MJ critique class: would you?

[NZ Monkey]

To be honest, it seems to me that for a dance like MJ (or twisty-turny WCS) it's pretty much impossible to lead many moves without a large degree of armleading.

While I agree to you up to a point, I think you'd be surprised (because I know I have been in the past) at how much of what looks like arm-leading can really be attributed to things like set-up and other little "rules and conventions" like flashlighting.

To take a concrete example, I had a private lesson with one of the all-stars in San Jose while I was in America and he helped me out with a particular pattern which I thought I was arm-leading too much. The thing I needed to change was to stop trying to lead altogether and just let my arm follow her spin until I was back in a position to take over again. The pattern didn't look any different after I got it right (eventually....) but it did feel much nicer and the exit was much smoother too.

Similarly, and perhaps this is semantics, you can move the arms independent of the body to make a particular outcome feel like the most natural one without trying to physically man-handle your partner while doing so. In an underarm pass for instance, you have to raise your hand to let your follower come under it after you've lead her forward. You can only do that by using your arms, but because that motion isn't required to move the follower where she needs to go it feels perfectly comfortable. So in short, not all arm motions are leads, even when they can sometimes look like them (i.e. if for example, you were used to dragging your partner down the slot after the 1 in the same underarm pass).

from 1:40 to 1:55. I'm finding it hard to see even a hint of body leading during most of that sequence.

Assisted spins (particularly ones on the spot) pretty much have to be arm-lead to a degree.

I'm quite certain the parts where Jordan is tapping each of his shoulders before turning Tatiana is more a prep that an lead in the sense I think you're meaning though. She's already traveling and reaching with her foot at the final tap so it seems to me that he's just making the inevitable turn much more comfortable for her than putting any energy into it himself.

There is at least one pattern on J&T Leader 101 DVD where Jordan explicitly states that a particular traveling turn is arm-lead, but the initial lead forward is all body and it's a particularly unusual pattern because of their relative body placements through that spin.

So even arm-leading isn't universally bad, but I don't think it's a stretch to say that it almost always is in comparison to body leading.

**********************************************

Thinking a little more, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the necessity of arm-leading comes down more to how sensitive and connected each partner is. I know *I* find myself having to lead less efficiently than I'd like with beginners, and that includes big arm leads sometimes if they're just not getting it.

[David Franklin]

Similarly, and perhaps this is semantics, you can move the arms independent of the body to make a particular outcome feel like the most natural one without trying to physically man-handle your partner while doing so.

Yes, I think this is semantics. By distinguishing this from arm-leading you are effectively saying "arm-leading = physically man-handling your partner". And if that's what you think, then yes, arm leading is going to be pretty uniformly a bad thing.

In an underarm pass for instance, you have to raise your hand to let your follower come under it after you've lead her forward. You can only do that by using your arms, but because that motion isn't required to move the follower where she needs to go it feels perfectly comfortable. So in short, not all arm motions are leads, even when they can sometimes look like them (i.e. if for example, you were used to dragging your partner down the slot after the 1 in the same underarm pass).

Again, I'd call that arm motion a lead; even if it was done without any physical connection at all, I think you'd have to call it a visual lead, and although in such an extreme case I can understand not thinking of it as an arm-lead, since it's (a) a lead, and (b) being done with the arm, it's also a bit hard to see what else to call it either.

Conversely, if I were to use about 1/4 of an ounce of force to lead the follow down the slot (from experiments I've done I believe this is roughly the amount of force I use in a very light lead) I find it hard to see how any reasonable person could consider it dragging them down the slot.

I'm quite certain the parts where Jordan is tapping each of his shoulders before turning Tatiana is more a prep that an lead in the sense I think you're meaning though.

Again, probably semantics rather than anything else. I picked that particular sequence because (to me) it looks like Jordan is actively trying not to body lead during it. The exact question of how much arm leading is going on, given we seem to have different definitions of what arm leading is, is a more difficult one, but I think we agree there's at least some arm leading during the sequence.

Thinking a little more, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the necessity of arm-leading comes down more to how sensitive and connected each partner is. I know *I* find myself having to lead less efficiently than I'd like with beginners, and that includes big arm leads sometimes if they're just not getting it.

