MJ lead/follow conventions

[jim]

Jim, like RobD I also think this is an interesting post.

I can see what you're trying to say I just don't share the view. It sounds as if the dance and its emotion is only going one way, from you to the follow. If that was happening in the bedroom then I'd fully expect the lady to come to bed with the BOB already running...... Dancing is social intercourse and just like the sexual variety it is far more exciting if your partner is actively involved and coming up with their own fun ideas........
Agent 000
Licensed to Dance

You’re not wrong, but how do we square a fair lead and follow system and one that also entices men on to the floor?

So I can see where you're coming from but I just think that there is room for the follow to show their 'emotion' in the dance as well.

Agent 000
Licensed to Dance

I think it was David Bailey who said it's all about 'different solutions to the same problem'.

West coast might say this dance is all about the ladies and her interpretation, guys you are the frame.

But Latin dancers might say; guys your doing all the work at the moment. Let the women exhibit, let her 'shine'.

Or you might say use a salsa analogue. Maintain the frame; let the hips do the talking. - She’s working her side of the frame your working your side.

Different solutions. Different Systems. Lots of room for confusion.

[jim]

Blimey, are you related to Gadget?

I thought of a funny answer to this, but then I'd have to take the thread upstairs.

.

I've tried that. There are two types of female response. Oh what a fun new game we both dance in a jazzy solo style melting pot or 'why have you stopped leading'?

[Dottie]

Does that mean you can see it it the different lead styles, and that it's not just my imagination?

It's definitely not just your imagination - but I never thought it was.

[jim]

Well, if a follower doesn't "get it", it's the leader's fault for not being clear enough.

I'm glad you said this. Because it's been bugging me for a long time.

You’re a lead; you define the dance you want.

You’re a lead; you’re obliged to give the follower what she wants.

We both agreed to that at the beginning of the thread so;


If you as a lead want one thing and she wants another.

Do you lead or give her what she wants?

[David Bailey]

You’re a lead; you define the dance you want. [/font][/color]

You’re a lead; you’re obliged to give the follower what she wants.

We both agreed to that at the beginning of the thread so;

Did we? I don't remember agreeing to the second - because I don't. It's a silly rule.

The only thing I think a lead must do, the only non-negotiable thing, is to avoid causing harm to the follower, or allowing the follower to come to harm.

If you as a lead want one thing and she wants another.

Do you lead or give her what she wants?

You lead.

[straycat]

If you as a lead want one thing and she wants another.
Do you lead or give her what she wants?

Both.

[David Bailey]

Both.

Well, yeah - but that's not really answering the question.

I think the question is, if the follower wants to do something different - if she doesn't like what you're leading, on purely "style" grounds - then what should happen?

My answer is: if it comes down to it, you lead; if the follower doesn't like it, then they simply have to tough it out for three minutes and not dance with you again.

Obviously, in 99% of cases, you can work out a compromise, and good leaders should of course adapt their styles to match the styles of their followers (I'd hope that shouldn't need to be said in here, but you never know). That "compromise" is part of the fun of the dance, after all.

But if it really really comes down to a choice between compromising the lead and keeping the follower happy, then I'd say you should not compromise the lead.

And the reason I'd say that is because, in the long run, I think a good clear lead is the best way of keeping followers happy.

But, as I said, this is more of a hypothetical thing than a real-world situation.

[straycat]

Well, yeah - but that's not really answering the question.

I think the question is, if the follower wants to do something different - if she doesn't like what you're leading, on purely "style" grounds - then what should happen?

What I meant was ... go with what she wants.... but lead it.

In this situation, here's four of your more obvious possible responses:

1) 'You go ahead, and I'll watch'
2) 'You go ahead, and I'll follow'
3) 'Aha. I get what you want. Now let me lead it.'
4) 'Forget what you want. You do what I want.'

Personally, I think option 1 is a bit dull for both parties, options 2 and 3 can both be fun, and option 4 is plain rude. From what Jim says, option 1 is a complete non-starter, and I don't think he's really into option 2. Which, so far as I'm concerned, only leaves option 3.

And remember - if you start off leading what she wants, you can always use that to finesse it back to what you want - which is far more fun than simply wrestling her for the lead.

