--- From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Swing, physics, Olympics, and values Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 16:17:29 -0800 > rlg2@cornell.edu (R. Gray) writes: > > dance was, is, and will always be an Art, and as such will always > > have an element of mystique. 1) Dance, like painting or music, is both Art and Technology. Was is Leonardo or Michaelangelo who did a lot of basic science and applied research to make new pigments and paints so that the colors in their paintings would turn out just so? If someone feels a great dance within them but can't get their body there, is it wrong to expain to them exactly what muscle forces applied at what points in time will help them get their bodies to the spots that they envision. 2) Different people learn in different ways. Some people will learn best from reading technical descriptions. Some people will learn best from hearing it talked about. Some people will learn best from seeing it done. Some people will learn best from feeling the movement. Sometimes a combinations will work best. etc. 3) Social dancing is supposed to be fun. If it feels good and looks good, who cares if it's a precise technical reproduction of something a great artistic dancer did, or something that you or I just made up on the spot? --- From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Swing, physics, Olympics, and values Date: Mon, 27 Nov 1995 21:48:12 -0800 Rahul Dhesi wrote: > Relative movements of the parts of the body above the thighs are > better classified as 'technique' and 'style', not 'steps'. Only if you want to leave the most important part of many dances out of what you call 'steps'. The derisive term "foot dancer" used to be applied by latinos and swing dancers to studio trained types who moved their feet to the right places, but did nothing (musical, interesting or otherwise) with their bodies, sometimes not even changing weight fully. Even to get a basic step right you have to go up the body to at least the center of gravity (C.G.) to get the weight over the correct foot. Think of it this way: 'technique' and 'style' are also part of the definition of 'steps', not just the foot/leg movement. --- From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Swing, physics, Olympics, and values Date: Tue, 28 Nov 1995 20:05:53 -0800 Rahul Dhesi wrote: > How about we all agree on some definitions? > footstep: where a foot is placed on the floor In partner dances, weight changes are more important than foot placements. > steps: any sequence of three or more footsteps There are basics in some syllabi that only have 2 weight changes. > style: nonfunctional movements of the body primarily having > visual appeal A blind couple dances (well) in a dark room. Does this mean that they have no style? > technique: all other movements of the body Every movement, including foot placement, requires some amount of technique. It's just that some technique is obvious and some technique is quite difficult to achieve. These definitions make no sense to me. I'd always thought that the term style could be used to refer to a dancers personal interpretation of a dance; whereas, the term technique refers to the more standardized ways of doing things. --- --- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 12:02:01 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Instructor ACCOUNTABILITY Rahul Dhesi wrote: > The reason why many beginners like to take more advanced > classes is because: > > We all want to dance with those who are better than us. It's not so much that they want to dance with partners who are "better" than them; it's that they want to dance with partners who make them look good. These are two different skill sets. The main reason why there are so many beginners in advanced classes is that they don't know yet how bad they are. Partner dancing is an art forms where the best practitioners do exceedingly complex and difficult things in order to make the results *appear* effortless and simple. Some folks never catch on to the illusion. In fact, to simply have fun at the basic level, one never needs to know. At some point, many people need to be told in order to prevent them from mauling their partners in the more advanced classes. --- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 12:08:56 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Instructor ACCOUNTABILITY Rahul Dhesi wrote: > The reason why many beginners like to take more advanced > classes is because: > > We all want to dance with those who are better than us. In order to learn social dance, beginners *need* to dance with someone better than they are. Partner dancing is a complex language. The best way to learn a new language is by trying to communicate with someone who already knows that language (e.g. child and mother). --- Viennese Waltz step measurements There was a question previously in rec.arts.dance as to the relative size of steps in Viennese Waltz. So I decided to make some actual measurements. Using videotapes of 7 different years of PBS Championship Ballroom broadcasts, I examined the V. Waltz's using slow motion and freeze frame. It was difficult to get good measurements, but I finally found at least 8 examples of couples who were in view for at least two measures while traveling horizontally across the camera view, with their feet