Why technique is the way it

[IndyLady]

However, general body condition/balance/posture isn't that connected with it ... one may perfectly understand what should be done, but can't do it well because his/her body isn't working good enough for that ... and dance teachers are usually more or less able to explain the first, but most of them can't help much about the second or even understand why technique doesn't work on particular person ...

^^^ This.

I'm not going to humor the "gotcha" response to my other post, it's missing the point for the most part.

At any given moment in any dance, there are probably at least 20 technical things I'm supposed to be doing. My brain doesn't have the capacity to remember that many things at once, so of course they have to be taught and internalized gradually so that I don't have to consciously articulate them to remind myself, and some things are going to take longer than others to make physically happen. In fact, I have told instructors (one in particular had to be reined in a lot) that they had a limit of 3 things at any given time, so pick the most important ones. (Same instructor once tried to bundle three elements and count it as one thing... ha ha, no).

At the end of the day, both students and instructors are human, none of them are perfect, and not every teacher is right for every student. And matching them up optimally is not always possible (especially geographically, based on what I read on this forum). So you just have to work with what you have and make the best of it.

 

[vit]

At the end of the day, both students and instructors are human, none of them are perfect, and not every teacher is right for every student. And matching them up optimally is not always possible (especially geographically, based on what I read on this forum). So you just have to work with what you have and make the best of it.

Exactly

My overall experience is that teachers that are best for me have similar body type like me (if man) or my ideal partner (if woman). That was the case even if I was attending only group classes, where there was usually not much dancing with the teacher, and of course for privates where I mostly want to "feel" it by dancing with the teacher. Theories never worked well for me, although I was reading books etc and I am not against theory, just that theory I got from the teachers was mostly some kind of pseudotheory and was ringing wrong bells on me as mechanical engineer ... exception was a gentleman that was studying physics before oriented to dancing, he was free of telling physical nonsenses to the students for obvious reason ...

 

[Partner Dancer]

Hi Partner Dancer , do you mean travelling or pivoting turns. It would make a difference.

Open ended question, answer as you will. As mentioned in the "original" post, I'm interested in what/how others think (about) in learning to dance, and to what extent they pursue "why."

My take on these things is quite different from what has been tossed around by others in this thread so far, and I'll expound on this in due time.

 

[Partner Dancer]

Perhaps the most basic question is "why" people dance, as that has a high impact on how they learn and how much they care about "why." Of course, different individuals have different motivations and viewpoints, and disagreements/differences/challenges in opinions could be viewed positively as "what works for me" or (implicitly) negatively as "what you are missing." For me, the quest for doing something better (given the amount of effort, time, money, etc., spent) outweighs the ego factors inherent in human interactions. Accolades/criticisms from others affect me far less than those from myself, but YMMV. To me, the ability to assess fairly entails understanding "why."

My motivation in dancing (at this point, and as the case with my other hobbies) is just to do something well and better from day to day. I'm naturally curious, inquisitive, and skeptical and am highly practical in what I consider good/mediocre/bad in dance, not blindly following any religions or doctrines. To me, good technique makes dancing/dances easy. To me, good dancing is easy (but the path to get there is usually quite difficult). To me, being able to dance "anything" with "anyone" without much effort is the ultimate goal.

When I first started, an AM instructor posed in group class the question of "why we have so many dances," and he was just referring to the ten AS dances, plus the miscellaneous Merengue, Salsa, etc.. No student responded, so he followed up with the answer that "it's so we learn to move in many different ways." This "simple" answer is actually pretty prophetic. By extrapolation, doing other dances (partnered or solo) beyond what AM taught would teach one to move in even more different ways. Also, the question of whether "movements" or "dances" should be the main focus of this endeavor pops up. After over two decades of learning and doing, and becoming capable/competent in well over thirty dances, I have my preferences and rational.

About 5 years into my dancing, a high-ranked Standard coach introduced me to the idea of "easing up." Up till then, dancing just oftentimes felt like too much work and headed the wrong way. Although the lesson concentrated on Standard, the concept made me much more aware about enviable goals, that really apply to all dances. It was a turning point in that I realized I needed to take charge of my own dancing development. "Effortlessness" and finesse became my obsessions, and the means was understanding "why" certain instructions/techniques were better than others.