(depending on what metaphor we're going with right now :innocent

[Gadget]

{erm... now you may understand the reference to me }

I’ve been having a bit of a revelations so bear with me…..
~
I remember watching Jordan start a dance and put a woman straight into a shine and I thought this was really odd. But now I get it; he’s getting a feel for how she moves. So she can lead her the way she wants to be lead.

I do exactly the opposite! I get her in close so she can get a feel for how I move.

This seems to me to be a 'latin' mentality to the dance; a dominant position with clearly defined "lead" and "follow" roles: Only one person can be in the driving seat at any time. And since you are the lead, this is you. The follower can direct you and influence where you are going, but more often than not if they try, they are 'back-seat-driving'.

To me, this seems a very selfish way to dance: you are expecting the follower to connect with you and move how you want them and dance to your beat.
Perfectly acceptable if you are dancing with someone who isn't as good as you at picking up cues from the music and has no desire to go anywhere other than the direction you are sending them in.
If you both want to dance 'together' as 'one body', then it has to be your body.

At times like this to be blunt, guys like me feel that we’re having sex with a woman using a vibrator. – She’s creating her own emotions – lead / man not required.

A woman having sex with a vibrator knows how she wants to be touched, what moves her and how to bring herself the most pleasure... perhaps you can learn from that and add your own input to heighten the experience? Perhaps if you get in her rhythm you can over-lay your own rhythms and have an experience that is good for both of you? What you are doing obviously doesn't satisfy the follower, so where is the down side to learning what does?

Now if the follower has not had your pleasure yet, but is used to other leads who just don't do it for them, then who can blame them for not trusting you to bring them closer to the music? If you know you can please them, you have to get them to trust you first - and the quickest/best way to do that is to match your partner's rhythm before taking them into yours.

It’s no good saying I’ve heard something in the music I’m going to stop. What about me? what about my footwork? I am I in a position to stop?

What about them? Are you not as guilty of ignoring their input as they are of ignoring yours? You are demanding that they listen to the music with your ears: can they not try and show you what they are hearing?
If you are good enough at leading to convey the emotion and lead it with enough clarity that the follower can follow it, then are you saying you are unable to adapt when they do something unexpected? That you cannot change your footwork or convert what you are doing into a stop? Somehow I doubt it.

You’re a lead; you define the dance you want.

You’re a lead; you’re obliged to give the follower what she wants.

We both agreed to that at the beginning of the thread so;
If you as a lead want one thing and she wants another.
Do you lead or give her what she wants?

There is no "or" in the statement - you change how you define the dance so that the follower wants what you lead. It's a partnership; when you lead a follower to step in on the first bit a first move, do you keep your feet planted, do you lead them to remain in the same place while you come to their side, or do you step in and meet them half way?

Some step in further than others. As a good lead, you adjust your step accordingly so that they are in the 'ideal' position for the next bit. As a good lead, you neither dominate the dance or become submissive - you meet half way and share the dance. You work with your partner, you do not comprimise; there is no "give and take"; you work together to both "give" to the dance.

[jim]

then are you saying you are unable to adapt when they do something unexpected? That you cannot change your footwork or convert what you are doing into a stop? Somehow I doubt it.

Sometimes I'm in a position to stop very easily, - no problem.

Sometimes followers ask me to stop at times when my body has a lot of momentum, at which point it can be very difficult. Which is why I said they need to be aware of my weight and what I can and can't do, in the same way we are aware of them when we are leading.

There is no "or" in the statement - you change how you define the dance so that the follower wants what you lead. It's a partnership; when you lead a follower to step in on the first bit a first move, do you keep your feet planted, do you lead them to remain in the same place while you come to their side, or do you step in and meet them half way?

Some step in further than others. As a good lead, you adjust your step accordingly so that they are in the 'ideal' position for the next bit. As a good lead, you neither dominate the dance or become submissive - you meet half way and share the dance. You work with your partner, you do not comprimise; there is no "give and take"; you work together to both "give" to the dance.

I've no doubt that using this kind of middle ground idea you will be popular and I’ve heard some teachers say similar things.

I do it as an experiment sometimes. In fact I led like this when I was a beginner. I know it has a nice Zen like feeling of harmony and sharing between the two of you.

