Yup, this is because of the 3-4 song commitment + the movements are very granular and there’s not really a basic to fall back on so it’s just a bigger risk than other dances to dance with a new lead.
What Is Tango Doing Right/Wrong: Recruiting and Retaining
- Thread starter JournalInTime
- Start date
pianistamediano
Forum Master
Rejection is par for the course for beginner leaders in any social dance — but then tango takes it to a relative extreme. Nowhere else do you dance four songs in a row, hold the close embrace for the majority of the time, have such a small proportion of time devoted to followers' "shines", have to learn so much to do so little just to be average...
The smaller a community is, the closer it gets to the ideal [?] of everyone dances with everyone, with a proportionate increase in friendliness.
In larger communities, followers will almost always try to dance with the better or best dancers. It's a fact. They do so knowing that ignoring the other leaders all the time will just lead to a greater lack of leaders in the long term. But beyond a certain size, it doesn't really matter, because there will be plenty of visitors, and enough people moving into the localities to match any real drain. And of course you have followers becoming leaders.
So it is what it is.
Your information on this is inaccurate on a few counts.
First, the Ballroom connection is not hip to hip; it is right ribs to right ribs. Contact at the hips does happens, but it is an incidental outcome of certain movements, not a goal that the dancers aim for (incidentally, Tango sees less of that hip contact than the other ballroom dances do). Anyway, the main evolutions here are much greater partner offset and taller individual posture than in AT.
Second, the reasons for that evolution. They are not, as you have supposed, just something somebody tried once because it looked cool. Both the taller posture and the greater offset are mechanically functional. The main purpose of them is to facilitate rotational movements, in terms of both speed and angular size. A secondary purpose of the greater offset is to make Promenade position more comfortable and flexible.
Two central characteristics of international-style Tango are the use of staccato and stillness as a contrast to smooth movement, and no straight lines--curves everywhere (in closed position). Staccato requires speed, and curves require rotation; the evolutions you see from Argentine to International Tango arise directly from those expressive goals.
Third, regarding the dance "losing its soul." What you are complaining about is simply the difference between a visual art and a social activity, plus a healthy dose of reductive categorization.
When I watch AT performances, they deliberately sacrifice chest contact fairly often, when they need to create more space in the partnership to facilitate some particular movement. By contrast, because of the evolution of the contact point and positioning, International Tango never loses that rib connection (in principle--there are always technical flaws that can cause "gapping'). So if the "soul of Tango" is close embrace connected at the chest, I could make the (foolish) argument that competitive International Tango has "lost" less than performance AT. A ridiculous thing for me to claim.
And I have already gone over how the evolution has a deliberate artistic purpose, and is not superficial nonsense.
I'd say an issue is not realising that every milonga is different. Some are stuck-up and snooty, harking back to a retro, foreign, culture; others are friendly and contemporary, adapted to the host culture. You can go to one and feel rejected and miserable, an imposter, even an alien, with no redeeming skills; you can go to another and you'll be welcomed, people will explain and dance. There's also a misunderstanding about learning. Yes, it probably does take 2 years of learning to walk properly before you should venture to a milonga (I wouldn't recommend that nowadays), but you wanted to learn to dance. The 8CB! Ochos. Maybe a giro.
You should be able to go to a milonga after a few lessons. It's just a meeting to dance. The group should organise one for students where advanced dancers also attend, and explain the history and those hidden codigos. It should be a happy, fun, social occasion. But people think it's just another dance where you learn a few steps, even a sequence, and voilà, you can dance AT! You need to learn the social and associated cultural aspects, the old motivations (there are now easier ways to hunt for life partners), and where they're applicable. You can then progress.
You go to the other types of milonga and the problem is the people - and your own confidence.
You could compare it to knowing a little social ballroom, and then going to somewhere where everyone on the dancefloor are ballroom competitors. It's not the school disco!
JournalInTime
Forum Master
Hmm, yes, but do the dances these people danced back in the day use the same steps and music as those that are formally judged today, and is the judging rating the same technique and musicality that those people back in the day held to be important?
See, that's the crux of the "Don't ballroomize Argentine tango!" argument. Many people see ballroom tango and think, "Never again!" And yet there's the Mundial. One track (pista) is supposed to honor the traditions of social tango, but in reality has specific prescriptions for steps that social dancers improvise, and awards points for technique that would be uncomfortable for 3-4 hours of nonstop social dance and musicality that wouldn't work on a crowded/unmoving social dancefloor. The other (escenario) exists solely to be viewed and judged, and bears no relation to social tango; it even does the whole costumes-and-makeup thing. So, people who compete in the Mundial aren't really dancing in a way that has much to do with milongas, our "socials," and many just don't bother at all . . . they're dance athletes.
