.
No I am not confusing them
I didn't remember correctly
From my notes, it was Cacho Lavandino, the brother of Petróleo, in 1939, as told by Miguel Zotto in a 1985 (?) interview (from ~0:42). I suspect the 'giro' had been around longer from Spanish immigrant dancers (see also Schottische), but they took it, it evolved, and they developed it. Back in 1939 something, then, that teachers couldn't teach. AT hasn't finished evolving, despite some who wish to hang on to their perception of retro 'traditions' and elements. Maybe it just seems a better world...
opendoor
Forum Master
The molinete existed independently in some folk dances. It is said that Petróleo built a teaching system around it.
I was told Pugliese built his didactical approach around the 8-count basic.
Volcadas definitely belong to tango right from the beginning. I would even say that they are older than tango, as they already appear in danzón which is a parent to tango. Volcadas can also be found in african dances.
Basically Nuevo was seen as a return to the roots and original forms of tango. Musically and dance-wise. It was aimed against the European influences in tango (aka tango de salón).
Last edited:
I suppose it was simpler back then, pre-internet, to come up with something 'new'. The world was smaller.
Tango of 1890 differs from that of 1920, which differs from that of 1939, which differs from 1970's, which differs from 1990's... Some want to keep it in what they liked in some previous age of culture and dance (usually the 'GA'), but then there's also re-enactment of the 1920's or 1990's. Steps, and the associated culture, are not static and set in some bygone era.
But, whilst these are important in themselves, they only serve to illustrate the point that, at some time, 'teachers' didn't know these steps so couldn't teach them.
Ultimately, have your own style, as these maestros-of-old did. In the meantime there's whatever you're taught.
Tango of 1890 differs from that of 1920, which differs from that of 1939, which differs from 1970's, which differs from 1990's... Some want to keep it in what they liked in some previous age of culture and dance (usually the 'GA'), but then there's also re-enactment of the 1920's or 1990's. Steps, and the associated culture, are not static and set in some bygone era.
Yes. But the anecdotes are interesting.
I think we also see them, or similar, in some Valentino films, or at least stage tango. But they've become more popular of late whilst [extreme] colgadas less so.
That will be Mingo Pugliese. There's also a giro de ocho attrributed to him (pre-dating 8CB). Whilst the 8CB is attributed to Copes, I understood there was some 'meeting' (more likely chatting in a bar) where some great maestros, probably including Copes, came up with the 8CB - but with disagreement about what was step 1.
But, whilst these are important in themselves, they only serve to illustrate the point that, at some time, 'teachers' didn't know these steps so couldn't teach them.
Ultimately, have your own style, as these maestros-of-old did. In the meantime there's whatever you're taught.
How to embrace, interpretation, physicality, musicality, making partners happy, self-confidence, humility, creativity, understanding one's own strengths and weaknesses, etc...
And creating one's own style based on these things
I'd disagree on some of those.
Embrace can be taught (or, at least the basics).
Interpretation can be taught ( it you can make more of it).
A good 'coach' can certainly help with the others, if you classify that as 'teaching'. But that does require some humility to know you don't have all the answers and accept guidance
Obviously you have to do something with what you're taught - which is your 'style'.
I seen you say that before. But I disagree about it being returned to roots or original form. For that to be true, tango should have been popularly dances that way socially. I have doubts it ever was. Tango was always performed on the stage as far back as 1910s I think. Stage performances of any dance include a lot of theatrics and other elements usually not seen in the social dancing.
By simpler do you mean easier and more often? Or that in post-internet anything “new” can quickly become “no longer new”.
Before 1910s, what was danced was precursors to tango. “tango” as talked, dance, and understood was only from 1910s onwards. There are some dances whose names we know from earlier era but other than written word don’t know how they were dance.
I do not think the essence of tango as a dance has changed since 1910s or early 1930s. All social of street dances that are not codified will evolve with time. They either lead to different dance style or retain basic essence of the style. Tango I don’t think has evolved into a different dance style or gave birth to something other than tango. It has in essence remained the same dance. Vals, Milonga, and Tango have so been present since early days? To me early days is 1910s (when what we danced developed) and 1920s.