Then I came to the conclusion that meeting in the middle is not lead and follow. Meeting in the middle is exactly what it is – meeting in the middle.

I know you going to say you ‘led’ the move, it’s still lead and follow.

But if I say to you gadget I want you to do a first move mambo for a minute.

You will lead the move 1 second and then spend the remaining 59 seconds meeting in the middle i.e. not leading.

That’s the way I look at it. I don’t expect to change your mind you’re using an idea that works and there’s other great dancers that agree with you.

But I would lead the step size I wanted (I have short legs so I’m unlikely to out stride the women) then I would lead big steps, then small steps, then mini steps, then I’d lead jumpy steps, - what ever I essentially wanted to lead.


It seems interesting to me that I lead the women’s rhythm, you meet them in the middle and Stray leads them in ‘their’ rhythm.

This thread has been really interesting, don’t you think?

[StokeBloke]

At times like this to be blunt, guys like me feel that we’re having sex with a woman using a vibrator. – She’s creating her own emotions – lead / man not required.

If you can make a dance engaging and entertaining enough then the follow will be too busy clutching at the sheets to even remember to reach for their vibrator. Let's face it, if the follow wasn't interested in partner dancing they would be down at the nearest disco doing their own thing already!

Part of the problem I feel, stems from class night teachers chanting the "this is a male led dance, here the lead is in control and ladies... you just follow" mantra. It's not true, it's not helpful and in the long run it may mean lots of follows end up reaching for Mr Buzzy

[robd]

Part of the problem I feel, stems from class night teachers chanting the "this is a male led dance, here the lead is in control and ladies... you just follow" mantra. It's not true, it's not helpful and in the long run it may mean lots of follows end up reaching for Mr Buzzy

I think that when this is said the intention is more that the followers should take note of the lead and try and follow it as opposed to just dancing through what they think the moves are going to be and/or doing their own thing regardless of the lead.

Sometimes followers ask me to stop at times when my body has a lot of momentum, at which point it can be very difficult. Which is why I said they need to be aware of my weight and what I can and can't do, in the same way we are aware of them when we are leading.

Yes, I can identify with that. Sometimes I see it as the leader leads the follow with little regard for the music (beyond being in time) and the follow reacts to the music with little regard for the leader. However, I appreciate that dancing musically whilst continuing to follow the lead is very difficult. Someone mentioned Jordan earlier in the thread - well, for me, the quality that marks his partner Tatiana out so highly is that she does all this incredible musical accenting and styling yet is still almost without exception following what her partner is leading.

Ultimately satisfying partner dancing (like good sex) is all about compatibility and there's no single right answer here. What works for Stokie and DTS (two proponents of the 'give the follower free rein' school of thinking) may not work for me or for some followers that they choose to dance with. I think in some ways I am guilty of thinking one thing and acting another because I know that I do give followers room to play and if they do hit accents or subvert the lead I will tend to be responsive to that yet I also know that my most satisfying dances are those where I feel that the follower has placed the value on following my lead higher than any other aspect of their dance.

[David Bailey]

Part of the problem I feel, stems from class night teachers chanting the "this is a male led dance, here the lead is in control and ladies... you just follow" mantra. It's not true, it's not helpful and in the long run it may mean lots of follows end up reaching for Mr Buzzy

It's a lie-to-children.

It's not "true", but it's a useful simplification to tell people who've no idea how the lead-follow relationship works. It's much less damaging to give a simple-if-incomplete instruction, than it is not to - followers first-and-foremost need to learn to follow their lead.

Yes, like a lot of things in MJ, there's a lack of more detailed and complex instructions, expanding on the follower role, at the intermediate detail. So you tend to find intermediate followers having weird misconceptions about sabotaging being the same as interpretation, for example...

But I think the initial instruction is OK - how else would you phrase it to a beginner follower? (And leader for that matter)

[martingold]

It's a lie-to-children.

