Should Tango be done properly or not at all ?

[frodo]

From page 8 of the Camber 2006 Aftermath thread http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/show ... 464&page=8 are really some interesting comments from a Tango teacher.

...
along with the fact that part of the reason we couldn&#8217]go out and try to find a life, please but don’t do the Tango[/B]. ...

The last sentence brings up an interesting and for me quite relevant question.

Should you only do Tango, if you're going to embrace it fully, or from another direction, is there any point teaching watered down (but more immediately accessible) Argentine Tango.

[Clive Long]

<< snip >>
Should you only do Tango, if you're going to embrace it fully, or from another direction, is there any point teaching watered down (but more immediately accessible) Argentine Tango.

To address the original question.

I have been to fair number of AT lessons. I am frustrated at what I perceive to be my lack of progress. I bore CeeCee with my self-criticism of my dancing.

For me, Tango should be easy]there[/B]. You choose to engage with it in any way you wish. You want to muggle dance? Great. Have a wonderful time. You can teach and learn any moves you like and if they relate to music (that may be in your head) and you wish to call it dancing, then it is. I may not like what you are doing, it may make me feel embarassed, but that's irrelevant. You carry on.

So teach what you like, move as you like. If people gain pleasure from that, there is the point, it is the only justification needed. If people want to spend an hour practising Tango pivots - fine. If they want to learn flashy leg kicks and ornaments and incorporate them into other dance styles - fine.

However, if you want to dance with a partner there gotta be rules and conventions about how you move (try to mix a foxtrot and a waltz). And the more people you want to dance with the more rigid the rules gotta be. Oh and if you want to compete there gotta be some reference point.

Don't think I addressed the question.

Clive

[Feelingpink]

I understand that TangoMoon may be a teacher ... and perhaps with more experience I may change my mind ... but I'm very happy dancing either in close embrace or further apart - whatever feels most natural with each partner.

I don't like TangoMoon's comments that rather belittled what seemed to be some people's decisions to dance in fixed couples. TM has assumed reasons for the 'fixing' which can be many (& have been gone into in great detail on the forum in the past). There seem to be many approaches to AT and TM's view is one. If it works, then great, but it isn't the only one. Just because one person's view is as strong as TM's, it doesn't mean that another's view is one that is "watered down".

One of the things I like about KG's teaching on a Monday night at the Dome is his attitude that he has one particular approach to AT. It is certainly not the only one and we should learn from a number of teachers and find what is right for us.

As for learning "watered down" tango, I would assume not at a tango venue, but in other places, fine. I would have thought that much dancing would benefit from tango techniques.

[Gadget]

However, if you want to dance with a partner there gotta be rules and conventions about how you move (try to mix a foxtrot and a waltz). And the more people you want to dance with the more rigid the rules gotta be. Oh and if you want to compete there gotta be some reference point.

I don't think so. The only "rules and conventions" are how to lead and how to follow: a good lead should be able to convey what they want the follower to do. A good follow should be able to act and react to the lead.

The more people you want to dance with, the more flexable the rules gotta be - you've got to be able to adapt and move no matter the partner. If you tie it down to "you must lead(/follow) this in this way", then as soon as you change partners or music or deviate from the rules, the dance breaks.

(I agree with the compete line though - but will probably dissagree as to what the 'reference point' should be )

[robd]

The original posting no longer seems to be available on page 8 of the Camber aftermath thread. Wonder why?

[ducasi]

The original posting no longer seems to be available on page 8 of the Camber aftermath thread. Wonder why?

It has been moved to a new thread... http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/show ... php?t=8488

[robd]

It has been moved to a new thread... http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/show ... php?t=8488

Thanks

And having read the thread, I can see why

[TiggsTours]

However, if you want to dance with a partner there gotta be rules and conventions about how you move (try to mix a foxtrot and a waltz). And the more people you want to dance with the more rigid the rules gotta be. Oh and if you want to compete there gotta be some reference point.