I think there's a fair bit more than that. Most obviously, if you want your body to be reasonably still, you're going to end up arm leading (c.f. the J/T clip). There's one sequence I lead that is obviously "very arm leady" because of this (I grant you it probably feels a little awkward because of it).

[Gav]

Posture. There have been some comments on lets say the straightness of your knees or back. I don't think you have a problem with posture.

...you must try and dance your full height.

Close the 'Fingers'

Pet hate of mine. When in ballroom hold close the fingers on the shoulder blade. Don’t let them 'splay' out like every one else in Mj. It looks cleaner and it also gives a more solid platform to lead from. Watch any man on strictly; fingers are always closed.

Doesn't all of this depend on what you're trying to achieve with your MJ?
If the intention is to make it look more "ballroom-y", then I couldn't argue with you, but what if it's not?

Maybe people could define what they'd like to get out of this exercise when they put their neck on the block, or maybe critics could be more aware that their view is subjective, rather than authoritative (for example, "if you'd like to achieve a clean, ballroom-style look, then...").

[robd]

Doesn't all of this depend on what you're trying to achieve with your MJ?

I think there are some elements of styling that transcend individual dance styles in terms of aesthetic appeal. My immediate mental image of the Ceroc Champs (well, the one following the image of madly rushed assisted spins into a drop to try and hit the track climax) is of pigeon toed followers (based no doubt on seeing countless photos of people in such a state). It's an unfair image no doubt but its relevance to this thread is that there is probably not a dance style anywhere in which being pigeon toed is a desirable look. Does the closed fingers vs hand of bananas fall into this category? I'm not sure but personally speaking I think that closed fingers looks much neater (even though I am aware that I often have mine splayed like an excitable Freddy Krueger on the follower's shoulder)

[ant]

Originally Posted by Jim
Close the 'Fingers'

Pet hate of mine. When in ballroom hold close the fingers on the shoulder blade. Don’t let them 'splay' out like every one else in Mj. It looks cleaner and it also gives a more solid platform to lead from. Watch any man on strictly; fingers are always closed.

Doesn't all of this depend on what you're trying to achieve with your MJ?
If the intention is to make it look more "ballroom-y", then I couldn't argue with you, but what if it's not?

Hi Gav. I think that closed fingers on the right hand of the leader on the ladies back is functional as well as an aesthetic quality.You are far more likely to dig your fingers in the back of the lady when you that hand needs to be active whilst leading. And as Jim says, you will also find that a closed hand in this situation will be much better support for the follower.

[Gav]

Hi Gav. I think that closed fingers on the right hand of the leader on the ladies back is functional as well as an aesthetic quality.You are far more likely to dig your fingers in the back of the lady when you that hand needs to be active whilst leading. And as Jim says, you will also find that a closed hand in this situation will be much better support for the follower.

I appreciate that, but what has functional got to do with it? I thought the idea was to critique the look of it?

But if you want to get into that, if I'm leading someone forward with my hand on their back (shoulder blade, bra strap - whatever you use as your reference point), it'll be by moving my core backwards not by pulling with my hand/arm, so I can't imagine why my fingers might "dig in".

[Gav]

I think there are some elements of styling that transcend individual dance styles in terms of aesthetic appeal.

Maybe with the hands thing, but the posture isn't. I guess it's that age old argument of how do we define MJ and whose job is it?

[Andy McGregor]

I guess it's that age old argument of how do we define MJ and whose job is it?

It's really easy to define MJ. Everyone does it. However, it's very hard to get people to agree on a definition.

The LeRoc Federation agree on this. That is they agree to disagree. There's quite a few definitions of MJ amongst members of the Federation. The accepted wisdom is that none of them are wrong so long as people are enjoying their dancing.

On the subject of body leads vs arm leads, IMHO both have their place. If you watch some male leads they hardly move their feet at all but still lead the lady to complete her dance in a nice way. Those guys are mostly tall and can sort of extend their frame, rather like a crane, whilst keeping their feet in place. The lady seems to feel the same lead as she would if a shorter, but much more handsome guy , were to move his feet to lead that particular move.

[Gadget]

Could someone explain body leading in Mj, west coast or salsa to me?