If tango were to be equivalent of mordern Homo sapiens, then it appeared post 1910s. Everything before 1910s is like ancestors of modern Homo sapiens.
Not really sure. Most will practice what they see around them. Hence each tango scene develops its own tango style/elements that are more common to it. It doesn’t mean an outsider can’t dance or fit in easily. It is matter of what gets expressed most.
But how do you define a giro/molinette. As the woman walking around a man or more rigidly as back-side-forward-side-back step formula. Other dances had woman walking around a man. And a man walking around a woman. In partner dancing.
They have been in the stage dancing for long. I am pretty sure I have seen off-axis like volcadoish in old Afro-Cuban dance complex. In other modern dances, it is hard to tell where the move came from.
Does any other dance had something like ganchos? I am trying to remember if I seen it in any other dance.
I have vague recollection that the 8CB was also used in days when men first learnt with men. Or my memory is fuzzy.
Isn’t that always true in all eras. When there is no codification, fragmentation will be natural. Everyone whether a maestro or average social dancer develops or falls into their own style.
Not all, but some teachers will address a subset of those. If you keep learning from different teachers, you might end up learning all of the elements in the above. To learn from one teacher all of them, if at all possible will take a long time. Imagine if you were drawing a teaching plan which included all of above. How would you draw the roadmap. Then the question is group classes or private.
But I disagree that all of above needs to be taught. Most of it needs to come from within. That is how you develop from a new dancers to maestro class dancer. I think the job of the teacher is to make student aware of all these elements. It is upto the student to seek out and master them. Either by didactic learning, practice, or osmosis. F
Knowingly or unknowingly that happens. Isn’t that why we know how a particular partner dances.
opendoor
Forum Master
I do agree: every revival is kind of a construction!
Post-Internet a lie can travel round the world in nanoseconds before truth can get it's boots on! Their world was barrios, drinking, gambling, and dance. The rest of the world had other concerns. Sure, they 'met' at milongas, but multiple people could probably come up with the same idea, and one claimed it as theirs, and so it passed on as the anecdote.
Milonga is frequently claimed to be the earliest version of tango. But today's (post 1932) milonga (urbana) differs from early milonga. Canaro claimed to have coined the term 'Tango milonga' as 'Tango for the milonga', or 'tango for dancing'.
Yeah, you could define pre-1895 as 'proto-tango', but so what? There's plenty of tango history lessons online. My point is that there are 'phases' of tango in history and some transition, or evolution, to each phase. We pick up and carry forward adaptations of bits of associated culture with each phase (like cortinas, or bits of códigos, adapted for some new phase).
Tango used to be danced in brothels and drinking dens where the men paid for a ticket to dance. The women just got paid for the evening. Probably an improving evolution to have dropped that!
I don't care (except to execute it). My point is that it got picked up and developed, or evolved. There would have possibly been a time in some barrio practica where some teacher didn't know what Petróleo was doing, or he was from the right barrio. Of course when they found out, and people wanted to do it like him, they taught it.
Maybe I need a new 'killer step' in my dance? Do I develop it from what I know of or invent it? Has someone somewhere got something similar? Wow, you want to copy it?
Few. Those that do have stolen it from tango (fusion). But do they have it codified in some specific form?
Consider El Pulpo, known as the 'King of Ganchos'. Do many wish to dance wraps like that? I suspect there are few teachers who know of those ganchos to teach them.
I'm sure something similar existed, but perhaps not known by that name. Not exactly an Argentine Spanish term! Paso básico maybe? AI tells me it was developed as a didactic tool for teaching, possibly around the 1950's for international teaching since there's no basic step in Argentine Tango.
I'd say some actively develop it and promote it; the rest just dance (fall into it). That's what separates the 'greats' from the 'also rans'.
My point was simply to illustrate that some teachers just teach 'basics', and that's 'good enough'. There are some elements: the known and unknown unknowns, they can't teach because they don't use them.