I don't think so. The only "rules and conventions" are how to lead and how to follow: a good lead should be able to convey what they want the follower to do. A good follow should be able to act and react to the lead.

The more people you want to dance with, the more flexable the rules gotta be - you've got to be able to adapt and move no matter the partner. If you tie it down to "you must lead(/follow) this in this way", then as soon as you change partners or music or deviate from the rules, the dance breaks.

(I agree with the compete line though - but will probably dissagree as to what the 'reference point' should be ]
I'm sorry, but I'm with Clive on this one! If you tried to follow Tango in the same way as you follow Lindy it just would never work! In Tango, you need to be quite upright, and lean into each other, so much of the man's lead comes from his chest, and then you need your heads to be so close together. I've only done a couple of very quick tango classes, but even I've picked up that much! Whereas in Lindy you need to get down, you need to get the bounce, and you need the distance from each other. In Lindy it is important that you never break your frame, whereas in jive you break it all the time, in Jive there are plenty of moves where the lady is turned 180 degrees, whereas exactly the same lead in salsa would mean a 360 degree turn.

Its really important to learn just how to lead, and follow, each different dance style individually, as they are all different, if you're not following the basic rules of the dance, then all you're doing is modern jive with the relevant style, it doesn't mean you're dancing the true dance.

[MartinHarper]

I understand that TangoMoon may be a teacher...

Yes. I thought this was moderately clear from reading his post, or the excerpt quoted on this thread.

To answer the thread's question, I think for any dance form the aim should be to start off learning to dance it "properly", and leave the rule breaking until reasonably competent. I feel this is especially important when learning a second dance.

[JonD]

I'm very much with Clive on this as well. Dance is about freedom and taking different elements from one dance style to another is part of that freedom. But, if you want to master a dance then you must concentrate on it's basic elements. There seems to be some debate as to what those basic elements are - what characterises a dance - and, while I'd largely agree with DavidB's remarks in this discussion I'd add that some dances are defined by a style of movement, not just by the tempo or speed of that movement or the music it is performed to. AT has a particular style of movement which would be hard to describe in words, although most of us would recognise it as soon as we saw it. To achieve that style of movement takes effort and technique - it is possible to "ape" the style to some extent but it can only be mastered through study.

As an experiment, I've just suggested to Clive that we dance a Tango together at Negracha tomorrow night using Lindy styling - crouch and all. While we may be dancing to Tango music and using Tango lead/follow techniques, I doubt that any sane observer would describe us as dancing AT. (Indeed, we'll probably get banned from Negracha for life). Still, it'll be fun.

Part of me wants to say "Yes, if you're going to dance AT then damn well learn to dance AT properly" but another part of me says "Don't be so bl**dy pompous". I guess my position is that if someone is having fun with the dance then they should go ahead and do it. I've met people who've been dancing AT for 8 years and still clomp around the floor like a carthorse, I've seen people dancing AT in what I can only descibe as "Apache" fashion and I've seen people dance AT in absolutely sublime milonguero style. They were all dancing AT and were all passionate about the dance and taking huge pleasure from it. I was talking to Eric Jørissen, probably the best European AT teacher, as the "Apache" couple whirled by in what seemed a high-energy wrestling match - his only comment was to raise an eyebrow and say "Well, they're having fun". I'm not going to argue with Eric!

[CJ]

As an experiment, I've just suggested to Clive that we dance a Tango together at Negracha tomorrow night using Lindy styling - crouch and all. While we may be dancing to Tango music and using Tango lead/follow techniques, I doubt that any sane observer would describe us as dancing AT. (Indeed, we'll probably get banned from Negracha for life). Still, it'll be fun.

Would two men dancing together be such an afront to the Argentinian sense of masculinity that you may well end up getting shot for your indescretions!!

[JonD]

Would two men dancing together be such an afront to the Argentinian sense of masculinity that you may well end up getting shot for your indescretions!!