Two different explanations seem to have been put forward; the 'frame' and leading through the body, and a visual cue of moving the body & flashlighting. And arm leads appear to be disconnected from either.

My view is that they are all interconnected and separating them is only useful in developing specific techniques or explaining one element of the lead. When dancing, your "lead" should be a harmonious blend of visual leading, tactile leading, arm leading, body leading, spacial leading and responsive leading. As well as a touch of mental telepathy: Each should be 'saying' the same thing to your partner.

The way I think on the body lead element is that it has to rely on your partner maintaining a set distance from the centre of your chest to the centre of theirs and keeping their shoulder line parallel to yours. This happens quite naturally with most followers. (The concept of always having the centre of your chest 'illuminating' your partner can also be referred to as "flashlighting")

If you want an exercise to practice, then lead a follower with your hands clasped behind your back. Forward and back is relatively easy, as are changes of place and direction on the floor. Turns can be led, and you can lead them to extend or close the distance between you, and you can lead side movements.
Look at the physical aspects of posture, where you're looking, weight distribution, and the set of your shoulders to lead. But in saying that, I have found the physical side of things is only half the story - you need to get the timing right and be 'in sync' with your partner to get it to work well.
{Franck does a dedicated workshop in this: 'telepathic leading' I think he calls it}

When you have someone in your arms, then you try and convey these same lead movements through the contact points you have with your partner; enhancing your physical lead, requiring less force to be applied through it and a gentler guidance.
When your body is not reinforcing your arm leads, then your arm leads have to do so much more to convey the same information. Even more so when your body lead is saying one thing, but your arm lead something else. {<- which I was doing for years ... I still occasionally do it, but I am aware of it now and can try and compensate in other ways so I can 'disconnect' movement from lead}

[ant]

I appreciate that, but what has functional got to do with it? I thought the idea was to critique the look of it?

But if you want to get into that, if I'm leading someone forward with my hand on their back (shoulder blade, bra strap - whatever you use as your reference point), it'll be by moving my core backwards not by pulling with my hand/arm, so I can't imagine why my fingers might "dig in".

I was not aware that he comments relating to the critique were solely relating to the look but in any event I was responding to the comments generally about the hand and splayed fingers.

As regards the closed hand there are occassions when the lead will result in the followers back being supported by the leaders right hand and on those occassions a closed hand is desirable.

I suppose the other important time when the hand may be used by the leader is when he needs to pull the follower forward to avoid a collision. At this time it would be a very sudden movement and if the fingers were open would almost certainly result in the leaders fingers digging into the followers back.

[Gadget]

I suppose the other important time when the hand may be used by the leader is when he needs to pull the follower forward to avoid a collision. At this time it would be a very sudden movement and if the fingers were open would almost certainly result in the leaders fingers digging into the followers back.

When my hand is on my partner's back I have at least eight points of contact with my partner; fore-arm, thumb pad/wrist, base of hand (from pinky to wrist), crowns (were fingers join palm) and the finger tips themselves.

The strongest movement to physically move my partner towards/away is through my fore-arm by bending my elbow. To rotate them I use the wrist/palm connection. The fingers I use to 'listen' rather than lead... if your fingers "dig in" when splayed, then they are going to dig in when closed - not a very good argument.

[Gav]

I was not aware that he comments relating to the critique were solely relating to the look

How could they be anything else? You can't tell how it feels by watching it. Plenty of times people leave the dance floor swooning after an "amazing" dance, but actually it looked cr4p (probably the other way around too).

but in any event I was responding to the comments generally about the hand and splayed fingers.

and I was being picky.

[ant]

Originally Posted by jim
Could someone explain body leading in Mj, west coast or salsa to me?

Originally Posted by Gadget
....and a visual cue of moving the body & flashlighting

The way I think on the body lead element is that it has to rely on your partner maintaining a set distance from the centre of your chest to the centre of theirs and keeping their shoulder line parallel to yours. This happens quite naturally with most followers. (The concept of always having the centre of your chest 'illuminating' your partner can also be referred to as "flashlighting")

Hi Jim. I think in Tango we would call this our intention, although I think the emphesis is more on the visual effect in separated partner dances such as swing as opposed to the follower feeling a change in your body due to their closeness in Tango. In open embrace they would have the same effect.

