MJ as a conversation?

[bigdjiver]

One of the strengths of MJ is its lead-follow ethos.

However that is not very democratic, and, as commonly practised, is sexist. If there were more lead swapping that might make for a better dance, but I believe it needs a structure, methods for signalling the transition so it is not clumsy.

One idea might be to use the fact that the follower mostly uses their right hand. If coming out of a spin or any release they instead offer their left hand, in lead position that would be one clear way of signalling the transfer. Using the different hand should be clearly visible in time for the original leader to react and use their right hand to connect in follower mode.

One way of relinquishing the lead would be to freeze with right hand in followe posture.

Reactions?

[Magic Hans]

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

One of the strengths of MJ is its lead-follow ethos.

However that is not very democratic, and, as commonly practised, is sexist. If there were more lead swapping that might make for a better dance, but I believe it needs a structure, methods for signalling the transition so it is not clumsy.

Sorry ... I don't agree. MJ is sexist like motorcycles are dangerous. Only the rider or participants can be sexist and/or dangerous. What MJ does, is to set out very clear and defined roles. It is then, generally, taught as if the man has control and the woman doesn't; An assumed fiction, in my book. And, more to the point, women are perfectly free to learn to lead, if they so choose. In fact, the only difficulty raised is blokes who might like to follow. Although it does happen, it is the exception rather than the rule.

I'm not entirely sure that mid-track lead swapping particularly adds anything to MJ. I, for one, find it difficult to change mindset between lead and follow, and prefer to do either one or other for the full dance.

Interesting though though!

[bigdjiver]

Originally Posted by Magic Hans

Sorry ... I don't agree. MJ is sexist like motorcycles are dangerous. Only the rider or participants can be sexist and/or dangerous. ...

A lot of motor bike and bicycle accidents are caused by other road users simply not seeing them.

... It is then, generally, taught as if the man has control and the woman doesn't; ...

Sexist in my book.

...I'm not entirely sure that mid-track lead swapping particularly adds anything to MJ. I, for one, find it difficult to change mindset between lead and follow ...

Me too. This thread was prompted by my attending some of Sara White's classes where lead stealing and educated moves, where the lady takes control for a section of the move, are regularly taught.

In normal conversation there are many verbal and body language clues as to whether the listner wants the speaker to carry on, talk about something else, or take a turn listening. It is considered rude just to interrupt. I was looking for dance equivalents that could be taught.

What is dance for "At the end of this move it is my turn."?

[gebandemuishond]

The best way to express a desire to have the lead taken over during a dance is in a double handed in-and-out. The leader normally keeps their hands with palms facing inwards and the follower drapes theirs over the leader's. It's really easy to swap this around, at which point the follower should take over the role. In theory.

Dan

[ducasi]

Dances can easily be a conversation without having to devise complex signals to pass the lead.

By giving your follow room to express her own reaction to your lead and the music, and then reacting to her movement by mirroring or contrasting, you are having a conversation.

[Dreadful Scathe]

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

However that is not very democratic, and, as commonly practised, is sexist.

Its not sexist as there is nothing to prevent either sex being the lead - if anything it's "leadist"

If coming out of a spin or any release they instead offer their left hand,

Hmm, as a lead I offer my hand, if someone tries to take it with their left hand then its simply a different variation. Admittedly i have less practice right to left, but and i would still continue as normal.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

One of the strengths of MJ is its lead-follow ethos.

Same for all partner dances, surely?

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

However that is not very democratic, and, as commonly practised, is sexist.

Errr.... democratic? Is this a voting system then?

Democracy only applies to politics - the armed forces aren't democratic either, should we start reforming them too?

And sexist? Well, culturally, I guess; but you could make the same argument about other activities which most commonly involve a man and a woman...

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

If there were more lead swapping that might make for a better dance,

Why? Or, more precisely, how?

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

Reactions?

Lead swapping is, 99% of the time, a gimmick, or a play-dance; it's like double-trouble, or circle dancing. It's fun, but it's certainly nothing to do with improving the quality of the dance experience.

[Magic Hans]

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

A lot of motor bike and bicycle accidents are caused by other road users simply not seeing them.

.... as there are 'safe' climbers who die as a result of freak weather. Point being that (and it's all relative) taking unneccessary risks is an aspect of the participant and not the activity.

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

Sexist in my book.

.... and so it's the manner of teaching MJ that is sexist (or leadist) rather than MJ per se? I'd agree.

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

Me too. This thread was prompted by my attending some of Sara White's classes where lead stealing and educated moves, where the lady takes control for a section of the move, are regularly taught.