Nah, that wouldn't worry them - guys dancing together is much more normal in AT than in MJ. It's how the dance evolved - there were hordes of male labourers in Buenos Aires building railways, docks and such like in the 1890s and precious few women. Legend has it that when you went to the brothel you had to be a good dancer or you didn't stand a chance with the ladies of the night. So guys practiced with guys and then showed off their skills on the dancefloor in the hope they'd get invited to dance with a real, live woman before enjoying a horizontal reprise upstairs.

Mind you, dancing with a guy and sticking my arse out could be a recipe for disaster and lead to pistols being produced. Hmm- Clive can do the "Lindy Tango" with Julie while I take the video!

[Gadget]

I'm sorry, but I'm with Clive on this one! If you tried to follow Tango in the same way as you follow Lindy it just would never work! In Tango, you need to be quite upright, and lean into each other, so much of the man's lead comes from his chest, and then you need your heads to be so close together.

If I take you into a tango hold and lead from the torso, then you will follow like that because you are a good follow. If I drop the embrace and relax the frame to lead from the hand, then you will mirror it and follow that.

[JonD]

If I take you into a tango hold and lead from the torso...

Ballroom Tango? Yes, I can see that - rigid frame, torso lead. AT is a bit different though. If I take a follower who has no AT experience they will not recognise and follow an AT lead from my centre or my invitation to step into a space. OK, I'm not a particularly brilliant AT leader but I can normally lead a follower with a few week's AT experience to do backward and forward ochos at will. I've tried that on some extremely good MJ and ballroom followers, when I haven't explained the principles first, and got nothing more than a confused look! (Mind you, that isn't too unusual with my MJ lead ...)

[Clive Long]

If I take you into a tango hold and lead from the torso, then you will follow like that because you are a good follow.

Nice idea, and if you stay still, fine. But it doesn't result in any co-ordinated movement between the dancers. I have tried to lead MJers using a Tango embrace on Tango tracks that appear sometimes at Ashtons, without using a vice-like grip, and failed because ..

a follower who has no AT experience they will not recognise and follow an AT lead from my centre or my invitation to step into a space.

I know one of your pet theories Gadget is that a good enough lead can lead a good enough follower to do any step when they have no background in the dance. A lovely romantic notion, but it is an illusion. However, if they are both enjoying whatever movement results then they are dancing.

Clive

[frodo]

Ballroom Tango? Yes, I can see that - rigid frame, torso lead. AT is a bit different though. If I take a follower who has no AT experience they will not recognise and follow an AT lead from my centre or my invitation to step into a space. OK, I'm not a particularly brilliant AT leader but I can normally lead a follower with a few week's AT experience to do backward and forward ochos at will. I've tried that on some extremely good MJ and ballroom followers, when I haven't explained the principles first, and got nothing more than a confused look! (Mind you, that isn't too unusual with my MJ lead ...)

Personally given a good follower who hasn't done the dance, I'd much rather try to lead Argentine Tango than Ballroom Tango.


As I understand it Argentine Tango is more improvisational and so doesn't have the same timing and step constraints. I think the posture and hold for the follower is also less strange.

So if I choose to pause here and there, I'm just improvising. Given I'm dancing with a good follower I assume she's well balanced, is ok with dancing fairly close and can follow a part torso-ish lead.

While I wouldn't be dancing close embrace I would have my hand pretty much all the way around the followers upper back and hence quite a bit of control.

Starting with a salida and cross we might do a various walk variations. While not leading ochos at will ( I can't do that anyway ), if the lady has seen them before, and I'd guess the majority of good MJ followers have, I could probably lead them at certain points in the dance.

Somewhat the opposite of not moving together, I've found it particularly enjoyable dancing with the odd good MJ follower new to Tango, I think specifically because of the feeling of moving together, which seems less present in MJ.