I don't know if you have had any Tango teachers talking about an imaginery light beaming from your core to that of the follower but it seems like flashlighting is the same princilple.

.... the 'frame' and leading through the body....

When you have someone in your arms, then you try and convey these same lead movements through the contact points you have with your partner; enhancing your physical lead, requiring less force to be applied through it and a gentler guidance.

Jim I think this corresponds to leading through the core in Tango. Where we keep a consistant frame meaning our arms do not move in relation to our body and we use our core to turn our body and so the arms move because they are connected to the body as opposed to them moving themselves. As our arms are connected to the follower the follower will also move.

As Gadget says they are both linked and probabally much more so in Tango when in close embrace because the follower will feel your intention and depending on the direction of the movement you are inviting the lead from your core as well.

[Gus]

Please don't take offence ... but wouldn't it be nice to get some informed comment from some recognised teahcres/dancers? Its great to quote theory, especially form WCS ... but I must admit that I'm struggling at time to connect the WCS words to the actual dance.

I count myself lucky to have seen coaching from some of the greats (Dave & Lily, Kate, Amir, S&N, N&N) ... and very little of it has gone on about 'body lead'. I think that the end result is the key. Timing, weight placement, how the follower is put/encouraged to be in what position with what momentum, shapes etc etc are the things that I think matter (and of course there are other aspects I've missed out).

With respect to many fo the comments made, Dave F is probably the only one that I know that has 'a rep'. It would be really usefull to see the contributors put video (of themselves?) on this thread to demonstrate the application of their words.

[Gav]

Hi Jim. I think in Tango we would call this our intention, although I think the emphesis is more on the visual effect in separated partner dances such as swing

Unfortunately, you think wrong.

I can't speak for WCS, but in Lindy Hop the aim seems to be that all leads come from the core, and that has little if anything to do with 'visual effect' and everything to do with effective leading.

I think you'd be surprised at how similar the principles of Lindy are to AT. I've seen a Lindy Hopper switch from Lindy to AT and back again in freestyle and it actually looked perfectly natural (of course it has to be an appropriate piece of music :rolleyes .

[Gav]

With respect to many for the comments made, Dave F is probably the only one that I know that has 'a rep'. It would be really usefull to see the contributors put video (of themselves?) on this thread to demonstrate the application of their words.

I'll shut up then.

[robd]

All critique gratefully received.

Please don't take offence ... but wouldn't it be nice to get some informed comment from some recognised teahcres/dancers?

With respect to many fo the comments made, Dave F is probably the only one that I know that has 'a rep'.

What do you want Gus? All critique or just that of the teachers that you know and admire? You're not going to find a lot of the latter on here (for a variety of reasons)

It would be really usefull to see the contributors put video (of themselves?) on this thread to demonstrate the application of their words.

Many of the respondents (Dave F included) have made the point that they may not practice what they preach. It doesn't mean that what they say is not a valid critique of your dancing.

[Gus]

I'll shut up then.

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! I didn't mean it like that. What I was looking for was a 'more balanced' view across 'mortals' and 'Gods'.

Actualy, Gav, I find your postings from the Lindy perspective an excellent extension of the debate ... after all, the roots of my Ceroc dancing are in the Lindy/Ceroc I originally learnt in London under Simon Selmon.

[Gus]

Many of the respondents (Dave F included) have made the point that they may not practice what they preach. It doesn't mean that what they say is not a valid critique of your dancing.

Absolutely. I wasn't make en edict .. just a request. Picture speaks a thousand words etc. I've already said that from a perosnal view the postings have given me much to work on. My latter comments were more i the context of trying to take the thread on generally.

[straycat]

I can't speak for WCS, but in Lindy Hop the aim seems to be that all leads come from the core, and that has little if anything to do with 'visual effect' and everything to do with effective leading.

Spot-on. This is one of the things that I love about Lindy - when danced well, everything about it is geared towards connection (with the music, with the floor, and with your partner) and movement - often at serious speed when efficiency and economy of music becomes absolutely crucial. So you end up with a dance that can look incredibly natural and relaxed at 200bpm (for example) Ironically, I don't believe that this could be achieved if the emphasis was on styling.