Lead stealing and hijacking is fab! ... and I so wish that it was more widespread. However, what is its purpose? What does it achieve? I love it, because it springs a surprise. It breaks up my pattern as a lead and punctuates it with something new! It's wonderfully cheeky. I'd like to think that it also tells me that my follow is happy and comfortable enough to play around, and it makes me want to pull the next surprise.

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

In normal conversation there are many verbal and body language clues as to whether the listner wants the speaker to carry on, talk about something else, or take a turn listening. It is considered rude just to interrupt. I was looking for dance equivalents that could be taught.

Until I am very, very comfortable with a partner, I think that I would find having to switch between lead and follow for longer periods quite hard work ... although I'm sure that it would add something.

[Gadget]

If it were "sexist" or "leadist" then it would be a monologue or lecture rather than a conversation.

I think perhaps it should be more of an "interview" like Parky or Wogan; 'leading' questions and verbose responses from the follower. The lead trys to control the direction of the conversation, but will change the next 'question' depending on the response of the follower. If the follower says/does something that spikes the lead's interest, then it's likely that they will go down a route that generates similar responses from them.

A good lead 'interviews', a poor one reads from the script.

Conversations would be likened to swapping roles, but all that needs to happen is that the lead 'listens' to the follower and relinquishes control to them when being led. (and steals the lead back when desired.) There doesn't have to be any signals or specific queues to swap.

[bigdjiver]

Originally Posted by Magic Hans

.... and so it's the manner of teaching MJ that is sexist (or leadist) rather than MJ per se? ...

Yes, it is the MJ, and other dance scenes that are sexist, not the dances themselves. e.g. Most venues would not allow a guy as a follow in the beginners class. I was guilty of sloppy language.

Until I am very, very comfortable with a partner, I think that I would find having to switch between lead and follow for longer periods quite hard work ... although I'm sure that it would add something.

I find it very hard work, but that is partly because I am trying to dig ditches using a teaspoon. Having the right tools would make it easier, having some instruction as to which way up to hold the teaspoon would help.

In the real world I cannot remember talking to a woman for three minutes without her changing the tack of the discussion. There are good listeners that say "uhhu" "That's right." "I didn't know that." but in any worthwhile conversation they add something of their own.

Giving the follow some space is the equivalent of ending a paragraph. There is an implied opportunity to speak. Stealing, done well, is interrupting at the end of a sentence, but it is interrupting. What I am seeking are some ways for the follower to indicate a few fractions of second earlier that an interuption is going to take place.

[MartinHarper]

So in my experience, the best way of lead-swapping is for the follower to take the lead and keep it. The follower applies force, at a moment when the leader is not applying force. The leader reacts to that force by moving so as to relieve the force, and thus the roles are reversed. It should take no more than two beats.

Required technique:
* Light following. If the follower is applying lots of force all the time in an uncontrolled fashion, then there's no easy way to distinguish between lead-swapping force, and regular bad-following force.
* Reactive leading. If the follower takes a forceful and yanking rock step, the leader can either stand there and take it, or step forwards to relieve the pressure. The latter approach is safer, and good for this type of lead-swapping.
* Positive leading. "Invitational" leading results in those awkward "who's leading?" moments. Lead-swapping, as opposed to spiritual "shared leading" weirdness, works best when the current leader is leading
* Passive following. As noted elsewhere, passive following doesn't mean simple following, but it does mean doing what the lead asks for.

There are other options, but they're not as good.

Modern Jive is well suited to lead-swapping dances due to the comparative simplicity of competent following and the lead/follow characteristics of the dance.

[straycat]

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

Reactions?

Nothing so solid or cut'n'dried. I've often described partner dance in these tems, but someone a while back (I think it was Ghost) went one better, ad likened the whole lead & follow game to a jam session, where both lead and follow are improvising around the music and round each other. There is still a leader, but when things really gel, the roles can be blurred to quite an extent.

I've been doing a lot of work on connection over the last couple of years or so, and playing heavily with the whole leading-by-following concept - and one thing I've come to realise is that in a really connected dance, the line between leader and follower can be incredibly subtle. To the point where the roles can and do change at the drop of a hat.

[mikeyr]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

Lead swapping is, 99% of the time, a gimmick, or a play-dance; it's like double-trouble, or circle dancing. It's fun, but it's certainly nothing to do with improving the quality of the dance experience.

Whats wrong with the Leader (whatever sex they maybe) Leading and the follower following?

As a leader I like it when a follower follows and as a follower I really do appreciate a clean early lead.

I try to lead as clearly and as musically as I can and when I feel theres extra space like a piano run I give the follower the oppurtunity to improvise for a couple of bars. 99 % of my dances seem to workout ok based on that philosophy......?

Conversation is the term used in dance to convey clear communication of the leads intentions, If it clearly and cleanly lead it can be followed and allow the follower the time to style it if they so wish.