Around the same time, a Latin coach made me aware of how much "effort" good dancers actually put in to control their bodies and movements. Prior to that, I really just "flopped around," mostly because I didn't appreciate enough the use of body isolations and integrity of movements. With this insight, along with stuff learned around then in classical dance classes, I gained greater clarity of what makes for great dancing. There's effort in training the body/mind to do things on demand/interaction, to achieve the effortlessness that can happen while dancing.

Dancing is oftentimes like taking medicine. A lot of dancers are taught to do dozens of techniques simultaneously that are often conflicting or unnatural. Hence, they find it forever difficult. My observation is that many students (and instructors) were never made aware of the "real" basics and hence are always trying to apply a new technique to fix the old broken ones. It's like taking dozens of medicines, each additional one to counter the ill side-effects of the one before, without a diagnosis/cure for the original ailment in the first place.

One of the distinctive qualities of Ballroom/partner dancing (note that I lump Ballroom as a subset of partner dancing (which excludes cabaret, etc)) is that a dancer gets to "work with" a partner, changing the physical dynamics of movement. There are many considerations in being tethered to a partner, that are absent from dancing solo. Having a good grasp of partnered dynamics makes choosing proper techniques almost trivial.

I'll go through the various "why" sub-topics mentioned, as they relate to the issues above, in ensuing posts.

 

[tangotime]

To me, good technique makes dancing/dances easy.

. After over two decades of learning and doing,


.

Easier..

So , you've just scratched the surface

Time spent on "dance/learning ". is quite subjective. The quality of instruction anyone receives, and the ensuing time to adapt the theories, may differ greatly from person to person .
This also needs to factor" in " , competing theories ( as Scrivener briefly outlined ) . The other aspect of "dance " , is how one approaches teaching for 1.. the social side ( the majority of students ) and.. 2.. the competitive side .

It's worth noting that, the social strata in the UK and the States, are miles apart .

 

[Partner Dancer]

My observations, YMMV...

The single most important technique which the vast majority of partner dancers don't know or are inconsistent about doing is alluded to in these videos.

at 4:18

at 3:20

The ability to maintain a taut/flat lower ab and a butt that's tucked under the torso is essential for good upper and lower body coordination. This straightens the body line, making the body like a pair of chopsticks with flex, directing energy and force with maximal effect (and hence minimizes the work). This is the "primary effort" a dancer should make.

Although most (serious) Ballroom dancers have probably heard of the idea of axes of rotation, many/most don't manage to attain it (consistently) because of lack of understanding of the above. An uncontrolled ab or protruding butt breaks the axes lines, making it hard/harder to rotate or lean/sway. Unfortunately, because many dancers are more into the "look" and pizzazz, they often miss this most fundamental of techniques, either because they were never taught or exposed to it, or because they never figured it out for themselves.

How do I know this? I am a prolific social dancer and I observe a lot of dancers in action. At this point, I can tell from the movements of my social partners of the moment how well they coordinate upper and lower body actions and can "superimpose" myself onto the dancers I observe to figure out the force vectors they employ, and consequently how much excess work they do. Because the connection between partners is pretty much always above the waist, and typically at the hands/arms, the ability of each partner to extend that connection across his/her own body so that the legs+feet which provide the weight-support are integral and consistent with the inter-partner connection, both in position and timing, is key to how pleasant and easy the dance goes. IOW, when a partner shifts the connecting point one inch, what he/she desires is to have the other partner shift his/her foot/feet a proportional distance/direction, with appropriate time skew.

I consider Ballroom Samba to be the most difficult dance to do with real lead+follow and connection. Few Samba dancers can do this, and the primary reason is because most others have poor grasp of abs/butt control. When a partner executes a body gyration, the idea is to carry it throughout the body, but most dancers end up flailing the upper body separate from the lower (especially with disproportionate butt shaking), making it "impossible" to do good/true lead+follow (no connection from one partner's feet to the other's). Consider the following figure, the Closed Rocks...


Although doing an acceptable demontration (I will be critical here to press my point), the dancers are not using enough abs/butt control so their upper and lower bodies are disjoint (bellies are flopping). There is no energy flow from the feet of one dancer to the other, and the dancers are in each-other's way (because their dance axes are not "straight enough"). The leader can't convey to the follower to "get out of the way" (at the hip), so there's in-fighting. Unfortunately, most dancers dance Samba (and lots of other dances) using patterns/amalgamations rather than individual movement/weight-change, which means a lot of mediocre/bad technique is covered up. A Standard-only dancer who understand/uses abs/butt control technique should be able to do Samba basics ad-lib.