So, while it's reasonable to say that AT can be competitive and judged, but also offers social dancing, only competitive dancers believe that. Most social dancers do not, and social dance events don't remotely resemble competitions. A non-AT dancer could be forgiven for thinking that social AT and competitive AT are two completely different dances, at least as different as competitive AT and competitive ballroom tango.
I think you can now add in the perception projected by DWTS/Strictly - which is themed, telling some story. I'd guess ballroom competitors and social ballroom dancers also say that's not how we dance. Our old beginners group says it's not AT as portrayed on Strictly - but that's sometimes the advertised stereotype which has brought people along to, at least, find out.
We got 'recruited' into AT by street advertising in Switzerland for an AT orchestra in a nice Schloss. Some social dancers took to the floor and we asked ourselves how they were doing that compared with ballroom. And here we are.
But, for similar, I now have to search FB, and, despite plans by some in the past, there's been no outdoor milongas in my region of the north. I've danced al fresco in Europe and there have always been posters, or business cards, for AT groups, teachers and events. I've never noticed that at Spitalfields in London, and last year's UKATA event seemed to struggle to find participant groups - even where you thought the weather might be ideal. I'm going to listen (!) to a small Argentine Tango music group in the near future playing in a library! I'm told it's carpeted.
Perhaps But me not caring about whatever you are referring to by culture, I think ballroom is not any more stripped of culture in the literal sense of the word culture. I think it is aligned with current social customs. The seen currently popular tunes to danced to while also including older ones. I think that is culture. If you don't recognize current mores, music and ways of interacting as culture, I think you have a narrow idea of what culture is.
But more important: Whether ballroom stripped or aligned with culture has nothing to do with whether it is social or competitive. Whether or not ballroom has some sort of "culture", social ballroom does exist.
There is nothing about "speaking English" that is "not culture". What's going on in Chicago is just as much "culture" as what's happening in BA.
I disagree that history is what gives dance soul. I also disagree that "culture" means "infused with history". Current practices, current art, current music are also culture. They are modern culture--but they are culture nevertheless. The don't suddenly transform into culter 60 years from now when we all are dead.
Last edited:
Social ballroom events also don't resemble competitions. They exist side by side with competition.
I'm not advocating changes for AT, saying they should all compete or not compete or whatever. I think dancers should do what they enjoy. But people here were claiming there is no social ballroom: that's simply false. And bringing up issues -- like love of historicity-- that have nothing to do with whether something is social or competitive doesn't contribute to figure out if social ballroom exists. There is social ballroom.
I'm confused. You are responding to my paragraph starting with "When didn't ballroom offer social dancing." I have no idea if they are using identical technique or musicality. I'm am pointing out that ballroom has always been social.
I get that AT afficianados may greatly wish to cling to some degree of historicity. They may like that element in their social practice. I have no objection.
But that doesn't mean historicity is required for something to be social.
Heck, you could retain historicity as part of competitive tango if that's what competitors desired.
There are lots of groups dancing all sorts of historic dances in the US. Serbian? Ukrainian? Irish? We have them all around here. Create a competition for the best history "xxxx" performance, and it's both historic and competitive dancing. And most see it as a celebration of some older cultural practices as opposed to current ones.
But you can have social dancing with no harkening back to some foreign or older cultural practices! And all these different intersections of social/competitive/foreign culture/past culture and exist in parallel-- provided there is enough interest in each one.
@lucia_l expressed the idea better than I would have. Namely, that we seem to be conflating culture and historicity/tradition here
It is certainly true that social AT, in general, values historicity. The competitive form less so, because it is a performance art and arts are always pushing boundaries. And it is also completely true that *none* of the forms of ballroom care particularly about historicity, even the social ones.
I think the thing that has been disquieting me is that folks are talking about ballroom as being a soulless, sanitized outlier because of this. But the truth seems to me that AT is the strange one in this regard, not Ballroom. Club Latin is certainly unconcerned about historicity, nor is WCS or the other social dance forms I encounter. Yet they are given credit for "having culture," and Ballroom is not.
It all just seems very prejudicial, and I can't figure out what the cause is.
It is certainly true that social AT, in general, values historicity. The competitive form less so, because it is a performance art and arts are always pushing boundaries. And it is also completely true that *none* of the forms of ballroom care particularly about historicity, even the social ones.
I think the thing that has been disquieting me is that folks are talking about ballroom as being a soulless, sanitized outlier because of this. But the truth seems to me that AT is the strange one in this regard, not Ballroom. Club Latin is certainly unconcerned about historicity, nor is WCS or the other social dance forms I encounter. Yet they are given credit for "having culture," and Ballroom is not.