All this backward and forward stuff why don't just go dance lyrical Jazz, you can make it as you go along there

[straycat]

Originally Posted by MartinHarper

So in my experience, the best way of lead-swapping is for the follower to take the lead and keep it. The follower applies force, at a moment when the leader is not applying force. The leader reacts to that force by moving so as to relieve the force, and thus the roles are reversed. It should take no more than two beats.

Of course - it can be quicker, slicker and more subtle than that...

[straycat]

Originally Posted by mikeyr

Whats wrong with the Leader (whatever sex they maybe) Leading and the follower following?

Nothing at all! What's wrong with experimenting and trying new things?

Originally Posted by mikeyr

As a leader I like it when a follower follows and as a follower I really do appreciate a clean early lead.

As a leader I love that also, but I also love it when my partner's responses to my lead take the dance in exciting new directions that I hadn't anticipated.

Originally Posted by mikeyr

I try to lead as clearly and as musically as I can and when I feel theres extra space like a piano run I give the follower the oppurtunity to improvise for a couple of bars. 99 % of my dances seem to workout ok based on that philosophy......?

There's nothing wrong with this at all. However I don't see anything wrong with taking that up a level ... or two ... or ten...

Originally Posted by mikeyr

Conversation is the term used in dance to convey clear communication of the leads intentions, If it clearly and cleanly lead it can be followed and allow the follower the time to style it if they so wish.

I call that dictation. Conversation (in my book) is when both lead and follow have a very clear say in shaping the dance. Yes, in practical terms, the leader is still providing the overall direction... but is paying constant attention to the follower's input, and using that to build on what he / she is doing / leading.

Originally Posted by mikeyr

All this backward and forward stuff why don't just go dance lyrical Jazz, you can make it as you go along there

I'm quite happy it up as I go along when dancing jive. That's one of the key things that makes it fun for me.

[geoff332]

It varies widely, depending on where you learn as well.

In UK Ceroc, teachers very rarely teach the follow's steps. This means, the dance is taught to leads, and follows just stumble along as best they can (I wish "stumble" was more metaphorical than literal, but it's not...). I consider this one of the biggest weaknesses of Ceroc in the UK. It makes the learning curve for a follow steep and highly dependant on the quality of leads they dance with.

In NZ and Australia, both lead and follow are taught the steps for each move. With the better teachers, this includes some of the finer details of lead and follow technique. One of the biggest advantages is it allows me as a lead a much better appreciation of what the follow has to do to complete a move, which allows me to both lead and vary moves far more effectively. Some moves require both partners to know the move to be able to dance it well.

I won't get too deep into the mixed metaphors (I think I found dance, politics, and sport in the first two posts). However, the conversation metaphor is quite rich, so worth pursuing. We're never taught how to have a conversation. We're taught language and manners (which vary from place to place). We figure out how to hold a conversation through having conversations. The best conversations are a subtle flow of language, with everyone involved. As we start formalising a conversation with strict rules, conventions, mores and scripts, it becomes less of a conversation and more of a staged dialogue. Only a gifted actor can make a scripted dialogue seem realistic (don't believe me? Listen carefully to the next telemarketer who calls you...). Anyone fluent in language can spot the difference between natural conversation and scripted dialogue.

Far be it from me to suggest there might be an analogous to dancing in the conversations I might have with antipodeans vs the british...

[bigdjiver]

Originally Posted by mikeyr

...Whats wrong with the Leader (whatever sex they maybe) Leading and the follower following? ...

I have enjoyed that for decades. Because something is enjoyable and works does not mean it could not be more enjoyable and work better. I have been quite happy as a chauvenistic dictator.

Someone posted how much the had enjoyed playing with the un-named swing dancing lady at Sara's purple night. She used to turn up regularly at the Bedford Corn exchange until Ceroc played even less swing tracks, and I always enjoyed my trips into uncharted territory with her, even though I was aware that I was pitiful at it. To-and-fro can be fun.

Some teachers are trying to promote the follower having a more active role. In verbal converation we develop by custom methods of feedback when we want the talker to stop and listen. We pick up the techniques by participating in group discussion. We are so used to using them we do it unconciously. I think we might be richer if someone could identify the equivalent dance techniques and teach them.

[Trouble]

Isnt the conversation otherwise described as connection.

For me, dancing with somebody is a bit like having a chat with somebody. You either respond with vigour and interest in the conversation or your eyes glaze over with boredom.

its also being able to interupt that conversation otherwise known as hijack... if you so wish and taking control of where its going and the partner allowing you to do that.

Conversation in dance is being able to connect with each other so that u can chat all the way through the dance without saying a single word.... perfect.