To Follow without Following

LoveTango said:
Good leaders can follow the wild followers.;)
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by wild followers.

There are followers that seem to to there doing there own thing without any regard for what I lead. I have come across maybe 4 or 5 in the three years I have been dancing, I just let hem get on with it so to speak and move on as quickly as I can.

Where the follower is moving with some relationship to what I am leading then thats fine and very enjoyable. Occassionally I end up dancing with someone that is obviously far more experienced than me then I try to give her as much room as possible but I still feel very much involved with the dance.

By room I mean time and/or space between us when I sense she needs it.
 
pwpulto said:
Aren't the "wild followers" leading? Roles are not always that strict, are they?
PW
Click to expand...
It depends.

Some men just don't like a woman to do ANYTHING at all that they haven't led. A bit of playing before stepping over his fot in a...whatever you call stepping over his foot...can be considered hijacking and they don't like it. Period. Some men will take changes in how a woman moves her body (is she rigid or fluid, letting her hips move or not) as her trying too much to influence the dance. Men like this could consider a woman doing any of these things to be "wild follower", and feel like they're not fully in charge any longer, and dislike it. The only thing to do with those men is to follow blindly and not add anything that they could possibly feel.

And then there are other men who seem to like it if a woman adds to the dance in her own way. The style of her movement, taking a moment to play, suggesting timing, suggesting movements. Some men like it, and don't consider that to be leading. Or perhaps they do consider it hijacking but still like it.

So, what could be a "wild follower" rudely hijacking the lead according to one man could be a follower who is fun and creative and activiely contributing to the musical interpretation of the dance to another guy. There is no way to win...
 
Peaches said:
It depends.

Some men just don't like a woman to do ANYTHING at all that they haven't led. A bit of playing before stepping over his fot in a...whatever you call stepping over his foot...can be considered hijacking and they don't like it. Period. Some men will take changes in how a woman moves her body (is she rigid or fluid, letting her hips move or not) as her trying too much to influence the dance. Men like this could consider a woman doing any of these things to be "wild follower", and feel like they're not fully in charge any longer, and dislike it. The only thing to do with those men is to follow blindly and not add anything that they could possibly feel.

And then there are other men who seem to like it if a woman adds to the dance in her own way. The style of her movement, taking a moment to play, suggesting timing, suggesting movements. Some men like it, and don't consider that to be leading. Or perhaps they do consider it hijacking but still like it.

So, what could be a "wild follower" rudely hijacking the lead according to one man could be a follower who is fun and creative and activiely contributing to the musical interpretation of the dance to another guy. There is no way to win...
Click to expand...

until you know which is which... :)

one lady loves dances nuevo music with me because another lady is totally trad....
 
Yeah, until I know...or until I stop caring. So many times the guys who have the I Am The Leader And You Will Do What I Say When I Say It attitude are the ones who...well, aretn't that good. Gotta do something to amuse myself for 10 minutes. If a bit of a brain and independence on my part threatens their leaderhood...eh.
 
ant said:
I don't know what you mean by wild followers.

There are followers that seem to to there doing there own thing without any regard for what I lead. I have come across maybe 4 or 5 in the three years I have been dancing, I just let hem get on with it so to speak and move on as quickly as I can.

Where the follower is moving with some relationship to what I am leading then thats fine and very enjoyable. Occassionally I end up dancing with someone that is obviously far more experienced than me then I try to give her as much room as possible but I still feel very much involved with the dance.

By room I mean time and/or space between us when I sense she needs it.
Click to expand...

:D:D:D
I can relate part of that. I tried leading a little. Occasionally, a follower would not follow me and so I gave up and started my pretend leading but in fact was follow her.

In my original post, I was trying to be a little humorous. Obviously I failed and it's no surprise to me.;) What I really meant to say is that a good leader knows how to respond to unexpected moves and adjust accordingly.
 
LoveTango said:
:D:D:D
I can relate part of that. I tried leading a little. Occasionally, a follower would not follow me and so I gave up and started my pretend leading but in fact was follow her.

In my original post, I was trying to be a little humorous. Obviously I failed and it's no surprise to me.;) What I really meant to say is that a good leader knows how to respond to unexpected moves and adjust accordingly.
Click to expand...
People here rarely get my jokes either, so I think it's their fault, and not ours.

icon10.gif
 
Peaches said:
It depends.

Some men just don't like a woman to do ANYTHING at all that they haven't led. A bit of playing before stepping over his fot in a...whatever you call stepping over his foot...can be considered hijacking and they don't like it. Period. Some men will take changes in how a woman moves her body (is she rigid or fluid, letting her hips move or not) as her trying too much to influence the dance. Men like this could consider a woman doing any of these things to be "wild follower", and feel like they're not fully in charge any longer, and dislike it. The only thing to do with those men is to follow blindly and not add anything that they could possibly feel.

And then there are other men who seem to like it if a woman adds to the dance in her own way. The style of her movement, taking a moment to play, suggesting timing, suggesting movements. Some men like it, and don't consider that to be leading. Or perhaps they do consider it hijacking but still like it.

So, what could be a "wild follower" rudely hijacking the lead according to one man could be a follower who is fun and creative and activiely contributing to the musical interpretation of the dance to another guy. There is no way to win...
Click to expand...

I agree with you completely.

I think usually we can sense the preferences of the leaders and dance accordingly, if the leader would rigidly hold on to his principle.
 
LoveTango said:
I agree with you completely.

I think usually we can sense the preferences of the leaders and dance accordingly, if the leader would rigidly hold on to his principle.
Click to expand...

double entendre intended???? ;)

you might like to read this...
http://lanuitblanche.wordpress.com/

I do think that an active follower is a more equal partner in the
dance. When I teach about leading and following I try to get my
students to see it as a means of communication. The more active the
follower, the more it becomes like a two-way discussion, and less like
a stream of directions. This means that the follower must speak up
enough to be heard, but not shout: her intention must be conveyed back
to the leader through the embrace, not just executed in her own body,
but she can’t be rigid and forceful (any more than a good leader would
be). On the flip side, the leader must be willing to hear what she’s
saying: he must respond to the change of the embrace the follower is
creating. In other words, he has to follow. We should have a term for
this sort of leader to match “active” following- how about a
“responsive” leader?
 
bordertangoman said:
double entendre intended???? ;)

you might like to read this...
http://lanuitblanche.wordpress.com/

I do think that an active follower is a more equal partner in the
dance. When I teach about leading and following I try to get my
students to see it as a means of communication. The more active the
follower, the more it becomes like a two-way discussion, and less like
a stream of directions. This means that the follower must speak up
enough to be heard, but not shout: her intention must be conveyed back
to the leader through the embrace, not just executed in her own body,
but she can’t be rigid and forceful (any more than a good leader would
be). On the flip side, the leader must be willing to hear what she’s
saying: he must respond to the change of the embrace the follower is
creating. In other words, he has to follow. We should have a term for
this sort of leader to match “active” following- how about a
“responsive” leader?
Click to expand...

I sure like to accept your charge, to make me sound smart.;)

Just learned a new expression (have been ignorant to it all along). Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Dance Ads

Advertise on Dance Forums Reach dancers, teachers, studios, event organizers, and dance-friendly brands. View ad options
Back
Top