View Full Version : MJ critique class: would you?
Caro
10th-November-2006, 10:13 AM
Following discussions on this thread (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10315), it begged the question whether or not people would be ready for a critique class in ML/Ceroc (see definition in the linked thread).
So... let's see if there's any taker?
under par
10th-November-2006, 10:52 AM
I would not have a problem with other casting a critical eye over my dancing nor does the public element concern me.
Any person dancing for any length of time should be continuously trying to assess how they could do better what they do IMHO.
Seeking feedback is one form of assessing. This can be by means of private lesson, privately asking partner or other observer for feedback at a public event or a critique class.
The benefit of hearing public comment on a dance viewed in a public area would be for the group in general who could hear informed opinion on what they have seen.
For the dancer who is being critiqued they would benefit IF they bother to LISTEN to the range of opinions offered on the dance viewed and accept that they are just opinions of persons trying to help them.
Not all critique need be negative and feedback given properly should always include things done well too.
In fact I was advised about the "sh*t sandwich" feedback method. This is where you tell them what they did poorly (or sh*t) inbetween 2 good things.
eg. "You are holding your frame well, your footwork was awful and needs some improving but your musicality was good"
This is a very very basic example and needs to be followed up with actual evidence of what was good or bad and then offer a ways that aspect can be improved.
I personally am always looking for things that I can practice on or gems of wisdom that make me work on one or other part of my dancing so that I can offer the best possible lead when dancing.
Caro
10th-November-2006, 11:03 AM
Any person dancing for any length of time should be continuously trying to assess how they could do better what they do IMHO.
:yeah:
personally I totally agree with that, but the discussion in the previous thread what about whether or not the average MJ/Ceroc dancer was ready for this sort of class since:
- feeback is not part of the usual classes and people are not used to it
- the emphasis in ceroc, at least when you start, is that it's 'easy', i.e. technique is not paramount in order to have fun dancing and to achieve a reasonable social dancer level.
- the public aspect of feeback might put people who are not already confident with their dancing off.
So we were wondering if there was actually enough public for this sort of class.
Yogi_Bear
10th-November-2006, 11:29 AM
:yeah:
personally I totally agree with that, but the discussion in the previous thread what about whether or not the average MJ/Ceroc dancer was ready for this sort of class since:
- feeback is not part of the usual classes and people are not used to it
- the emphasis in ceroc, at least when you start, is that it's 'easy', i.e. technique is not paramount in order to have fun dancing and to achieve a reasonable social dancer level.
- the public aspect of feeback might put people who are not already confident with their dancing off.
So we were wondering if there was actually enough public for this sort of class.
In view of the above - with which I agree - I would say probably not. It would be beneficial (I for one would appreciate it, depending on who was giving the opinions - better not as part of a class as such) but the whole MJ culture is contrary to this.
Chef
10th-November-2006, 11:33 AM
I am up for this. I often ask partners in class how I might change what I do to improve (to improve the experience for my follwers), ask for feedback from teachers and have the occasional private lesson.
A few years ago a group of dancers in my area used to hire a village hall on a sunday afternoon and have a dance with each other. A good part of the afternoon was sharing stuff we had learned and getting feedback from each other about things we could change to improve the look and feel of the dance. We were not top notch technical dancers but we at least knew what we liked to see.
I would like to go through this public critique process. I have no problem chucking any ego away and getting down to work. I have learnt over many years that often the truth about yourself is painful to confront at times but how you react to that truth can either enslave you or set yourself free. If there is something I can change to make it better I would rather know sooner rather than later. I have no desire to be ignorant for one second longer than I have to be. When I stop learning and discovering things almost all the spice would have gone out of my life.
Yogi_Bear
10th-November-2006, 11:36 AM
So I am up for it too......maybe someone here could help organise something, say at one of the coming weekenders....? Happy to have peer review, not just teachers...don't want to be told I'm too unconventional to fit the MJ standard mould :D
whitetiger1518
10th-November-2006, 11:40 AM
I would love to get feedback..
I always feel like I am breaking the mood if I ask for feedback in the freestyle or party evenings - particularly if I am asking an off duty teacher or taxi dancer...
I never have enough time to ask or practice in class...
If a class combined a bit of feedback together with another MJ topic then I would love to sign up.
Whitetiger
Yogi_Bear
10th-November-2006, 11:46 AM
What I had in mind was this : let's say at one of the weekenders, or make it a regular thing, a group of people gather at say the blues room at Southport or its equivalent at a time when there isn't much else happening and take turns to dance with each other and then give feedback all round, including those dancing and those watching. This would not be a formal class, just an informal gathering. Or make it a formal class called 'modern jive technique and style feedback' or something more catchy.....
NZ Monkey
10th-November-2006, 11:49 AM
- the public aspect of feeback might put people who are not already confident with their dancing off.
Although I can understand why people often feel this way, it seems to me that dancing is a public activity anyway and that most of the people who dance with you will form opinions of your dancing regardless.
Maybe I’m a masochist but I’d rather hear those opinions, especially if it’s about technique and from someone with significant experience.
Groovemeister
10th-November-2006, 12:19 PM
I would be up for it but after doing the video thing at Breeze it is not an easy thing to do. It wouldn't be as bad if you started of with the cirtique at the begining of the MJ learning experience.
For me in changed my thinking but believe me it took a lot of debate. The hardest thing after that is going to learn or trying to eliminate the problems. Other dance forms you are constantly told about your technique until you get it with MJ there is no one telling you this week after week so it is very easy to fall back into your old habits.
I would ensure people are aware of certain things before they came on such a class such as their dance knowledge, confidence level, what there end goal was so that the critique could be tailored to suite
janey
10th-November-2006, 12:51 PM
I think that this would be an excellent idea. I understand that for a lot of people MJ is a purely social thing but for those of us who are keen to improve our dancing in terms of style & technique this would be really useful.
I know I have loads of bad habits & would really like advice on how to imporve them - however painful it is to hear :tears:
sidney
10th-November-2006, 01:22 PM
I would be in favour of a class where we could get together and improve on our style and technique as I am at a stand still where my mj is concerned so I go now to salsa where the classes are more intense but I don't like the venue or culture very much but I feel I am taxing myself once again. My cousin who is staying with me from NZ do this style of class back in NZ which she found benefical and she and her husband when they first arrived in england they went to a couple of classes but did not like the style of teaching so did not go back, things like just going through the routine no one coming around to checkyou the guy who was teaching did the talking but the lady kept quiet so no feedback for the ladies and he did not dance with the punters only if you went looking for him outside. So yes if we could have these sort of extra classes around the country on a weekend for the same price not the prices you pay for workshops which are fine now and again when I can afford it.
Gadget
10th-November-2006, 02:12 PM
The hardest part of this is not really trying to find something to critique uppon, but what to do to try and resolve it. Or more to the point what is happening within your dancing to cause the effects - the "why" behind the "what".
For some of the better dancers (which I think would be most of the folk up for this) it is much harder - you can only really point out what you did and didn't like, then you've got to try and work out why you didn't like it. :sick:
Then, after you have received the advice, how do you take it or apply it? Should you apply it? Does the person talking know what they are talking about? Do you understand what they think they are saying rather than what you are hearing them say?
I think that you could get a lot out of this, but there may be a danger of takeing something as gospel instead of a suggestion on improvement.
Frankie_4711
11th-November-2006, 11:26 AM
I would definitely be up for something like this. Although I only dance socially, that doesn't mean I don't want to improve - I am always happy to receive feedback whether good or bad, whether in a class or in freestyle (doesn't happen much, but always appreciated when it does), so to have a class/workshop/informal session dedicated especially to that would be great.
Alice
11th-November-2006, 05:35 PM
I think this would be a great idea:) I'm always looking for feedback, though people are often reticent about giving it for fear that the comments might offend or simply be unwelcome. Having a workshop or master class where everyone is encouraged to comment and discuss others' performances would be a safe environment both to give and receive feedback and suggestions for improvement. It would also create a fantastic learning environment, as you can always learn from the comments made to others...
I say bring it on:):flower:
:cheers:
Clueless
13th-November-2006, 03:20 PM
I would gbe up for this as I am always looking for a way to improve my dancing and sometime it can only be done with feedback from other dancers.
paul stevo
13th-November-2006, 11:20 PM
This "workshop" was done at Jive Addiction`s Scarborough event last year and was the best lesson of the weekend. If I remember right one of the Aussie teachers did it.
He gave the dancers things to remark on after 30 seconds of freestyle ie. is your partner bouncing their hands or are your partners arms floppy. He`d obviously done this before because it was very polished and he`d got it down to a fine art.
He made it especially clear that a person`s critism was their opinion and therefore could not be wrong, but if you did not agree with what they said then to thank them for their help....and ignore it. However, if 4 people on the trot told you the same critism then maybe ignoring it wasn`t the answer !!! :whistle:
Hopefully Scarborough this week will again have some differant classes like this.
Paul
Caro
15th-November-2006, 04:25 PM
it looks like what most people would like for a 'critique' class is one where people dance with each others and give themselves feedback, which although an interesting concept, wasn't the intention of this thread (critique class being one where the teacher only critiques one dancer while the others watch).
The poll looks very good, i.e. most people would want to be critiqued, however there doesn't seem to be any beginner in the list of voters, so we still don't know how that would be received in an average weekly class.:rolleyes:
May be the option of 'too shy / not confident enough' was too intimidating in a public poll? :confused:
under par
16th-November-2006, 12:47 AM
This "workshop" was done at Jive Addiction`s Scarborough event last year and was the best lesson of the weekend. If I remember right one of the Aussie teachers did it.