unobstructed and the camera not zooming. By taping a clear plastic ruler to the TV screen I was able to get measurements of step length repeatable to at about +-5%. The results: Steps 1 and 2 were equal in distance traveled, steps 4 and 5 were equal in distance traveled. In reverse turns, all four steps traveled about an equal distance. In natural turns the steps on the front half traveled about 15% farther than the steps on the back half. I didn't measure steps 3 and 6, but any travel was relatively small. The Cullips were not in view long enough to get good measurements of their step size, but the overall data corresponds with what I remember them saying during a seminar on V. Waltz, e.g. the forward and side step should be equal in terms of distance traveled. My VCR doesn't have a frame counter so I was not able to get any step timing data (e.g. should the 1 or 2 step be stretched in time?) --- Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance In article , Peter Renzland wrote: >1. many instructors teach beginner groups in such a way as to prevent > connection, by emphasising "steps", etc. > they tend to say beginners first need something to lead/follow, Learning a partner dance is a lot like learning a language. First you need start with basic consonant and vowel sounds, then some pronunciation and a little vocabulary. After you have some of these individual skills down, then you can start working towards engaging in lively debates on politics... or on dance technique. Actually, there's some ratcheting. First you learn to step forward and back. Then maybe you learn to lead or follow forward and back. Then you learn forward, forward diagonal, forward outside partner, forward to PP, forward with a hand change spin wrap duck body wave... and maybe how to communicate each succesive refinement in your dance vocabulary with your partner. If you dance socially, you get to learn regional slang and accents, how to work with people who lead or follow with a lisp or stutter, how to communicate with someone who hasn't learned your techno-lingo, etc. Baby talk to start out. When you get it right, a duet of lyric poetry. --- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 19:31:05 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Why private lessons? Bruce York (Sverdrup) wrote: > What will cause me dismay sometimes is the following: > I go to a dance. Person I dance with claims to have danced > for 10 years. Turns out person is not only a poor dancer but > doesn't realize it. Later I find out that person has never > had a private lesson and has only had group lessons for 10 > years. !!!! People who've spent tons of money on private dance lessons can be just as bad, and just a clueless about how bad they really are, as people who've just stuck with group classes. > If you want to attain a certain level of expertise or > ability find a competent instructor... ^^^^^^^^^ very important key concept Most instructors are fairly good to quite excellent, but a few dance teachers are..., umm... Most people, when they first start out dancing, just can't tell as excellent instructor from a mediocre one. I don't recommend jumping right into private lessons unless: you feel very lucky, or you know dancers whose opinion you can *really* trust, or you've been dancing long enough that you can tell the difference between a good instructor/dancer and a bad one. (hint: watch and dance with several of their students.) I do recommend private lessons, but only with *good* instructors who can help you towards *your* dancing goals. IMHO --- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 19:43:31 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: "JUST"!!??!! Follow?!?! > >From: ConnaC > >Subject: Re: "JUST"!!??!! Follow?!?! > >Date: 23 Feb 1996 04:22:55 GMT > > >I take major offense to following being referred to as "just" > >following ...because, to me, it is not necessarily easier to > >follow than it is to lead and it isn't something that you "just > >do" ... it takes a LOT of training to become a good follower. Amen. People who think the lady can "just" follow are similar to the tourists who think that folks in a foreign country will understand them if they simply SHOUT loud enough. Fred Astaire (or was it Gene Kelly) could dance with a chair or lampstand and make that partner look good. Women who think that it *just* takes a good enough leader to make them look good sometimes end up dancing about as well as a chair. --- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 21:10:24 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: learning from non-dance-teachers Lely Chow wrote: > Would someone like to comment on this? When I go to dance parties, > I sometimes have partners tell me that I am doing something wrong, > and then they proceed to correct me. When I ask my dance teacher > about it, he says *they* are not exactly doing it correctly. So, > when I am at a social function and this happens, do I just do what > my partners tell me to do, or do I practice what my dance teacher > tells me?? 1) When you choose to dance with someone (as a follower), you should try to follow the best you can. Most men hate being practice dummies to ladies who are in their own little mental dance space. 2) If you're the better dancer and you know that the suggestions are bogus, the skill of polite nodding while mostly ignoring him could come in quite handy. 