It all just seems very prejudicial, and I can't figure out what the cause is.
Last edited:
Makes sense to me. And from a certain point of view, I'd say they are exactly right. People make the same claim about social versus competitive Ballroom being entirely different dance forms.
In one sense, they aren't, because they stem from the same tradition of movement and use the same music. But at the same time, they must be different, because they serve entirely different goals. Somebody who has attained a very high degree of skill can move between the two forms seamlessly, because excellence is able to adjust its expression to match the current goal and environment. But the path to get there looks very, very different under each umbrella, and only a minority of people will study hard enough and long enough to reach that point of convergence.
I say this not to brag, but to suggest that I am not speculating on the subject; I think I have approached that convergence point fairly recently in Ballroom. It helps that there are two coaches in my competitive team who are adamant believers that the soul of Ballroom is still its social roots, and any innovations in performance need to respect that on a technical level. But as a result, I absolutely do not use the same tools for connection and expression on the social floor that I do in competition.
I enjoy both forms greatly, for very different reasons. It pains me when I see people who only live in one camp looking down on the other, because in my view it always stems from ignorance. Which is no doubt why this direction of the topic has moved me to say so much-- it seems like exactly the same dismissal based on a lack of understanding, except across dance styles instead of between two forms of a single style.
Last edited:
DWTS/Strictly is recognizable to a Ballroom competitor, because what they do there is pretty much exactly what you would see in the Showdance competition category.
But yes, the whole point of that category existing is that it permits all kinds of things that you would never do socially and that are forbidden from the generic competition floor, either for being too dangerous to do in a crowd, impossible to improvise through lead and follow to unplanned music (which is central to the philosophy even of competitive Ballroom), or jumping the shark and departing too completely from the style.
So yeah. Definitely true that anyone not in the Showdance category would say "that's not how we do it." But if the dancers on the show are doing their job well, any ballroomer can still recognize each dance based on identifiable themes and characteristics. Including the music that is chosen.
Last edited:
Ok I apologize and stand corrected for some points.
But you said for international style tango it derives from wanting to express staccato, stillness, and curves. Why exactly those traits/movements if not to achieve a certain look for shows/competitions?
For example I’ve heard WCS has evolved from lindyhop to accommodate to dancing to less of the bouncy swing/jazz music so it’s more smooth to account for that.
Yes in AT the embrace is dynamic, it can go from close to open and anywhere in between, this happens more in performances but I do it in my own dance depending on a lot of factors. My point was that huggy part of AT is fundamental (as seen by so many photos of followers with their eyes closed dancing in this style) to the dance and is what it’s known for.
Staccato action is part of the basic character because the selection of music for International Tango almost always has a marching beat with strong note articulation. It is not nearly as varied as the music played at the milonga, because, in Ballroom, variety is expressed with an entirely different dance, not shades and flavors of a single one. Having said that, if a "non-standard" piece is played, an excellent Tango dancer will abandon most of the staccato action and use a character sometimes called "serpentine." No staccato in that flavor. But you generally only see a challenge like that posed to professionals or the very highest level amateurs.
The desire to have walking actions be curved comes from the fact that Tango, uniquely in the Standard discipline, does not use the technical action known as "swing and sway".
Swing and sway is critical to the task of moving two bodies freely in a straight line while squashed together in an offset position. Without it, the action loses its free and effortless character, with one of the following results: it becomes muscular and forced, uncontrolled and hectic, or tiny and devoid of all energy.
Allowing "walking straight" to gently curve solves all of the above issues. But why the workaround? Why not just use swing and sway to make it easier, just as in the other four dances?
Because Tango music, as played in competition, never asks for such an action. And music informs movement, not vice versa.
********
Ballroom evolutions are almost never a question of "wanting to look cool and different." They arise when someone discovers that their current tools and tactics are not sufficient to let them express what the music makes them feel. So they adjust their tools, which adjusts their look.
When that expression resonates with others, they themselves adopt the tools that allow it, or develop their own approach to the same end. When a critical mass of people make such change, it becomes the new normal. And so on forever.
It is certainly not the substanceless, superficial posturing you might think it is. Ballroomers just aren't that boldly innovative--they by and large want to do "the same thing as that guy, but cleaner and better and more personally mine" than creating something truly novel.
Last edited:
I’m not denying that dancing to modern music nor current practices/art/music aren’t culture. But usually you can trace what the modern/current art is influenced by — whether it’s the surroundings, the past history, or just a really good story of how it came about. So maybe I can say that ballroom’s evolved culture is about competition rather than saying it has no culture.
My comment about spanish is related to learning a different language which is also learning a different culture, not that english inherently has no culture.