Paul
Hi Paul yes I also did this class ..:clap: it was very well received and one of the better lessons I've been to at a weekender.
Mark and Simone Harding did the class:respect: although I seem to recall Mrs Par nearly demo'd for Mark cos Simone was feeding the baby:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
She managed to get on stage in time though:clap:
Maybe they'll be asked to do it again next year at SP!!
Flat_Eric
24th-November-2006, 10:59 AM
This "workshop" was done at Jive Addiction`s Scarborough event last year and was the best lesson of the weekend.
Great idea ! Also a very valid point about the MJ culture. I think the reconciliation can be done in the monitoring of the format and the way the feedback is offered. Not so different from many feedback mechanisms in the corporate environment.
The way I would do it:
- Definitely a workshop format in a weekender rather than a lesson. Suggestion:
x First session: 2 hours on the Saturday morning / early afternoon
x Second session: 1.5 hour on the Sunday afternoon
First session:
==========
1- Groups of 5 couples working with each other, teacher monitors the process and moves from one group to the other
2- Each person performs 1 min of freestyle with 2 other partners
3- Use a + / Delta format: tell people what you like, and what you would do differently (vs what you're doing "wrong") and how you would do it
4- At the end of their review, each member of the couple individually agrees to work on 3 things during the rest of the week-end
Second session:
============
1- One single group with all couples
2- Each couple dances for 2 minutes
3- Anonymous feedback with another "plus-delta" from the whole class
4- Snowball teambuilding type of dance to put everyone back together
- Possibly use anonymous feeback written on paper that the couple receives, shares and analyses. This element would adrress the MJ cultural element where
I would actually enjoy managing such an exercise or going through it, I think !
Yogi_Bear
24th-November-2006, 01:57 PM
Great idea ! Also a very valid point about the MJ culture. I think the reconciliation can be done in the monitoring of the format and the way the feedback is offered. Not so different from many feedback mechanisms in the corporate environment.
The way I would do it:
- Definitely a workshop format in a weekender rather than a lesson. Suggestion:
x First session: 2 hours on the Saturday morning / early afternoon
x Second session: 1.5 hour on the Sunday afternoon
First session:
==========
1- Groups of 5 couples working with each other, teacher monitors the process and moves from one group to the other
2- Each person performs 1 min of freestyle with 2 other partners
3- Use a + / Delta format: tell people what you like, and what you would do differently (vs what you're doing "wrong") and how you would do it
4- At the end of their review, each member of the couple individually agrees to work on 3 things during the rest of the week-end
Second session:
============
1- One single group with all couples
2- Each couple dances for 2 minutes
3- Anonymous feedback with another "plus-delta" from the whole class
4- Snowball teambuilding type of dance to put everyone back together
- Possibly use anonymous feeback written on paper that the couple receives, shares and analyses. This element would adrress the MJ cultural element where
I would actually enjoy managing such an exercise or going through it, I think !
I would be keen to take part - good of you to offer to manage it! At the next weekender......:whistle:
Flat_Eric
24th-November-2006, 08:21 PM
At the next weekender......:whistle:
Shame I don't do them...unless Ceroc book me. :wink: :clap:
Design workshops is part of what I do for a living, and I must confess that I have sometimes thought of what format would be the best to get dancers to go to the next level. To me, the one class which that would make a difference would have to do with character building in the dance, using the Stanislavky (Actor's Studio) method.
This one would definitely kick arse and is not that hard to design...Maybe one day....
Clueless
28th-November-2006, 12:28 PM
Shame I don't do them...unless Ceroc book me. :wink: :clap:
Design workshops is part of what I do for a living, and I must confess that I have sometimes thought of what format would be the best to get dancers to go to the next level. To me, the one class which that would make a difference would have to do with character building in the dance, using the Stanislavky (Actor's Studio) method.
This one would definitely kick arse and is not that hard to design...Maybe one day....
Why not incorporate it into a style workshop of andvance intermediate workshop and say what is hapening at the beginning and give the participants the option if they want to join in or not?
Flat_Eric
29th-November-2006, 07:28 PM
Why not incorporate it into a style workshop of andvance intermediate workshop and say what is hapening at the beginning and give the participants the option if they want to join in or not?
Possible, provided that:
- On the logistics side, appropriate pace of teaching is used. Some elements would need delayed, "infused" learning
- On the personal side, attendees are ready to get close and personal with their inner self. Not so obvious an assumption to make, given that, beyond the glitter of their dancing, people generally prefer to keep things private.
"Style" workshops sound to me as "skills" workshop, something that can be learned without any alteration to who you are as aperson. What I am talking about would, more often than not, induce serious introspection. Not sure that would be appropriate for something as light as MJ...
Lee Bartholomew
29th-November-2006, 07:58 PM
Could it not be done by vid clip and forum?
Should get a new thread going on it. Maybe Ill get filming this weekend.
David Bailey
29th-November-2006, 09:11 PM
Could it not be done by vid clip and forum?
Should get a new thread going on it. Maybe Ill get filming this weekend.
Funny, I was thinking exactly that - based on your posting the vidclip, of course.
We could maybe create a "critique area" or something, where we could post our opinions of clips - that way, people wouldn't have to make notes or anything, and they could update clips, ask for opinions on a continuous basis and so on.
It's not as good as a professional critique session of course, but it's much easier to organise, especially as we're all so spread-out geographically.
Lee Bartholomew
29th-November-2006, 09:26 PM
Funny, I was thinking exactly that - based on your posting the vidclip, of course.
{snip}
Ah at last something positive comes from my spinning :D
Flat_Eric
29th-November-2006, 09:38 PM
Funny, I was thinking exactly that - based on your posting the vidclip, of course.
Grat idea, great format, definitely deserves a place here with a Youtube plugin. Only risk is to get your MJ too "cerockised" and not personal enough. Still a risk worth taking I think.
Lee Bartholomew
29th-November-2006, 09:40 PM
Im happy to kick things off with a vid, but will have to wait untill weekend and I find a willing partner.
Flat_Eric
30th-November-2006, 01:04 AM
Could it not be done by vid clip and forum?
You just gave me a great idea !!! (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showpost.php?p=314543&postcount=1)
Alan Doyle
21st-September-2009, 11:56 PM
Following discussions on this thread (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10315), it begged the question whether or not people would be ready for a critique class in ML/Ceroc (see definition in the linked thread).
So... let's see if there's any taker?
I'd give a critique if anyone wants one :waycool:
jivecat
29th-October-2009, 07:50 PM
Although I can understand why people often feel this way, it seems to me that dancing is a public activity anyway and that most of the people who dance with you will form opinions of your dancing regardless.
Maybe I’m a masochist but I’d rather hear those opinions, especially if it’s about technique and from someone with significant experience.
I've voted for the first option on the poll as I've always tried to work on pushing my dancing on (not that it's done me much good), but having read the thread I think I've changed my mind.
I'd be happy about hearing private feedback (I won't use the word "criticism", far too negative) from a teacher I knew and respected, in a small group situation.
I'd be less happy about receiving public feedback in a large group situation.
I'd be less happy about receiving peer feedback in a group situation. I was at the above-mentioned Scarborough Aussie workshop, and it was good, and very well-managed by the teachers but I don't know how useful it was and some of my partners seemed uncomfortable with it as well. I just don't feel comfortable telling a dance partner that they need to change - to be honest, I'd rather just dance with someone else. However, I'd certainly try to help if directly asked. I'm not sure if I could accept criticism easily unless I trusted and respected my dance partner, both emotionally and professionally.
I'd be very unhappy if there was public criticism from a large public group, even worse if non-participators were allowed to comment.
I think criticism you've paid for from a trained professional is the most worthwhile sort as they should know what to look for and how to achieve it. Peer feedback has its place but can't really supply that.
DavidB
29th-October-2009, 08:17 PM
How about a workshop where you can anonymously criticise everyone else?
Get 10 couples in a class. Each dancer has a number on their back (as in a competition)
You dance with someone for 2 different tracks, one slow, one faster, and different styles (like competitions are supposed to do).
After dancing with them, you fill in a sheet with marks out of 10 for various criteria (musicality, connection, content, execution etc). You can also add comments. They also get to mark you.
The sheets all get collated, and you get the results of what everyone thought of you. This feedback would show your individual strengths and weaknesses, and also how you compared with everyone else in each criteria. You would also see the comments. However you wouldn't see who said what, or who gave you what marks.
You could have one or more teaching couples in the rotation, with the difference being that you see their marks.
I think 10 couples would work, so you get to dance with and mark 9 other dancers in an hour. The results would be available later in the day.
(I may have suggested this before, but nothing ever came of it.)
frodo
29th-October-2009, 11:06 PM
...
I'd be less happy about receiving public feedback in a large group situation....
I wouldn't have a problem with the large group as such, but would prefer it was a group of people I didn't know and wasn't likely to cross paths much with.
...
The sheets all get collated, and you get the results of what everyone thought of you. This feedback would show your individual strengths and weaknesses, and also how you compared with everyone else in each criteria. You would also see the comments. However you wouldn't see who said what, or who gave you what marks...
Sounds like an elegant solution.
It would be good to know the average mark each marker gave out for each category (that might be implicit).