3) If he's a slightly better dancer, listen carefully, but don't believe him completely. Some intermediate level dancers have the annoying habit of, while being able to sense when something feels wrong, completely screwing up the explanation of how to fix the problem. Make note of what went wrong and then let your instructor fix it properly. 4) There exist a small, but non-zero, chance that your partner knows more about certain dance techniques than your teacher. This can happen, for example, when your partner is a well trained international style competitor and your instructor only knows social American style. This isn't anyones fault. You're just trying do two different dances, but together. 5) Your teacher could be holding you back from doing it "right" to keep you from developing certain bad habits. (e.g. a lot of teachers teach beginners to stand up straight, without any sway, not because there is no sway, but because most students will sway in exactly the wrong direction.) --- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 21:46:44 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Leading vs Following (unless your Ramiro) Rahul Dhesi wrote: > I think it's a safe bet that 98% of people who do partner dancing > do it because of the way it feels. Some people learn better by hearing, some by seeing, some by reading about it, some by doing, some by feeling the movement, etc. Some people mostly feel what they're dancing, some see their dancing in their minds eye, a few even hear a kind of harmony of their bodies with the music. To some people, what feels good looks good; to others, what looks good feels good (could even be aquired tastes). Everybodies different. To each thier own. --- Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 22:01:05 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: leading vs. following Tom Stermitz wrote: > I stand by my statement that in the Argentine Tango you can ONLY > lead the followers if you know inside and out their footsteps. > I do believe this is much, much easier if you start out doing > it yourself. In ANY closed position partner dance, you can only lead well if you know exactly where your partner is going. Whether one needs to actually be able to do the followers part in order to know enough, seems to differ among dance schools and instructors. --- Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 19:14:35 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: CWD Counting Cha-Cha Nebraska Chamber of Commerce wrote: > > I am learning to do Free-style Cha-cha and am confused with > the count. When I was taught the "Cowboy Cha-Cha" couple dance > long ago, we counted it 1,2, 3&4, 5,6, 7&8. Doing this I felt > that my cha-cha step matched the cha cha in the music. I now > understand the cha-cha should be counted 1 2,3 4&5 6,7 8&1 > but I do not feel like my cha-cha step matches the cha cha > in the music. What am I doing wrong? When counting "cha-cha-ONE two-three cha-cha-ONE" make sure that your emphasis step is the ONE. cha-cha-BOOM. Some people try to emphasize the forward and back breaks, e.g. STOMP-STOMP Cha-Cha-cha, but this doesn't really fit cha-cha music very well when synched to the rhythm track as "2 3 4&1". IMHO. --- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 12:10:16 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: If your partner knocks yo Edbj@ix.netcom.com (Ed Jay) wrote: > icono.clast@toadhall.com (Icono Clast) wrote: > >Follower, you should: > > > > Never hold on > > Never let go > > Don't think > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > I'm sure you meant don't anticipate. Depends on how you define "think". If you mean Western analytic reductionist forebrain type analysis and measured response, this definitely doesn't work in realtime for a follower (or a leader). If a follower trys to "think" to hard in this manner she will probably inhibit the parts of her brain that help make following work. The way we learn to ballroom dance is quite interesting. We use lots of words to teach and learn the "steps". But we don't really learn to dance until we can just do it without thinking about the words. There is a lot more to human intellegence than analytic thinking. Partner ballroom dancing probably uses a significant amount of brain power to do well, even if not a single word or idea is thought or said. There may also be a limited amount of anticipation used in following. It's just that this anticipation is probably not conscious; and that there are very strongly defined points where anticipation is allowed and not allowed. If there were no anticipation, then the 98% of us who are not top notch leaders would have no success at all. --- Date: Fri, 22 Mar 1996 12:21:43 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: early instruction (was leading vs. following) My guess is that people form a mental image of what "good" dancing is from what they see when they first start learning to dance. If all they see are dancers who are slightly better than they are, then this image will stick. Then when they see the real top professionals dance, what the professionals do will look funny, or even wrong to them. People who are exposed to a high level dancing from the very start, won't have this plateau, in perception of quality, to work