It turns out that for a lot of activities, such as skiing, skating, scuba diving, and gymnastics, being able to straighten the body, so upper and lower parts are integral, is key to basic competence. Because these activities are primarily characterized by performance/balance/control rather than appearance, participants tend to gain awareness of the need for abs/butt technique as a natural outgrowth of doing.

In the 20+ years I've been taking private/group classes in all sorts of partner dance, I have never heard of any instructor mentioning the abs/butt technique. Instructors talk about "posture" but don't mention the important details of how to achieve it. In the 3 or so years of classical dance lessons I attended, I learned implictly to use this technique at all times, as the 45 minutes out of every 1 hour lesson doing bar and floor exercises demanded the ability to keep the body straight. Every competent Ballet/Jazz/Tap/Modern/etc. (solo) dancer knows this (as shown in videos above). Although I had become keenly aware of the need for partner dancers to do this fairly early, particularly in Samba, it's only in recent years that I would categorically state that in _every_ partner dance across the board (of the 35+ dances I do), this is a core/foundation technique (now that I understand even better "why").

To be clear, the abs and butt techniques shown in the solo spin videos are only part of the story. For partner dancing, the technique has to be refined with such things as body rotation, how much strength verses habit, how much play there is between upper and lower body, etc.. While this is necessary for the partner dances and classical solo dances, it is optional for other solo dances such as line dancing, since the body dynamics are different and these other solo dances have so much more random freedom.

The abs/butt technique gives rise to so many other good/great techniques; trying to do these other techniques without this core capability would be a futile proposition.

 

[tangotime]

at 4:18

The ability to maintain a taut/flat lower ab and a butt that's tucked under the torso is essential for good upper and lower body coordination.
Although most (serious) Ballroom dancers have probably heard of the idea of axes of rotation, many/most don't manage to attain it (consistently) because of lack of understanding of the above. miss this most fundamental of techniques, either because they were never taught or exposed to it,

I know this? I am a prolific social dancer and I figure out the force vectors they employ, and consequently how much excess work they do. Because the connection between partners is pretty much always above the waist, and typically at the hands/arms
I consider Ballroom Samba to be the most difficult dance to do with real lead+follow and connection.

In the 20+ years I've been taking private/group classes in all sorts of partner dance, I have never heard of any instructor mentioning the abs/butt technique. even better "why").

You sure do make a lot of assertions..

The techniques of which you speak, are not

as uncommon as you think/believe. I will use salsa for a classic ex. of a dance where, the use of the "body " from the core ( abs to you ) is a constant part of most teachers vocabulary in that dance discipline .

What really concerns me , is your reference to Ballet technique that should apply to BR. This one area of "dance " is contradictory to the BR technique in most aspects.

I also would beg to differ that, Samba runs a distant 2nd to Foxtrot in degree of difficulty . ( as most Profs will agree ) .

I'm also surprised( thru your statements ) you have never come across any teachers , who advocate the FULL use of the body in partnership dance .

lastly, the amount of time spent social dancing , does not equate to the multi years of prof training, with world class technicians . The theories you espouse, are common knowledge, to any well trained Prof.

NB.. may I suggest you go to salsa Forums, where you can spin technique at its best ( and those dancers are as common as sand at the beach )..

 

[opendoor]

...In the 20+ years I've been taking private/group classes in all sorts of partner dance, I have never heard of any instructor mentioning the abs/butt technique..

On the contrary, in my 20 years of dancing I found it impossible to finde a teacher who not only mentioned the core techniques. At the risk of repeating myself, I think you have confused style with technique for over 20 years. It should be clear that teaching viennese waltz in a proper international standard technique involves a totally different concept of postitioning the axes than teaching one and the same dance in a balfolk or folklore class does. If fear that the said "all sorts of partner dance" only account for two or three different styles. Have you ever asked the teacher before attending a class which style and which techique he/she actually follows?

 

[snapdancer]

I believe PD was using the example of the ballet dancer to illustrate the need to basically stand up straight and maintain that by use the core in order to spin properly. I agree that other ballet techniques don't work/is counter-productive to partner dancing but I don't think PD was pushing those.