Phil_dB
30th-October-2009, 03:32 PM
Interesting thread.
I would take part in such an exercise.
My view of it would be: A: To give me an overview of what people thought of my dancing & what I need to improve upon (& would hope for suggestions of how). B: (hopefully (unless the comments were that bad!)) a bit of fun.
A lot would depend on who exactly is in the group of participants. I value some peoples words of advice much higher than others.
If you’re dancing with people much more advanced than yourself, then you would probably benefit from lots of advice of where you’re going wrong, and ways you can improve (as they’ve probably been-there-done-that). If you’re much more advanced than others than all your critique will probably be extremely complimentary, but not much help to you in terms of progressing forward.
I reckon that most people have a rough overview of how others view their dancing based on a collation of the brief exchanges of words after dozens upon dozens of dances, more detailed feedback from closer dance friends, conversations with teachers, etc, - anyway.
I'm of the current belief that to discover your strengths/weakness in detail, and to receive constructive advice on how to progress forward (in detail) would probably come from private tuition from a dance teacher who's style of dancing you like (who is also a good teacher).
Another alternative possible solution (closer to the idea on this thread, & one i've not yet seen here) - is to post up a video of yourself dancing, - and ask everyone on this forum to offer their constructive criticism :what:
emmylou25
30th-October-2009, 03:39 PM
I'd be happy about hearing private feedback (I won't use the word "criticism", far too negative) from a teacher I knew and respected, in a small group situation.
I'd be less happy about receiving public feedback in a large group situation.
I'm with Jivecat on this.
I haven't answered the poll as I'd be happy to be videoed and critiqued but wouldn't necessarily want this from a general random group of people. As dancing is subjective, if I don't rate the critiquer's style or technique, why would i want to hear what they say about my dancing? I've seen myself dancing on video and I think I get a lot of benefit from this because i can see a lot of the things I'd want to work on. For me this would be more valuable and then to work with an expert/teacher on how to improve on those things.
Giving feedback, I have quite set views about certain people I see dancing in terms of what I think they do/dont' have in style/musicality/technique etc. But I'm not a teacher or expert, and therefore unless someone specifically asks my view on a particular point, I'd not offer my view as they might not want it or value my opinion. Obviously if I'm asked, I'm quite happy to give advice in terms of how to work on certain things, because that person has asked me and they must value my opinion.
I think it would only work if everyone in the room respected everyone else's dancing/views.
Andy Razzle
6th-November-2009, 09:40 AM
A group assessment is difficult, as everyone has a different opinion on how to interpret the music, ie blues dancers are very different to dance with than others so they look for different qualities in a partners dance style.
Also if the feedback is purely on how it is to dance with someone you wont get the feedback on the visual aspect, which for me is one of the main aims.
I personally have had comments from other dancers on followers saying how good someone is, and not agreed!! so Id say lead and follow is much more subjective. most of the best for me are light but I have come across very good dancers who are much heavier! and also danced with one of the top dancers who I found light but compared notes with another leader who commented on how she was heavy!?
On style and elegance the ultimate feedback for me is via video.
todd
9th-November-2009, 05:53 PM
As dancing is subjective, if I don't rate the critiquer's style or technique, why would i want to hear what they say about my dancing?
I kind of like the idea of posting up a video to get feedback. I do take Emmy's point though that if the Critiquer's style is poles apart from mine (IE not want I'd want from my own dance) then I'd be less inclined to take any notice. Having said that - just because the styles might be a lot different doesn't mean that someone couldn't offer useful advice...
Perhaps the video idea would work if you could post feedback only if you have already posted your own video clip. That way anyone reading feedback about themselves could, if they wanted to, view the critiquer dancing and make up their own mind what to think of the feedback..?
Gus
9th-November-2009, 09:30 PM
How about a workshop where you can anonymously criticise everyone else?I remember on a Blitz instructor training day we all got to give feedback (non-anonymously). It was really useful ... though some of the instructors were less than happy by what wasn't said rather than what was said.
I think its a great idea ... but I would guarantee there would be tears before bedtime no matter how carefully the message was delivered
Gerry
10th-November-2009, 12:14 AM
I remember on a Blitz instructor training day we all got to give feedback (non-anonymously). It was really useful ... though some of the instructors were less than happy by what wasn't said rather than what was said.
I think its a great idea ... but I would guarantee there would be tears before bedtime no matter how carefully the message was delivered
I have had many WCS private lessons / tennis coaching, you need to respect you teacher and remember to take the feed back as constructive critism. Nobody is perfect and we are all able to improve its just that some of us need more improving / help than others.
I know in my own mind that I am not a real dancer, more a move monster. In the immortal words of Jordan, there's nothing wrong with that, you just need to do the right move at the right time:doh:
Phil_dB
10th-November-2009, 11:11 AM
I kind of like the idea of posting up a video to get feedback. I do take Emmy's point though that if the Critiquer's style is poles apart from mine (IE not want I'd want from my own dance) then I'd be less inclined to take any notice. Having said that - just because the styles might be a lot different doesn't mean that someone couldn't offer useful advice...
Perhaps the video idea would work if you could post feedback only if you have already posted your own video clip. That way anyone reading feedback about themselves could, if they wanted to, view the critiquer dancing and make up their own mind what to think of the feedback..?
The principal of the idea is good, however in reality, you'd probably recieve little or no feedback whatsoever (as hardly anyone will post). Plus as well, - just because someone is a good dancer, - does it automatically mean they're a good teacher? I'd say no.
Plus as well by limiting the response you cut yourself off from the "wisdom of crowds" which internet forums are good for.
I completley agree with Gus, - dance crique is a very personal thing. And often the best critique can be the hardest to stomach (truth hurts & all that).
I also think that identifying problems is one hurdle; offering a solution is another.... But offering a solution that will actually work for you, - is yet something else again.
I do think it would be beneficial to post a video here (after you've got over the dent in your ego :D ), however, probably a "safer" way forward if you're really serious about making progress, would be private tuition (which included video analysis) from a respected teacher. A good pro should be able to immediately idenfity underlying issues, and know exactly the best way forward to solving them (because he's taught hundreds of other pupils before & know what works well and what doesn't work as well). Aside from problems, - a good teacher should also be able to offer you a clear direction in terms of the way forward (long term) and short cut your learning curve.
Andy McGregor
10th-November-2009, 11:32 AM
I also think that identifying problems is one hurdle; offering a solution is another.... But offering a solution that will actually work for you, - is yet something else again.
I do think it would be beneficial to post a video here (after you've got over the dent in your ego :D ), however, probably a "safer" way forward if you're really serious about making progress, would be private tuition (which included video analysis) from a respected teacher. A good pro should be able to immediately idenfity underlying issues, and know exactly the best way forward to solving them (because he's taught hundreds of other pupils before & know what works well and what doesn't work as well). Aside from problems, - a good teacher should also be able to offer you a clear direction in terms of the way forward (long term) and short cut your learning curve.I give quite a few private lessons. Except for those learning a dance for a wedding it's mostly about correcting bad habits and replacing them with new, good, habits. Private lessons are an expensive way to learn new moves that you could get at any class or workshop. But they are a fabulous way of getting personal and private feedback on improving your technique.
I believe that a video critique by the masses would be worse than useless. The masses as a group don't know what they're talking about. If you need evidence of that you need look no further than John & Edward in The X Factor or the likes of Christopher Parker in Strictly.
todd
10th-November-2009, 11:44 AM
The principal of the idea is good, however in reality, you'd probably recieve little or no feedback whatsoever (as hardly anyone will post). Plus as well, - just because someone is a good dancer, - does it automatically mean they're a good teacher? I'd say no.
Plus as well by limiting the response you cut yourself off from the "wisdom of crowds" which internet forums are good for.
I completley agree with Gus, - dance crique is a very personal thing. And often the best critique can be the hardest to stomach (truth hurts & all that).
I also think that identifying problems is one hurdle; offering a solution is another.... But offering a solution that will actually work for you, - is yet something else again.
I do think it would be beneficial to post a video here (after you've got over the dent in your ego :D ), however, probably a "safer" way forward if you're really serious about making progress, would be private tuition (which included video analysis) from a respected teacher. A good pro should be able to immediately idenfity underlying issues, and know exactly the best way forward to solving them (because he's taught hundreds of other pupils before & know what works well and what doesn't work as well). Aside from problems, - a good teacher should also be able to offer you a clear direction in terms of the way forward (long term) and short cut your learning curve.
Yeap, have to agree with your on you points. Good dancer = good teachers? Not always. And the idea causing limited feedback - yeah, I see what you mean.
As for private tuition with video - that sounds like the "Video Clinic" that is often run at Ceroc weekenders. I've done that a couple of times myself and found them really beneficial.
Phil_dB
10th-November-2009, 11:53 AM
May I ask, - which teacher/s did the video clinic with you at the weekenders, out of interest?
I know that some teachers outside of weekenders also offer this service.
todd
10th-November-2009, 05:28 PM
May I ask, - which teacher/s did the video clinic with you at the weekenders, out of interest?
I know that some teachers outside of weekenders also offer this service.
Hi Phil - It was Richard and Jo from Ceroc Fever and both times I did it at the Breeze weekender in Brean Sands. I believe they also run the same service at other weekenders (EG Camber), but don't quote me on that. I'm not sure if they do it outside of weekenders - best ask them directly!