past. --- Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 18:16:04 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: CWD Counting Cha-Cha Icono Clast wrote: > There are two ways to count the dance: > > ChaChaCha, On Beat: > One Two ChaChaCha (Break on One) > 1 2 3 & 4 This is only "on beat" if you consider the break to be the emphasis step, which I've heard is not authentic to the original Latino version of the cha-cha. I consider this count as off beat. > ChaCha, Off Beat: > Two Three ChaChaOne (Break on Two) > 2 3 4 & 1 This is "on beat" if you make the last step of the chachacha triplet a strong emphasis step. Then the emphasis step lines up with the down beat of the music. We need a latin dance (and music) historian here. --- Date: Mon, 01 Apr 1996 19:13:26 -0800 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: More on Arthur Murray Luv2waltz wrote: > In my estimation one drawback to Murray's and > Fred's is that the students can only compete at franchise > sanctioned events - most students do not even know what > other local events are occurring. This probably depends on the particular chain or studio. Around here (SF Bay), the Astair studio attends several of the major competitions. The Murray chain is a black hole where people forever disappear from the dance scene, perhaps because the studio thinks that their students won't stick around if exposed to other dance places. Once upon a time, I decided, after asking around about dance instructors, and watching the students of several dance instructors, that it would be nice to take lessons with a certain experienced instructor. The only problem was that she taught (was dance master) for a franchise chain studio. So I walked in the door and said that I wanted to take lessons with instructor X. They immediately said that only instructor Y was available and it was a much better deal to buy this discount package... blah, blah. I held up my checkbook, stood up and said that I was only interested in taking lessons from instructor X. Then it (my checkbook) and I left. They called back quite soon and said that instructor X had an "unexpected" opening in her teaching schedule. I returned and they again went into their package deal pitch... blah, blah. I held up my checkbook, stood up and... ... we quickly came to terms on 5 lessons with instructor X at a competitive price per hour. The only problem was that I needed to repeat this charade every month or so. The instruction I got was quite good, exactly what I needed at that point in my learning curve. I also got to hone up on negotiation skills that could come in handy if I ever need to buy a used car. --- Date: Mon, 08 Apr 1996 13:57:44 -0700 From: Ron Nicholson Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance Subject: Re: Ballroom: different learning abilities (LONG) KarmelaL wrote: > We went to a group class this week where the teacher made us > dance with other people. I had a great time, and he was > miserable, because he was used to me leading while he was > still learning a step. ... > So what should we do? Should we take private class separately? > Should we just dance more with other people? Should we quit > learning with each other altogether and just dance with each > other when we already have the steps down? This problem situation could actually be due to a number of reasons. 1. There is the reason that everybody has mentioned so far. The lady, usually more experienced in other dance forms, "helps" the man by backleading. This actually destroys his ability to learn to lead and also addicts him to a crutch, that of being pushed around instead of learning positively how to execute a step or pattern by himself. I'm not as sure of this, but my impression is that ladys who do a lot of backleading of their partners also become stiffer followers. They get used to being more in control of the dance and occasionally "fight back" with even good leaders over the interpretation of a particular motion. 2. Another possible reason it that different people learn in different ways. If your partner learns more by feeling motion (kinesthetic learning), rather than seeing it or hearing the instructor talk about it, then he may need to be physically moved around to learn how the step should feel at first. If your partner has this learning style, the best thing may be to get him some private lessons. Then an instructor can push him around, if necessary, while associating the motions with the appropriate verbiage. If you leave all the teaching completely to the instructor, then he is less likely to associate dancing with you with being backled. Plus a good instructor can also show him, not only what the steps or patterns should feel like, but what the proper lead should feel like as well. 3. A third possibility is that your preferred dance roles are different from your genders. Maybe the woman really dances better as a leader and the man as a follower. In that case, and if you live in a big city, you can probably find a place where you can comfortably take lessons and/or dance with the opposite lead/follow roles. Once you both figure out how to dance well together with one set of roles you can try switching back and re-learning the other. etc. IMHO. YMMV. --- Copyright © 1995 Ronald H. Nicholson, Jr. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Last Modified February 05, 1996