My experience on the social dance floor is consistent with PDs. Also have never heard core techniques discussed in a group class but there are a lot of other techniques not described in group classes. One local teacher of C&W dances has invented the term "popcorn feet" for rank amateurs. "Popcorn feet" being the technique you would use to move past people from the center of a row in a crowded theater. Popcorn feet is basically used with one foot pointing LOD, the other foot facing wall, and the body pointed DW. The objective is that the leader's center points at his partner while he leads her in spins. I myself use CBMP facing DW and I believe the teacher uses that for her more advanced students, but if it works it works.

I have taken private lessons with only a few teachers. My present teacher teaches this, the others did not but possibly because I had other issues that were more pressing. I must say that I don't see a reflection of this technique in the private male students of some local female teachers, perhaps they're making a bit of financial calculus in there if the teacher can cover for her student's lack of technique. Countering that, I find it difficult to overcome the habits of a lifetime of slouching over a keyboard and just walking down the street and engaging my core in the "heat of battle" on the dancefloor.

The local "teacher guy" illustrates the lack of core techniques quite well. Teacher Guy is quite sway-backed, but it's even worse than that as his upper torso is straight. So that pretty much eliminates other techniques like CBM and he's so forward-weighted that he sometimes stumbles over his own feet. Teacher Guy compensates for his inadequate technique by teaching the lady to do her part well enough to compensate for his crappy lead; I suspect that he has the "gray book" pretty much memorized even though he can't execute it himself. It was comical watching him attempt a fleckerl. I later told his dance partner who is one of those rare women who naturally can move in CBM and CBMP that I believed that she could do a fleckerl with a minimum of competent instruction but that Teacher Guy never ever would. Or if they did it, it really wouldn't be a fleckerl, rather he would be dancing in one spot while she managed somehow to orbit around him.

 

[JudeMorrigan]

I just wanted to chime in that I've had many instructors/coaches who have stressed the importance of both the core and the pelvic floor, drilling down to the point of discussing individual muscles and how to engage them.

That said, I've also had several instructors/coaches who would be very leery about any discussion of tucking one's butt. Certainly, sticking it out is bad, but the importance of maintaining the natural curvature of one's spine has been a common thread among the higher-level instructors I've worked with. (And even the ballet instructor I'm taking group classes with these days.) It's all too easy to overcorrect.

 

[tangotime]

.

Guy compensates for his inadequate technique by teaching the lady to do her part well enough to compensate for his crappy lead; I suspect that he has the "gray book" pretty much memorized even though he can't execute it himself.

The "grey " book does NOT teach anyone HOW to dance, but What.

Teaching complex moves , is better served , in verbal instruction, and the book is essentially a guide for Prof exams ,technical approaches , and syl. work. Essentially, it is the basic foundation of the dances, and there is no way to include "nuance " f,or each and every step.

There are many ex. where one single word verbally given, may give immediate enlightment to complex issues, but , to include these in a book of technique, they could easily be misconstrued.

 

[IndyLady]

I just wanted to chime in that I've had many instructors/coaches who have stressed the importance of both the core and the pelvic floor, drilling down to the point of discussing individual muscles and how to engage them.

+1 for having multiple instructors emphasizing core/abs/butt/etc. Repeatedly.

That said, I've also had several instructors/coaches who would be very leery about any discussion of tucking one's butt. Certainly, sticking it out is bad, but the importance of maintaining the natural curvature of one's spine has been a common thread among the higher-level instructors I've worked with. (And even the ballet instructor I'm taking group classes with these days.) It's all too easy to overcorrect.

Similar here. At first it was a simplified "booty in", but more recently I've noticed an emphasis on "it's not squeeze your glutes, it should be coming from the abs". Even the lady on one of my hip hop exercise DVD's says that.

 

[snapdancer]

The "grey " book does NOT teach anyone HOW to dance, but What.

I agree with you, Teacher Guy would not.

 

[Partner Dancer]

I believe PD was using the example of the ballet dancer to illustrate the need to basically stand up straight and maintain that by use the core in order to spin properly. I agree that other ballet techniques don't work/is counter-productive to partner dancing but I don't think PD was pushing those.

My post was very specific. The "only" assertion has to do with tucking the butt under the torso and using the lower abs to position that portion of the body "straight." The Ballet/Jazz/etc. solo dancer in the video demonstrates this nicely. It's amusing how other readers infer from my claim all sorts of gobbly gook, like dancing from the core, which is _not_ the gist of this "positioning" issue. For all decent classical dancers, this is a given.