Gus
11th-November-2009, 08:32 PM
Perhaps the video idea would work if you could post feedback only if you have already posted your own video clip. That way anyone reading feedback about themselves could, if they wanted to, view the critiquer dancing and make up their own mind what to think of the feedback..?
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.
Andy McGregor
11th-November-2009, 09:42 PM
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.Nice venue :whistle:
Alan Doyle
12th-November-2009, 12:02 AM
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.
Hi Gus,
I suppose to give you some background...my teacher training is with the GSDTA & LeRoc. My judges training is with GSDTA & WSDC.
I'm teaching a workshop focusing on Upper Level (Advanced) Basics in Modern Jive focusing on Timing, Technique & Teamwork...I'm teaching advanced technique using basic patterns and anyone who wants a critique, I will give them one at the jive weekend in Munich in 2 weeks...
Please view this as constructive feedback (I think there are a lot of things you are doing well, but some things need some work)...if you'd like me to clarify anything let me know...I've broken it down into Timing, Technique & Teamwork. If you like I can make some suggestions as to what you can do to improve your Timing, Technique & Teamwork...
· One of the major things I'd like to see is you body leading the dance as opposed to arm leading it (most people arm lead MJ).
· I'd also like to see you do a rock step on beats 1&2 of every pattern.
All in all well done, good job :wink::hug:
Timing – You must be on the beat of the music
· On the Down Beat
This was pretty good, most of the time you were dancing on the down beat.
· Pulsing
You weren’t pulsing – you should pulse the downbeat in MJ.
· Aware of the Breaks
You were aware of a lot of the breaks
· Degree of Critical Timing
You were mostly on time, but slightly behind the beat
Technique – I'm looking to see how the body looks in motion.
· Individual Centring
You’re dancing with your feet but not with your centre. When leading the pattern, your centre moves first before the beat (&a) and then lands on the down beat.
· Body Alignment
I didn’t see many awkward moves that came from poor body alignment or lack of balance from improper foot placement but I did see that you were not getting your balance on the foot that you spin on before you steping back on your other foot after you turn. A lot of this is down to posture. There are 3 parts to correctly executing a turn (1) the start, (2) the turn and (3) the stop & Spotting
· Foot Placement
A lot of the time you were dancing on a single track which is good. A lot of the time you were using correct foot positions.
· Hand Placement
Hand Placement was pretty good.
· Leverage / Compression
I didn’t see you giving compression and then leverage before leading a move (but most of the patterns were arm lead – which I'd like to see body lead).
Teamwork – Partners must work together. One partner should not be obviously out dancing the other. There should be a comfortable, equal "resistance" between the two dancers that shows an action/reaction while at the same time creating a balanced flow.
· Couple Centring
There is a flashlight between your centres; she should always try to keep her centre facing your centre, which she did pretty well. You should lead with your centre.
· Action / Reaction
I felt she wasn’t actively following you, she should match the resistance – meet a push with a push and a pull with a pull.
· Connection
I did notice that you were dancing a lot with your finger tips; you get a better connection if you try to connect with the inside of your middle finger.
· Compatibility
You are quite compatible with each other
· Harmonious Adjustment
You both seem to have pretty good co-ordination
Gadget
12th-November-2009, 01:58 AM
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.
My thoughts:
I could tell you were tired; very little in the way of extensions or crisp/sharp contrasts and your floor craft wasn't as tidy as it could be.
You know you're a good dancer and you've been teaching it for years, so there isn't really anything obvious or major to pick up on that would make more than a tiny bit of difference.
But if I'm specifically looking for things to critique...
I think that the orientation of your feet could be looked at: you dance with a slight bend (and bounce) in your knees - gives you a bow legged look and makes your toes point out all the time. It also means that most steps taken are onto an angled foot. The bent knees can be a good thing - lets you move smoothly and turn easily, a wide stance means you are more stable and have more options in terms of where you can move from here. This is probably a remnant of your martial arts training; your 'at rest' stance is like GG's - not that pretty.
When you're not specifically looking at your partner, you tend to bob your head and look down. Would probably look better if you look to where your partner will be and let them move into your field of vision or specifically look away (with head up) to give contrast. (Trampy does the look down thing too, so do I... )
In general, you are leading MJ as classic MJ: you are leading and your partner is following. There is very little syncopation, mirroring, or moving as one with your partner unless it's where you bring them into an close embrace where it's still obvious that you're the lead and your partner is the follower.
Your length of stride and foot falls seldom match your partners: I've seen you look more 'in tune' with other partners, I know you can do it, but there is little evidence of it from this clip - It shows very much the roles of a dominant lead and submissive follower.
It was danced well, and on beat. However the moves were just moves after moves, exploring a little bit of musicality in selection, but not much in execution. You seemed to be dancing to the beat all the time rather than the lyrics, melody or structure. To me it made it just look like a typical MJ dance rather than a spotlight: I would have liked to have seen some changes in tempo that matched the music or a repeat pattern to match a chorus or some styling to coincide with the strings... even when you're 'static' in a pose/stance or the follower is orbiting you, you keep the 'marching' beat and movement going.
The not-so-subtle ass grab and leaving the hand on the follower's butt when pulling in for a close 'blues' embrace isn't something I would like to promote in social MJ dancing. Nor would I the collapsed blues frame be something I would show in a showcase/spotlight for normal social MJ. (Dancing socially or blues, then OK; but in this particular clip I thought it was out of place)
I don't know that a bounce on a dip is that good a move; I would have rather seen a staged controlled descent/ascent or an impressive exit.
Reading a bit, this clip is kind of a promo for the moves that will be taught in a workshop, so perhaps there are boundaries on what you wanted to show and specifically didn't want to show and how much of a 'performance' you wanted it to look.
As I said, not much to criticise; and from a video, all that can really be advised on is the look and perhaps connection with the music.
Gadget
12th-November-2009, 02:09 AM
Hi Gus,
I suppose to give you some background...my teacher training is with the GSDTA & LeRoc. My judges training is with GSDTA & WSDC.
I have no problem with the critique; just the language used: Lots of "Should" and convictions about what is right and what is wrong.
Opinions and views(*) presented as statements of fact are likely to lead to a debate that has little to do with the intent of Gus's post.
(* about how MJ "should" be danced)
Andy McGregor
12th-November-2009, 11:20 AM
· One of the major things I'd like to see is you body leading the dance as opposed to arm leading it (most people arm lead MJ).
· Most beginners arm lead. Most experienced Modern Jivers smoothly combine arm and body leads. Modern Jive is what Modern Jive does. It's a folk dance and should be taught the way folk do it. This prepares them for the social situation where Modern Jive is danced. As it's a social dance and we should be teaching people how to dance sociably.
I'm not saying MJ should be danced using bad dance technique if that's what everyone is doing. What I'm saying is that, as teachers, we should look at the best Modern Jivers and help our students to dance like the best.
I'd also like to see you do a rock step on beats 1&2 of every pattern.This would be very repetitive, to say the least! Having said that, it depends on what you call a "pattern".
[/FONT]On the Down Beat Down beat :confused: We're dancers, not members of an orchestra waiting for the conductor to drop his baton. And there is confusion about the down beat being beat 1 of a 4 beat bar. For us dancers, especially Modern Jivers we usually use beat 1 of the minor phrase of 2 bars - we dance in eight counts which would include 2 "down beats". Why not number the beats? It's so much more simple.
In the main, whilst I could understand Alan's critique, my impression was that he wasn't so much providing Gus with a critique as displaying his own knowledge of dance. This reminds me of the middle class ladies, think Mrs Bucket, who use long words in an attempt to impress. Yes Alan, we're impressed with your knowledge of dance.
My own critique of Gus is quite simple. Here is it;
Stop nodding and looking at the floor.
That's it. And the reason I'm only picking on one thing is that I'm an experienced dance teacher and know that a single change in a person's dancing changes so much more about their dancing - I'd watch carefully once the nodding had stopped and hope that the single change helped Gus improve his posture so that he was more upright with his bottom tucked under - lovely though it is :wink: If the posture didn't change once the nodding had stopped I'd address that next.
We were asked to provide a critique for coaching purposes and that's what I've done. If I were judging Gus I'd have a slightly longer list, but the thing that most needs changing is the nodding - and it's a simple change that you can make in an instant, which shows immediate progress, which is nice.
I think Gus is very brave in posting this video and he should be admired for this. His dancing is very good, especially for a teacher as he doesn't over-decorate which means his students can copy his moves more easily.
Well done Gus :clap:
straycat
12th-November-2009, 11:34 AM
Might I suggest... that those offering critiques put videos of themselves up? (I know that Gadget has, on the YouTube vids thread iirc)
It's always useful to see where someone's coming from. Example - if I were to post any comments on Gus' video, I would (mostly) be doing so from a Lindy / Blues perspective - and I'm not sure my feedback would be sufficiently relevant to MJ.
Although I think Gus needs a longer t-shirt ;)
Hmmm. Actually - I will say that it would be improved by better posture. I say this knowing fine well that my own posture is probably worse :rolleyes:
Oh - and kudos for posting the clip.
David Franklin
12th-November-2009, 12:09 PM
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.I think my biggest criticism of your dancing here is that it looks tired and a little bit sloppy rather than sharp. But I'd also say that normally your energy when you dance is one of your stronger points, so I'm inclined to think that "yeah, you were just tired".
As Andy says, you looked down too much. [And if ever the pot was calling the kettle black, it was me when I wrote that sentence].