It's not "true", but it's a useful simplification to tell people who've no idea how the lead-follow relationship works. It's much less damaging to give a simple-if-incomplete instruction, than it is not to - followers first-and-foremost need to learn to follow their lead.

surely its much more dangerous in the beginner stage to give incomplete or even wrong instruction because this is the stage that we are supposed to be putting down the fundimental building blocks in both the lead and follows minds

But I think the initial instruction is OK - how else would you phrase it to a beginner follower? (And leader for that matter)

whenever i take the practice session i will show basic lead follow tension but say "when you are a beginner you are taught its the leads job to lead and the follows job to follow, however you will find later on that this isnt the complete story as sometimes when i am dancing i give the follower her own time or she might want to take that from me which is ok as well this is done purely by sensitive feeling of the follows movement a lot of what is said in dancing is done via the hold and the eyes" which gives the new beginners a chance to change at a later date rather than just programming them in the lead follow mentality

[straycat]

surely its much more dangerous in the beginner stage to give incomplete or even wrong instruction because this is the stage that we are supposed to be putting down the fundimental building blocks in both the lead and follows minds.

Perhaps, but if you try to tell beginners everything they need to know, even about stuff that seems incredibly simple (like the old chestnut of leading a back-step) you risk boring them to tears (or scaring them off), overloading them with too much information, and confusing them. In extreme cases, their heads explode, and then you get hit with lawsuits and cleaning bills.

Softly softly catchee dancer.

[David Bailey]

surely its much more dangerous in the beginner stage to give incomplete or even wrong instruction because this is the stage that we are supposed to be putting down the fundimental building blocks in both the lead and follows minds

No, because that happens with all learning processes - you learn the simplistic models first, then you should learn that "it's never that simple" when you move on. That's pretty common in all dance forms, and in fact it's the basis for the whole "You need to know the rules before you can break them" approach.

So it's not "wrong" to say "Ladies must follow, leaders must lead". It's just incomplete.

It's nuts to even try to provide a full and complete description of the lead-follow interaction process, including musicality, interpretation, feedback, and other factors, to the average beginner. It's fine to provide a simple easy-to-grasp model.

What's wrong - in my view - is that there's no "follow-on"; there's no structured way within MJ / Ceroc, to teach or learn the enhancements or complexities of this relationship as people go on.

For example:

whenever i take the practice session i will show basic lead follow tension but say "when you are a beginner you are taught its the leads job to lead and the follows job to follow, however you will find later on that this isnt the complete story as sometimes when i am dancing i give the follower her own time or she might want to take that from me which is ok as well this is done purely by sensitive feeling of the follows movement a lot of what is said in dancing is done via the hold and the eyes" which gives the new beginners a chance to change at a later date rather than just programming them in the lead follow mentality

And that's exactly what you should do - but this isn't something built in to the classes, this is just good practice which you and others are telling people.

Like a lot of other areas, Ceroc is poor on imparting this sort of thing as a standard.

[martingold]

No, because that happens with all learning processes - you learn the simplistic models first, then you should learn that "it's never that simple" when you move on. That's pretty common in all dance forms, and in fact it's the basis for the whole "You need to know the rules before you can break them" approach.

So it's not "wrong" to say "Ladies must follow, leaders must lead". It's just incomplete.

i disagree as i said earlier it is wrong to build this information in a beginners mind as total and non compromising and not tell them that this is a rule that will be broken further down the line.
But you can simplify the instruction because what you teach in the first 6 wks will be in their memory its always a lot harder to undo incorrect thoughts than to put the correct thoughts in at the first stages

[straycat]

i disagree as i said earlier it is wrong to build this information in a beginners mind and not tell them that this is a rule that will be broken further down the line even if you simplify the instruction because what you teach in the first 6 wks will be in their memory its always a lot harder to undo incorrect thoughts than to put the correct thoughts in at the first stages

Do you teach?

[martingold]

Do you teach?

no i am a taxi dancer who takes the practice session on a regular basis
but what has me teaching got to do with these opinions
its a well known fact that undonig mistakes are much harder to correct than doing things right in the first place

[robd]

no i am a taxi dancer who takes the practice session on a regular basis
but what has me teaching got to do with these opinions
its a well known fact that undonig mistakes are much harder to correct than doing things right in the first place

Resisting the urge to make a cheap crack about your spelling and the value you place on 'doing things right in the first place', I would point out that creating bad dance habits and simplifying what is taught do not have a direct relationship. The two dance teachers whom I have probably done the most lessons with have both made clear that what they teach for beginners is appropriate for that level but will require re-visiting if and when a dancer progresses.