How about "just keep dancing"? Too broad, maybe?
what makes a leader/follower good
- Thread starter luh
- Start date
But it is adjusting that I'm doing. I lead a whip, my partner over-rotates (be it by accident or to better enable a syncopation or body styling without breaking the move itself). I can either ignore her over rotation and lead my next move as if she had followed the move in a plain and unmodified manner (that is to say followed the move rather than dancing the move) or I can adjust my lead to the angle, distance, and tension level that has now developed.
I could also use the word adapt, which in context really means the same thing, or accommodate or alter... but both of those are much to passive or permissive to be adequate word choices for dances like Lindy Hop, for my taste... not that they aren't all synonyms for each other, but the connotations they have are different.
I could also use the word adapt, which in context really means the same thing, or accommodate or alter... but both of those are much to passive or permissive to be adequate word choices for dances like Lindy Hop, for my taste... not that they aren't all synonyms for each other, but the connotations they have are different.
I am causing the step... I create the action in her body, she then reacts, either by accepting the lead and moving willingly as I have already begun mking her body do so, or resisting me.
I am creating the step, she is going with it. That is lead/follow on the most basic level. Everything else is built on this basic understanding. The idea of follow and follow is an abstraction. A fun way of making leaders think about watching their follower and responding to her movement... but it is an abstraction that if taken literally results in both people standing around waiting for a move/movement to happen.
As fundamentally wrong as co-leading.
Sounds an awful lot like following to me.
I offered Kool-aid and cookies to those who would come to the dark side of AT, but this thread has caught my attention again so I have returned to up the ante - Brownies!
:banana:
Vince A
Active Member
Sagitta
Well-Known Member
Angel HI
Well-Known Member
The concepts that I have been trying to say here, obviously not well, are what I have been teaching for years, and, though, arguably in different words, have been upheld by many, if not most, of those whom many of us consider maestros/maestras. As recently as tonight (which is what brought this thread to mind, again), a well known maestra from BsAs commented on how well my concept of lead/follow is working with the students whom she had encountered on her visit to the states. I wish that within the 5 languages that I speak, I could have said it better here, thus be better understood. Yet, for the moment,
I give up.
I give up.
The problem appears to be one of terminology. What you say might make perfect sense within the concept of AT and when you are present to demonstrate what you mean.
The problem is outside of your own dance circle your jargon is more than a little confusing. As a matter of fact in the world of Swing it is a ludicrous impossibility, seeing as how the roles of lead/follow are well established and everything you have said is the result of "Following the follower" is what we refer to as leading well, without the weird language.
I'm not saying you are wrong in what you teach, I'm saying that the words you use and the descriptions you give mean different things in the context of swing... it is you who must decide if you want give up your terminology to better communicate with Swing Dancers or if you are going to try and make the hundreds of thousands of us abondon our terminology to communicate with you.
The problem is outside of your own dance circle your jargon is more than a little confusing. As a matter of fact in the world of Swing it is a ludicrous impossibility, seeing as how the roles of lead/follow are well established and everything you have said is the result of "Following the follower" is what we refer to as leading well, without the weird language.
I'm not saying you are wrong in what you teach, I'm saying that the words you use and the descriptions you give mean different things in the context of swing... it is you who must decide if you want give up your terminology to better communicate with Swing Dancers or if you are going to try and make the hundreds of thousands of us abondon our terminology to communicate with you.
Angel HI
Well-Known Member
As a linguist, I appreciate your comments, but understand the language very well. It is not flawed, though perhaps, or obviously, not well communicated.
As for being a ludicrous impossibility, I disagree. There are many Swing moves that follow the questioned technique exactly (I won't bother to name them because names tend to change across syllabi). I could site a common one; for ex., a simple natural (right) or reverse UAT for the lady.
As for the need to abandon your terminology, ...unnecessary for communication. :cheers:
LOL. I think you are more concerned with apearing top be right than understanding what others are saying to you. If you want, I can try to clarify again, but, I'd suggest that reading what we have wrote will be enough.
The terms you use mean entirely different things outside of your circle. When I say they are impossible in swing I mean that the way we define/use those words describe something entirely different than what you mean, something not possible in swing.
You don't want to modify your language so your audience knows what you are talking about that is your prerogative. Completely illogical, but your prerogative.
The terms you use mean entirely different things outside of your circle. When I say they are impossible in swing I mean that the way we define/use those words describe something entirely different than what you mean, something not possible in swing.
You don't want to modify your language so your audience knows what you are talking about that is your prerogative. Completely illogical, but your prerogative.
Flat Shoes
New Member
If a follower is about to crash into me, and I jump out of the way, I am responding to her movement. But I am not following her, I am just adjusting to what she is doing.A fun way of making leaders think about watching their follower and responding to her movement...
Sounds an awful lot like following to me.
There is in my opinion many ways of responding to what a dance partner is doing. Not all of them are the same as following. As a lead, most of them is not following, but adjusting to what the follower is doing.
Both lead and follower responds to what the partner does. But there is a clear difference between the roles of the leader and follower. And there is a clear difference between how the lead responds to the follower, and how the follower respons to the lead.