In terms of musicality - I didn't see a great deal to be honest. It felt like it was just a string of moves that were on beat but not much else. To be fair, I think your biggest musical problem was using that track for a demo - it's the kind of track where I'd keep the moves very simple 90% of the time. To me it's also quite a 'sharp' track, and I would have preferred sharper movements to go with it. (In particular, there are typically strong beats on 1 and 7 of each {musical} 8-count, and I'd have liked to have seen more of your dancing acknowledge that).
Musically, the bit I liked best was a little section from about 2:05 to 2:13 where it felt that you were sharp, a little bit more on top of the beat, and also acknowledged the syncopation in the rhythm.
I'd disagree with Gadget about the drop - I thought it looked fine; although being honest, this is the often kind of thing that you do more because you and your partner like it than because it looks amazing to onlookers.
Again - lots of respect for posting the clip.
Gadget
12th-November-2009, 01:56 PM
Might I suggest... that those offering critiques put videos of themselves up? (I know that Gadget has, on the YouTube vids thread iirc)I was going to get someone to record a couple of dances and post one of them; Gus beat me to it. What's on that thread is a busk - not really a 'standard' dance.
Gus
12th-November-2009, 02:53 PM
Might I suggest... that those offering critiques put videos of themselves up? (I know that Gadget has, on the YouTube vids thread iirc)I can see what you are saying but I think that it need not be a criteria for offering advice. To be honest there has been much of benefit in all the postings (including the PM'd ones)
Although I think Gus needs a longer t-shirt ;)I think that Gus needs a shorter stomach :(
Dave Hancock
12th-November-2009, 03:02 PM
Firstly well done on posting this Gus, you are very brave in doing so.
Firstly I actually really enjoyed the video and thought there were an awful lot of nice things within it, I found the little bum grab playful and cheeky and it seems like the lady did as well! I thought there was a good selection of moves, that it looked pretty smooth and that the two of you were really enjoying it.
I'd agree with a lot of what Andy Mcgregor wrote, not sure that I was all that taken by Alan's or Gadget's review and totally agree with Andy on the best point in a critique is to get one single thing to focus on. To this effect I'd go with the posturing thing, I'd definitely focus on getting the shoulders a bit further back, to me this would solve quite a number of the other things mentioned, would naturally raise the head position and make the dance look even slicker.
However once again I'd like to thank you for posting this and being brave in inviting comments thereon.
robd
12th-November-2009, 03:06 PM
All critique gratefully received.
I've seen better MJ on YT and I have seen a lot worse. I'd echo what others have said about the overall dancing not matching the mood of the song particularly but very few MJ dancers IMO are capable of doing this anyway. Would also echo the 'looking down' comments. On the plus side there are some nice patterns in there and a couple of places where you accented the music well (0:32 and 2:13) which I enjoyed. Kudos for having the guts to put a clip up in the first place.
robd
12th-November-2009, 03:10 PM
In the main, whilst I could understand Alan's critique, my impression was that he wasn't so much providing Gus with a critique as displaying his own knowledge of dance.
:yeah:
So that's the distinction between knowledge and understanding? :rolleyes:
Double Trouble
12th-November-2009, 03:31 PM
I think there is a difference between watching someone dance and actually danding with them. Looking at Gus in that video clip doesn't do him much justice, IMO. I danced with him at a weekender a while back and it was (by far) the best dance of the weekend.
He ticks all the boxes for me. :respect:
David Franklin
12th-November-2009, 03:49 PM
In the main, whilst I could understand Alan's critique, my impression was that he wasn't so much providing Gus with a critique as displaying his own knowledge of dance.To be honest, I think Alan's largely reading off a set script written by someone else. Which is not necessarily bad - I would expect someone judging a MJ competition to be referring closely to a set of rules written by someone else as well.
There's a problem when the script was originally written for WCS dancers and not translated into MJ terms. (That's even before you get into Skippy Blair's writing style - I find she spends a page describing something and at the end I feel absolutely none the wiser. From discussions with others, including experienced WCS dancers, I'm far from the only person).
Down beat :confused: We're dancers, not members of an orchestra waiting for the conductor to drop his baton. And there is confusion about the down beat being beat 1 of a 4 beat bar. To be fair, however, I can't blame this one on Skippy. I thought it was pretty universally understood amongst swing-based dancers that the downbeats are the odd counts and the upbeats are the even counts (music counts not Ceroc counts).
the thing that most needs changing is the nodding - and it's a simple change that you can make in an instant, which shows immediate progress, which is nice.I have to say, I think it depends on the person how easy they find this. I certainly don't find this kind of thing easy to change.
Gus
12th-November-2009, 03:49 PM
I found the little bum grab playful and cheeky and it seems like the lady did as well! Didn't even remember doing that!:blush: Though we were dancing in front of a lot of people, its a lovely friendly club (Hessle Jive) and we just were dancing for each other and forgetting people were watching :waycool:
Re the DavidBs earlier proposal ... I think I'm going to try the idea out at Hessle. If we can cover the costs of the hall, I think we could get a fair few couples from the club to participate and then use a consolidation of the points emerging to develop a suite of workshops that are tuned to what people need.
Gus
12th-November-2009, 03:52 PM
To be honest, I think Alan's largely reading off a set script written by someone else. Which is not necessarily bad - I would expect someone judging a MJ competition to be referring closely to a set of rules written by someone else as well.Hmm .. my thougths were that such scripts are a really usefull framework for analysis. If anyone can point me in the direction of the source of this script or similar, be it MJ, WCS or Swing, I'd be most grateful.
robd
12th-November-2009, 03:55 PM
I think there is a difference between watching someone dance and actually danding with them. Looking at Gus in that video clip doesn't do him much justice, IMO. I danced with him at a weekender a while back and it was (by far) the best dance of the weekend.
He ticks all the boxes for me. :respect:
And the point of posting this is? :confused:
Gus had already implied in his invitation that it doesn't do him justice ("it was just a tired Gus freestyling") and since the only possible evaluation that can be done of a video clip is how a person looks when dancing rather than how they feel I can only presume that he is happy with people critiquing him on that basis.
David Franklin
12th-November-2009, 04:01 PM
Hmm .. my thougths were that such scripts are a really usefull framework for analysis. If anyone can point me in the direction of the source of this script or similar, be it MJ, WCS or Swing, I'd be most grateful.I can point you in the direction, but not to a specific script: http://www.swingworld.com/
I don't even know if there is a literal script, but my guess is you get a fair amount of written material in the intensives Skippy teaches, and my impression is that Alan quotes from that material extensively.
Alan Doyle
12th-November-2009, 05:11 PM
I can point you in the direction, but not to a specific script: http://www.swingworld.com/
I don't even know if there is a literal script, but my guess is you get a fair amount of written material in the intensives Skippy teaches, and my impression is that Alan quotes from that material extensively.
You do get some written material (in the form of articles, you can see some on Skippy's Website), but I generally take a lot of notes and I use Skippy's terminology.
bigdjiver
12th-November-2009, 05:17 PM
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.I was very happy to spread that link around the world as an example of Modern Jive. Probably 99% of the population that like dancing wish they could dance as well as that.
Gus
12th-November-2009, 05:30 PM
Gus had already implied in his invitation that it doesn't do him justice ("it was just a tired Gus freestyling").
I'm not sure that it doesn't do me justice. My dancing, especially as a visual experince has fallen back massively from the heady days of being part of the Jango Hotshots (:wink:) and being coached by the likes of Dave & Lily and Kate & Manchester-Supporter-type-bloke. It is what it is. I'm not fretting too much about it. I'm a teacher first and foremost, not a dancer ... though I do feel under pressure sometimes to be a better dnacer to justify the Teacher tag
However, I apprecaite, like other dnacers I know that (apprently) I'm better to dance with than it looks from the outside .... I think thats the point that the lovely Double Bubble was making.
Andy McGregor
12th-November-2009, 06:19 PM
To be fair, however, I can't blame this one on Skippy. I thought it was pretty universally understood amongst swing-based dancers that the downbeats are the odd counts and the upbeats are the even counts (music counts not Ceroc counts).Not being a musician I didn't know what a "downbeat" was. Some time ago I asked a musician and he explained that it's called a "downbeat" because it's when the conductor sweeps his baton down at the beginning of a bar. My tame musician also said that it could be argued that the "real downbeat" was only on the one of the first bar: this is when the conductor's hands hover really high and sweep down on the one in a fairly dramatic way. The other thing he said was that, technically, there is no such thing as an "upbeat".
My conclusion is that music is such an intrinsic part of dance we should really be talking the same language as musicians when we talk about music. For a musician the downbeat is beat one of a bar, not the odd numbered beats. Luckily musicians talk about beat numbers too. Therefore it's much easier for us to talk about the number of the beat when talking about dance. Why complicate it with down, up or any other word? Especially when you could end up sounding like the mad hatter "raise your arm on the down beat" or "lower your heel on the up beat" :confused:
And this whole "dancing count" thing is even worse - especially when it's called the "Ceroc Count". Each "dancing count" is two beats and usually requires a different action on each one of those beats.
Dave Hancock
12th-November-2009, 06:20 PM
You do get some written material (in the form of articles, you can see some on Skippy's Website), but I generally take a lot of notes and I use Skippy's terminology.
I guess I had a lot of similar thoughts to David Franklin and given you've presumably been to an intensive I found it all the more amazing that you wrote such a long critique.