Most/all of my other statements/claims are in support of the main assertion.

My single/main assertion goes beyond just maintaining the tucked butt for spins, which is probably what many dancers do (only). I assert that for most if not all of partner dancing, the butt should be positioned (roughly) thus because the "straight" lower back allows superior movement. This includes in doing walks, rocks (as in the Samba example video), leans/sways, fans, whatever. Note that in my analogy of the "flexed" chopsticks when the tucked butt is deployed, the body itself may not be rigorously straight (note "with flex"), as there could be a (single) curvature of body (from foot to head, as with a tree blown by the wind). This is simply physics, and I can elaborate more later.

To me, technique is technique, independent of dance (the idea that a tucked butt is "Ballet/Jazz" technique is silly, as obviously many/most dancers do it when spinning in any dance, partnered or solo). Some techniques work in certain dances/movements (good technique) and some don't (bad technique). Certain dances expose us more to certain techniques, such as Tango tends to involve more fans (fan figures/moves), but these figures (and related techniques) can certainly carry to other dances, as in fans in WCS or Foxtrot.

Instead of hand-waving in contesting whether a particular technique is good or bad, especially when misinterpreting the original point(s) of my assertion, there is much more useful/productive ways of making points. I invite posters to make comments about the dancing/dancers in the Samba Closed Rocks example, being very specific and indicating time in the video, since the posters seem to have so many strong opinions about techniques (in this case butt positioning). Show us what you know. I already stated some of my thinking, and can go into even more details later.

I have taken private lessons with only a few teachers.

I have taken 10+ years of privates and 20+ years of group classes (in Ballroom and many other partner dances), plus dozens if not hundred of coaching lessons, including with many top-ranked dancers in many genres. I would be surprised if any of the other posters in this thread has taken as many lessons or have come across as many varied instructors/coaches as I have. A very few may have spent some $$$ more than I have, but probably in areas (costumes, comps, etc.) not related to lessons and learning. Unfortunately, as human nature would have it, (other) readers jump to conclusions about what I stated, twisting my words from not reading carefully. They can certainly believe whatever they want, including dancing with a protruding butt, but their assuming things like I haven't "heard it all" is amusing. I deliberately use words like "lower abs" and "butt tuck" to stay away from this over-used idea of "core" (what is that? a lump of the entire abdomen? the entire torso?), and yet readers assume based on their own stories.

I re-iterate that in the thousands of lessons I've taken in partner dancing, I've never heard one instructor mention the importance of tucking the butt, the one technique I believe is fundamental to all partner dances I do (about 35 of them). I'm sure some/many of the instructors do in fact tuck the butt at times, or perhaps most/all the time, especially when they spin, etc. but they may not recognize its (all situational) importance and convey it to students. I have to stress, as I had already mentioned in the need to refine, that the "tucking" in partner dancing is not quite exactly what the Ballet dancer demonstrates in the video. I'll get into this later, as it gets protracted, since this and many other great techniques that derive from it are highly intertwined.

The posts from other readers actually support my claim that no/few Ballroom/partner instructors ever teach/mention butt positioning (from what I can tell reading some posts, some instructors may even teach/espouse/do butt protrusion). The posts keep mentioning some ethereal concept of "dancing from the core" which is so vague, it's useless (and not what I'm describing). Very similar to what I hear from many instructors about "body leading," when many of them that claim to teach it have no clue how to do it well. There's a big distinction between never having heard of the specific technique verses having come across it (heard about it or figuring it out) but discounting it (for oneself, or for all).

BTW, discussions about specific muscles, etc, is really pseudo-science to me, where dance instructors pretend to be surgeons. Dancers need to know much more general and practical information, such as the lower abs are far less strong than the butt and thigh muscles, and hence should be used more for positioning than powering.

 

[JudeMorrigan]

One more note since maybe it'll clarify things: I screwed up in my last competition and there were a few points where I *was* sticking my butt out. While watching the video, my instructor pointed them out specifically as something I both should know better than to do and as something I needed to stop. Because we've talked about it before. So when I talk about "maintaining the natural curve of the spine", it's definitely not about sticking one's butt out.

In all sincerity, I'm not doubting that your experiences are what they are. But all I can do is relate what mine are.