I currently think of it as dancing Tango and don't think of it as "Not the true dance", or "Whatever movement that results", though perhaps I shouldn't be.

So, for now, I think I still have a similar opinion to Gadget.

[Gadget]

I'll have to wait untill the next Beach Ballroom tango thingie to confirm a couple of things, but my understanding is that the lead is more about timeing in AT than the actual 'lead'. ie. WHEN to lead a movement is ten times more important as the 'how' than it is in MJ.

With a good follower, the less physical (domineering) leading is required. This weekend I danced with a few followers that moved and responded like silk ruffling with a passing. I could lead anything with bearly a breath. I have a feeling that they would follow and pick up the difference with ease.
At the other end of the scale, I can create a ridged frame that will encase the follower and they almost have no choice but to go where led. Relax this and step out of the "torso framed" leading and I can lead from the hands by controlling momentum. {:ping:}

Perhaps this is the difference: MJ leads by controlling the momentum that exists - directing and re-directing... AT leads by creating the momentum and dampening it. So AT is lead more at the start and MJ is lead more in the middle. (It makes sense to me )

{Just so I'm understanding right: Ochos - that's crossing over the feet in a walk? right?}

[TiggsTours]

I know one of your pet theories Gadget is that a good enough lead can lead a good enough follower to do any step when they have no background in the dance. A lovely romantic notion, but it is an illusion. However, if they are both enjoying whatever movement results then they are dancing.

Clive

A few weeks ago, I was at the Casbah with Groovy Dancer, and we were watching a couple who were dancing really well together to a really good swing track. He was leading brilliantly, she was following brilliantly, they really had the feel of swing about what they were doing, but they weren't doing Lindy. The footwork was all jive, the frame was all jive, they were down and bouncing, but that was about it. It was a great dance, they were dancing, they were doing brilliantly, but they weren't doing Lindy.

Same thing, I can put on a tangoesque feel to my jive, I can do an ocho, I can do some sexy kicky things with my legs, but I can't do tango, would never claim that I could.

[Gadget]

A few weeks ago, I was at the Casbah with Groovy Dancer, and we were watching a couple who were dancing really well together to a really good swing track. He was leading brilliantly, she was following brilliantly, they really had the feel of swing about what they were doing, but they weren't doing Lindy. The footwork was all jive, the frame was all jive, they were down and bouncing, but that was about it. It was a great dance, they were dancing, they were doing brilliantly, but they weren't doing Lindy.

Same thing, I can put on a tangoesque feel to my jive, I can do an ocho, I can do some sexy kicky things with my legs, but I can't do tango, would never claim that I could.

OK: Tango music is playing. The lead is leading you into some tango (/tangoesque) moves. You are doing sexy things with your legs ( ) It's led and followed with the 'snap' and 'strut' timing of tango. It's led with a torso frame. Why is it not tango?

It may not be brilliant tango, it may have "jive" influences, but where does the boundary lie between "Tango with Jive influences" and "Jive with Tango influences" ?

[TiggsTours]

OK: Tango music is playing. The lead is leading you into some tango (/tangoesque) moves. You are doing sexy things with your legs ( ) It's led and followed with the 'snap' and 'strut' timing of tango. It's led with a torso frame. Why is it not tango?

It may not be brilliant tango, it may have "jive" influences, but where does the boundary lie between "Tango with Jive influences" and "Jive with Tango influences" ?

In my mind, Jive with Tango influence or Tango with Jive influence (find that idea really hard to imagine!) doesn't exist, that is called Jango. Tango is tango, simple as that, you can do a fusion of 2 dances, but then you're not dancing one or the other. Modern Jive really covers everything, as it is such a fusion of all dance styles, that's what I like about it, if you go back to traditional jive, that too is not Modern Jive.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not belittling MJ, far from it! I think it is the most diverse and flexible form of dance there is! However, it is what it is, and sticking a style of any type of dance into it, doesn't turn it into that dance.