Also judging a MJ by what Skippy believes to be the best approach to dancing WCS seemed a little unusual.
Dave Hancock
12th-November-2009, 06:26 PM
Not being a musician I didn't know what a "downbeat" was. Some time ago I asked a musician and he explained that it's called a "downbeat" because it's when the conductor sweeps his baton down at the beginning of a bar. My tame musician also said that it could be argued that the "real downbeat" was only on the one of the first bar: this is when the conductor's hands hover really high and sweep down on the one in a fairly dramatic way. The other thing he said was that, technically, there is no such thing as an "upbeat".
A lot of other dances and teachers also use the downbeat/upbeat phrasing, I know that from time to time my Latin & ballroom coach does.
Skippy works in 2 beat increments where the first beat is downbeat as you describe with the conductor and second beat being upbeat. If you're able to break all your patterns into 2 beat increments it'll give you an awful lot of scope for increased learning and also for syncopations, again this a technique often used in the Latin world.
Thus for downbeat you could think 1,3,5,7 and upbeats 2,4,6,8.
Am not sure where I stand on the should MJ have a pulse debate, we had a little debate up here a few years ago after we first met Skippy but not sure if we came to a real conclusion.
David Franklin
12th-November-2009, 06:55 PM
Not being a musician I didn't know what a "downbeat" was.Seriously? (Assuming you mean you've only learnt during this thread. Obviously at one point none of us knew what a downbeat is). I find that very surprising (this is not a value judgement). I guess I've read a lot of internet discussions, so I kind of assumed it was common vocabulary amongst dancers who 'study around'.
My conclusion is that music is such an intrinsic part of dance we should really be talking the same language as musicians when we talk about music.Unless you're prepared to start calling half-beats eighths, this is perhaps a road best travelled selectively.
For a musician the downbeat is beat one of a bar, not the odd numbered beats. Luckily musicians talk about beat numbers too. Therefore it's much easier for us to talk about the number of the beat when talking about dance. Why complicate it with down, up or any other word?If the dance world could start again, I'm somewhat inclined to agree with you. However, given pretty much every other swing dance uses upbeat and downbeat, you're not really aiding cross-communication if you use different terminology.
And this whole "dancing count" thing is even worse - especially when it's called the "Ceroc Count". The thing is, outside of MJ, pretty much no-one uses it. And quite a few MJ teachers don't use it either these days. Which is why it feels fairly reasonable to call it the "Ceroc Count". I agree it's a bad thing - I think it's one of the main reasons MJ dancers tend to look worse than WCS ones.
Andy McGregor
12th-November-2009, 07:14 PM
Seriously? (Assuming you mean you've only learnt during this thread.I spoke with that musician years ago. I've been reminded of this nonsense by the talk on this thread. I don't talk down/up and neither do Ceroc or any other MJ teacher I've ever heard. They might talk about it in other swing dances, but not MJ.
And my ballroom teachers never talked about down, up or any other beat. They talked about ones and twos.
Andy McGregor
12th-November-2009, 07:25 PM
Unless you're prepared to start calling half-beats eighths, this is perhaps a road best travelled selectively. I'm saying that we should call beats "beats". This means that every eight count is made up of eight beats. I'm also saying that we shouldn't talk about any kind of count that has a single unit where you make two actions. This "Ceroc Count" is two beats but you do two different things on a single "Ceroc Count". This has got to confuse people.
Alan Doyle
12th-November-2009, 07:38 PM
I'm saying that we should call beats "beats". This means that every eight count is made up of eight beats. I'm also saying that we shouldn't talk about any kind of count that has a single unit where you make two actions. This "Ceroc Count" is two beats but you do two different things on a single "Ceroc Count". This has got to confuse people.
I agree, the count needs to correspond to the beats of music. MJ is counted in "Half Time" (2/2 time) instead of "Common Time" (4/4 time). If the Pulse (recurring accents) - (Down Beats & Up Beats) are in 2/2 time then that's fine, but they are in 4/4 time. So counting in half time doesn't correspond to the beats of music & the pulsing of the music.
DavidB
12th-November-2009, 07:52 PM
My conclusion is that music is such an intrinsic part of dance we should really be talking the same language as musicians when we talk about music.
This means that every eight count is made up of eight beats.
Musicians don't count in eights. They count in fours. Only dancers count in eight. So you have already gone against your own conclusion.
Downbeats, upbeats and counting in eights are all common terms for dancers when talking about music, and personally I'll carry on using them. The other think I like about 'downbeat' and 'upbeat' is that it implies that there is more of a difference between the beats than just a number.
Andy McGregor
12th-November-2009, 08:16 PM
Musicians don't count in eights. They count in fours. Only dancers count in eight. So you have already gone against your own conclusion. I'm pretty sure I said something to that effect earlier. What I'm saying is that dancers should count every beat the the musicians put in the music. I know musicians count in 4s. If we count every beat and give instructions for every beat we can't confuse anybody. It's this counting in twos but acting in ones that bugs me.
Alan Doyle
12th-November-2009, 08:47 PM
I'm pretty sure I said something to that effect earlier. What I'm saying is that dancers should count every beat the the musicians put in the music. I know musicians count in 4s. If we count every beat and give instructions for every beat we can't confuse anybody. It's this counting in twos but acting in ones that bugs me.
Dancers combine 2 x 4/4 measures (a heavy measure and a light measure) to make 8 beats.
If the measures are counted in 4/4 time then there are 4 beats per measure (2 measures to count to 8)
1234 (heavy measure) 5678 (light measure)
If the measure is counted in 2/2 time then there are 2 beats per measure (4 measures to count to 8)
12 (heavy measure) 34 (light measure) 56 (heavy measure) 78 (light measure)
Gus
12th-November-2009, 09:32 PM
I remember a far more learned teacher than myself (Roger Chin who is no mean Ballroom dancer) making the comments about not being a slave to the beat. I like that. I KNOW there is all the talk about down/upbeat ... but for me I hear a movement and, when I'm up to it, I follow that or try to throw some shapes that reflect what I feel ... OR, for more standard music, I try to put a smile on my partners face instead :grin:
With respect to the views expressed here, I've been taught by some of the best teachers MJ has to offer, and none of them have tried to improve my MJ dancing by talking about up/down beats. Having said that, things do change. If DavidB, who I still regard as the finest teacher it has been my honour to be coached by, says its the way to go, I may change my mind.
David Franklin
12th-November-2009, 10:15 PM
With respect to the views expressed here, I've been taught by some of the best teachers MJ has to offer, and none of them have tried to improve my MJ dancing by talking about up/down beats. Having said that, things do change. If DavidB, who I still regard as the finest teacher it has been my honour to be coached by, says its the way to go, I may change my mind.To be honest, it's not usually an issue in MJ. Because Ceroc (and most other MJ) is typically taught with this "1 count = 2 musical beats", dancing on the downbeat is pretty much automatic; it is very unusual to see MJ dancers fail to dance on the downbeat.
I think it's still useful to know the terminology, and be aware that there's actually one downbeat and upbeat for every Ceroc count, but it's more a nicety than something fundamental.
CJ
13th-November-2009, 10:24 AM
OK, I'll throw my hat into the ring.... is from a while back.. Yli and I just letting go at the end of a training session...
here... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHXjZuzmhMU)
I have my own thoughts on it, but critique away...
Thank U.
bigdjiver
13th-November-2009, 10:34 AM
OK, I'll throw my hat into the ring.... is from a while back.. Yli and I just letting go at the end of a training session...
here... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHXjZuzmhMU)
I have my own thoughts on it, but critique away...
Thank U.Another favourite moving clip I had no hesitation in spreading around the world. :worthy:
Part of my campaign to get MJ on SCD as a week 1 dance, the place for most people to start their dance journey.
Gadget
13th-November-2009, 02:24 PM
OK, I'll throw my hat into the ring.... is from a while back.. Yli and I just letting go at the end of a training session...
Not a criticism, but that it's not a "typical" MJ track - there is no obvious/consistent beat, so on or off beat is irrelevant; you are dancing to the music's structure rather than the beat. That makes it difficult to put the movements of the dance into a context where you can offer a critique.
As a dance and how it fits to the music; you teach this stuff - I wouldn't expect it to be lacking and it's not. Trying to look past the musicality and find constructive stuff to say...
The one thing I noticed is that when you are 'styling', you have a defined placement of your feet and smooth movements; but when you are moving and re-positioning there seems to be a bit of shuffling and small 'setting up' steps - I think it would be more confident and slicker if the movements between moves were as definite as the moves themselves.
There is a leg flick/knee lift thing that you seem to add in a lot; I think it's just a preparation for the following movement to add some contrast- it's a bit over-done in my eyes (not the quantity, just the size of movement.)
I would also say that you're missing a trick by settling your off-hand in a 'ready' position all the time rather than putting some styling into it - either mirroring Yli's or emphasizing the movement. It's by no means a zombie arm that most folk (inc. me) have, and it's not detracting from any part of the dance in any way - it's used nicely in a couple of hand exchanges, but could add more.
Most of your floorcraft is based on the 'cross', but there were a couple of times where you put Yli at 45º to the axis and then simply brought her back onto it - I think that if you're coming off from an angle, then it looks better if you take the follower from that into a turn/rotation so that they travel > 180º around you/the floor's axis.
I think you only did it once in this clip, but when breaking from a 2 handed hold (l/r,r/l) into a 1 handed hold, you tend to dip the connecting shoulder and initiate the 'push away' from it; especially if you're turning out at the same time. But I think that this is a CJ-centric gesture that makes your dancing identifiable as your dancing.
jim
14th-November-2009, 12:52 PM
OK ... nothing to lose. Video is here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpXf0JGcxvI). Knock yourselves out. All critique gratefully received. Please note that I'm only asking for comments on my dancing, not that of my partner. Despite the billing, it was just a tired Gus freestyling before teaching a second lesson.
Gutsy move Gus. It takes a lot to put yourself up for criticism.
So here goes......
I know about these because they are things I do and or I have done.
If you think I'm wrong I apologies.
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.
I think your following your natural inclination to try and meet your follower at her level and sort of ducking down to meet her at her eye line.
People naturally do this when there talking to children; they kneel down to get on their level so they don't 'tower' above them. It helps to meet people as equals. - Unfortunately this doesn’t work in dancing and 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.
Same again for the leading hand. There's is a rule in Mj that you never put the thumb on the back of a ladies hand instead we all tend to stick it up like where hailing a taxi- 'looks messy in my opinion'.
I know everyone always tells us not to put the thumb on the back of the hand, but that’s about ‘clamping’. You’re not a beginner twisting a ladies arm off so try and put the thumbs down.
Same again leading the turn. Yes you can lead with a finger but the other fingers end up splayed out everywhere like the picture of my hand below (rubbish).
I hope that’s genuiningly helpful to improving the look of your dancing.
Check out the attachment a picture speaks a thousand words
Alan Doyle
14th-November-2009, 08:41 PM
Check out the attachment a picture speaks a thousand words
I can't open the attachment
Gus
15th-November-2009, 09:34 AM
Re the DavidBs earlier proposal ... I think I'm going to try the idea out at Hessle. If we can cover the costs of the hall, I think we could get a fair few couples from the club to participate and then use a consolidation of the points emerging to develop a suite of workshops that are tuned to what people need.I know its bad form to quote yourself but...
Just getting ready to teach our final workshop of the year at Hessle. This one is the only 'moves' workshop ... just a list of moves from which they will pick out the ones they want to learn/improve as a group ... fairly unstructured .. BUT, it should be the ideal opportunity to float the idea of running a critique session early next year. Will see what the interest (or not) is like.:waycool:
jim
15th-November-2009, 11:01 AM
ok, not as big as I'd like it but do you see any spayed fingers on the back, or any thumbs sticking up on the hand holds?
Gus
15th-November-2009, 07:00 PM
ok, not as big as I'd like it but do you see any spayed fingers on the back, or any thumbs sticking up on the hand holds?Do you see any modern jive dancers there? :whistle:
Andy McGregor
15th-November-2009, 07:09 PM
Do you see any modern jive dancers there? :whistle:This is a constant bug-bear of mine. We're not defined by a dance. We do a particular dance at a particular time. We can choose to do any dance. And we can choose to learn any dance.
These dancers could do Modern Jive if they liked. I don't think they would start splaying their fingers and sticking their thumbs in the air because they were dancing Modern Jive.
Gadget
15th-November-2009, 08:03 PM
This is a constant bug-bear of mine. We're not defined by a dance. We do a particular dance at a particular time. We can choose to do any dance. And we can choose to learn any dance.
These dancers could do Modern Jive if they liked. I don't think they would start splaying their fingers and sticking their thumbs in the air because they were dancing Modern Jive.
That argument cuts both ways: the dance is not defined with fingers together or fingers closed. The aesthetics of either version is up to the person viewing.
Personally I find that it depends on where on the back my hand is whether i've got splayed fingers or not - higher up the back, cupping the shoulder-blade and they tend to be closed. Further down on the back/spine muscles and they will tend to be open.
It also depends on the feedback I have from the follower: the more that they 'settle' into my hand and respond to the other contact points, then the more closed I tend to be. With my fingers splayed I have a better feel of the follower's movements - If I have a sensitive follower that responds to fingertips, then I have more options with splayed fingers.
I can't say that I paid the hand-hold too much attention or that it caught my eye.
jim
16th-November-2009, 06:43 PM
Do you see any modern jive dancers there? :whistle:
If you don't think that advice can improve your dancing, that's very much you choice.
Sorry I couldn't actually be of help to you.
tanjive
16th-November-2009, 06:59 PM
Gutsy move Gus. It takes a lot to put yourself up for criticism.
So here goes......
I know about these because they are things I do and or I have done.
If you think I'm wrong I apologies.
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.
I think your following your natural inclination to try and meet your follower at her level and sort of ducking down to meet her at her eye line.
People naturally do this when there talking to children; they kneel down to get on their level so they don't 'tower' above them. It helps to meet people as equals. - Unfortunately this doesn’t work in dancing and 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.
Same again for the leading hand. There's is a rule in Mj that you never put the thumb on the back of a ladies hand instead we all tend to stick it up like where hailing a taxi- 'looks messy in my opinion'.
I know everyone always tells us not to put the thumb on the back of the hand, but that’s about ‘clamping’. You’re not a beginner twisting a ladies arm off so try and put the thumbs down.
Same again leading the turn. Yes you can lead with a finger but the other fingers end up splayed out everywhere like the picture of my hand below (rubbish).
I hope that’s genuiningly helpful to improving the look of your dancing.
Check out the attachment a picture speaks a thousand words
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.
Same again for the leading hand. There's is a rule in Mj that you never put the thumb on the back of a ladies hand instead we all tend to stick it up like where hailing a taxi- 'looks messy in my opinion'.
I have the same pet hate in Jive about the spead hand on the Ladies' back. It looks so ugly. I must admit I had not noticed or even thought about the thumbs sticking out. A good general observation.
I would think if these are the main points to hightlight on Guy's dancing he is doing 95% of modern jive right as measured against the general populace.
I did read the critics before seeing the video and was very surprised by the video as a result. Given all the stuff on posture I was expecting a disaster. Just a slight lift of the crown of the head to pull the chin up would be enough. No biggie. Certainly no hunchback, or bum out.
My only bug bear was the arm flinging back. I know it is supposed to be styling but to me it adds little. As a demo I can see the reason for adding it, but in general social dance it is unnecessary. There is happy medium between not using your spare arm and flinging it back behind your shoulder line..
Back to the two points on the hands it is such little points often unnoticed that lifts the appearance of a dancer. They are small and subtle but change enough of them and the total look changes. Do people have other hints like that? Perhaps another thread. Modern jive is a messy looking dance (on average), compared to others, as little is mentioned of these ideas. You would be fortunate to find any mentioned consistently outside of privates, workshops. How many people do these, and do them more than 3 times a year? That is perhaps a half dozen opportunities a year to find these things.
Gus
16th-November-2009, 10:25 PM
If you don't think that advice can improve your dancing, that's very much you choice.
Sorry I couldn't actually be of help to you.As I said before, I've been most appreciative of the feedback given and hope to learn from it. My comment was directed at the photos illustrating close hands. I'm not sure that this was, in itself, relevant. Personal view entirely.
jim
17th-November-2009, 06:51 PM
· One of the major things I'd like to see is you body leading the dance as opposed to arm leading it (most people arm lead MJ).
Could someone explain body leading in Mj, west coast or salsa to me?
I've just taken up tango so I get the principle, but I'm not totally sure how it relates to the 'open hold dances'.
If you say coloumbian or cross body lead I might get the idea, but if you say catapult, man-spin or shoulder-slide and then add the phrase body lead, i'm like :sick:.
geoff332
17th-November-2009, 07:11 PM
Could someone explain body leading in Mj, west coast or salsa to me?It's remarkably simple. Your arms are part of your frame. You lead by primarily moving your frame, not by changing the shape of your frame (ie pulling with your arms).
In a catapult, for example, the lead leads the step back, creating tension between the partners. Next, they lead the follow to move forward by moving their body back (when done well, this is a fairly small movement; mostly a shift in weight). This gets the follow moving and eases the tension, leaving you with connection. The lead then raises their arm, letting the follow step under; the connection leads the follow to turn under. The hand behind stretches out to create tension again. To lead the follow forward, the lead moves their body forward to start the follow moving.
The follow's job is equally important: they have to maintain their own frame and give good flight. That is, once led in a direction, they need to keep going that way until stopped (even if they're turned around in the process).
I've just taken up tango so I get the principle, but I'm not totally sure how it relates to the 'open hold dances'.The basic principle is identical: you lead from the frame. The hold doesn't change the fact you have a frame; it merely moves the points of connection. It's the same technique that you use in open hold moves in all the latin and ballroom dances.
The point of a body lead is it makes the whole dance a lot smoother, reducing the potential for injuring the follow. Leading from the arms (as is usually taught in ceroc) means that you can lead out of the follow's shoulder - which is likely to dislocate.
robd
17th-November-2009, 09:19 PM
The point of a body lead is it makes the whole dance a lot smoother, reducing the potential for injuring the follow. Leading from the arms (as is usually taught in ceroc) means that you can lead out of the follow's shoulder - which is likely to dislocate.
I don't think I am arguing with you here Geoff given your caveat ("as is usually taught in ceroc") but I do think it's important to note that yanking is not intrinsic to arm leading. I was not happy in my last private (in WCS but it would apply equally to MJ) to be told I was still leading a lot with the arms and needed to do more from the body. I completely accept that body leading is, in most cases, preferable to arm leading. I can also see in my own dancing where those observations sprang from. I realised that the reason I was so unhappy with them is the fact that arm leading tends to be synonymous with yanking or, at best, with poor leading and whilst I may be guilty of the latter from time to time I don't think I'd ever be accused of the former.
jive-vee
17th-November-2009, 09:39 PM
I don't think I am arguing with you here Geoff given your caveat ("as is usually taught in ceroc") but I do think it's important to note that yanking is not intrinsic to arm leading. I was not happy in my last private (in WCS but it would apply equally to MJ) to be told I was still leading a lot with the arms and needed to do more from the body. I completely accept that body leading is, in most cases, preferable to arm leading. I can also see in my own dancing where those observations sprang from. I realised that the reason I was so unhappy with them is the fact that arm leading tends to be synonymous with yanking or, at best, with poor leading and whilst I may be guilty of the latter from time to time I don't think I'd ever be accused of the former.
Haha, nope you're certainly not a y......anker :wink::lol:
robd
17th-November-2009, 09:54 PM
Haha, nope you're certainly not a y......anker :wink::lol:
Lol, I did think I'd be in trouble if my accuser was dyslexic :innocent:
David Franklin
17th-November-2009, 10:59 PM
I don't think I am arguing with you here Geoff given your caveat ("as is usually taught in ceroc") but I do think it's important to note that yanking is not intrinsic to arm leading. I was not happy in my last private (in WCS but it would apply equally to MJ) to be told I was still leading a lot with the arms and needed to do more from the body. To my understanding, the issue is more that it's more or less impossible to jerk someone (at least without jerking yourself equally badly) with a body lead, whereas with an arm lead it is easy to move your arm in a way that is incompatible with moving your partner smoothly. Which isn't to say that you can't lead smoothly with arm leads.
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.
For example: look at
43SrQLFiE84
from 1:40 to 1:55. I'm finding it hard to see even a hint of body leading during most of that sequence.
geoff332
18th-November-2009, 12:37 AM
...I do think it's important to note that yanking is not intrinsic to arm leading.Actually, I think it is. That's not to say that every arm lead is going to be a jerk, but it's almost unavoidable for even the best dancers not to occasionally pull too hard, at the wrong angle, or at the wrong time when leading from the arms. It's almost impossible to do so when leading from the body.
Body leading mostly applies to giving the woman the impetus for the move - the direction and power for the move. Spinning is slightly different (and I don't fully understand the differences - it's something I'm still learning). That sequence that David points out is a spinning sequence. The initial lead into it is a step back (hence a body lead); then the spinning sequence goes on for quite a while.
Personally, I do the same thing as you: I still lead from the arms a lot. It's something I'm working on...
Alan Doyle
18th-November-2009, 12:55 AM
Could someone explain body leading in Mj, west coast or salsa to me?
What is leading?
A lead is not placing your partner anywhere, a lead is an indication of direction. It's not my job as a lead to man handle or jerk my partner around the floor.
Body Leading in Modern Jive e.g. Body Leading a Rock Step.
There is more form and technique when you do a rock step.
How you lead WCS & Salsa is different because both partners are moving in the same direction. When you think of Anchors and Elastic Stretch - only in WCS. As I found out it's not possible to do an anchor in MJ because if you do an anchor you can't rock back as you have nowhere to go.
In Modern Jive the partners move towards each other and then move away from each other. Both partners rock back on beat 1 and replace forward on beat 2.
If I want to lead my partner to move backwards if I do
1) Semi-circle and both step back - This is a NOT a lead, it's a signal
2) Push my hand forward, to make her step back - I'm now ARM leading
If I want to body lead my partner to move backwards, the lead starts with his weight on his right foot and the lady starts with her weight on her left foot.
To give you an analogy...I'm standing in front of a wall, I place my hands on the wall, I'm weighted on my right foot. I bring my centre forward (to compress into the wall - I don't bring the wall towards me, I bring myself towards the wall) I then push myself away from the wall (I don't move the wall away from me) and I use my Right Foot (Sending Foot) by pressing forward into the floor. I move my centre back and my foot follows my frame (I rock back onto my left foot), not placing my weight onto my heel - my heel does not touch the floor. I've now rocked back
The follower has her part to play in this as well (the lady is responsible for matching the resistance - she meets a push with a push and a pull with a pull).
To give you an analogy...I'm holding a pole, my partner is also holding the pole. I use the same technique, I compress into the pole, my partner feels the compression through our connection, and it's her responsibility to match the resistance...so she also compresses into the pole.
I push myself away from the pole (I don't move the pole away from me) and I use my sending foot to bring my centre back and my foot follows my frame, so I rock back onto my left foot. The lady's movement is the reaction to this lead, and this causes the lady to rock back onto her right foot. We are now leveraged.
If I want to body lead the lady to move forward, It is the lady's responsibility to match the resistance. My weighted foot (Sending Foot) is now my left foot and I press back with my left foot into the floor and I bring my centre forward and I replace back onto my right foot (I bring myself back towards the pole, I don't bring the pole towards me - If I move my hand and bring it towards me to make the lady step forwards, I'm ARM leading). The lady's movement is the reaction to this lead, and this causes the lady to replace back onto her left foot.
The lady is now moving forward and I don't need to keep a constant connection between us (to lead the lady all the way through the pattern), just give her an indication of direction until I want to give her change of direction and I reconnect with her.
The lady is responsible for her part and you are responsible for your part, you can only get as much connection from your partner as you can - you can't fix your partner. The best way to help your partner is to do your part correctly.
NZ Monkey
18th-November-2009, 02:15 AM
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
18th-November-2009, 07:41 AM
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
18th-November-2009, 10:48 AM
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
18th-November-2009, 11:15 AM
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
18th-November-2009, 12:08 PM
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
18th-November-2009, 12:14 PM
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
18th-November-2009, 12:17 PM
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? :rolleyes:
Andy McGregor
18th-November-2009, 12:32 PM
I guess it's that age old argument of how do we define MJ and whose job is it? :rolleyes: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 :whistle:, were to move his feet to lead that particular move.
Gadget
18th-November-2009, 12:39 PM
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 :blush:... 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
18th-November-2009, 12:43 PM
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
18th-November-2009, 12:54 PM
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.
:confused: 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
18th-November-2009, 01:06 PM
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. :D
ant
18th-November-2009, 01:12 PM
Originally Posted by jim http://1.2.3.10/bmi/www.cerocscotland.com/forum/images/orange/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showthread.php?p=564282#post564282)
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
18th-November-2009, 01:20 PM
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
18th-November-2009, 01:28 PM
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. :na:
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
18th-November-2009, 01:30 PM
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. :blush: :tears:
robd
18th-November-2009, 01:38 PM
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
18th-November-2009, 01:57 PM
I'll shut up then. :blush: :tears:Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! I didn't mean it like that.:tears: 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
18th-November-2009, 02:00 PM
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
18th-November-2009, 02:04 PM
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.
:yeah:
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 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEtG4F4JWOo&fmt=18) (for example) Ironically, I don't believe that this could be achieved if the emphasis was on styling.
Gav
18th-November-2009, 02:13 PM
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! I didn't mean it like that.:tears: What I was looking for was a 'more balanced' view across 'mortals' and 'Gods'.
Only kidding, it's take more than that to shut me up lol.
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.
I guess that would explain your slightly bent knees and back better than trying to match your followers eye level. :worthy:
If I wasn't learning Lindy Hop now I might have nothing to say, I just think that it is worth bearing in mind that whilst looking for a 'recognised' dance to compare MJ to/aspire to, ballroom isn't necessarily the only/best way.
ant
18th-November-2009, 03:40 PM
:confused: 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.
I suspect it is only 4 points of contact and not eight as invariably you will only have one hand behind the followers back.
However that means that there are four points to dig into your partners back. When the fingers are together they are much less likely to claw and so much less likely to dig in.
Bending your elbow is a release, tightening mechanism and does not relate to the finger arguement,especially when you are trying to stop a collision.
ant
18th-November-2009, 03:55 PM
Unfortunately, you think wrong. :na:
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:).
Hey Gav is this a pick on ant day or something.
Look at the second part of the post when you will see the lead coming from the core. If you look at Gadgets post he was talking about movement of the body to provide a visual lead.
Originally Posted by Gadget
If you want an exercise to practice, then lead a follower with your hands clasped behind your back
This is an exercise done regularly in Tango and visual leads in open embrace in tango are commonly used. For instance if you can initiate the required step in the follower without stepping yourself then you have a free leg to continue the sequence you had in mind.
I agree to lead round yourself as a leader the visual effect will come from the body initiated by the core but for a forward or backward movement there will need to be a different type of lead when there is no contact.
Gav
18th-November-2009, 04:33 PM
Hey Gav is this a pick on ant day or something.
Yes. :na:
Look at the second part of the post when you will see the lead coming from the core. If you look at Gadgets post he was talking about movement of the body to provide a visual lead.
No. There's no need for me to look at that because my post quoted the bit of your post that was suggesting that swing dance only used body leads to look good!
Please do try to read peoples posts before defending yourself unnecessarily with irrelevant references ant. :rolleyes:
straycat
18th-November-2009, 04:40 PM
Could someone explain body leading in Mj, west coast or salsa to me?
Since the body-leading is a particular obsession of mine, and since everyone seems to look at this area differently I might as well add my own thoughts on this. This is the lindy perspective, but it amounts to the same thing, imo, in each of these dances.
A body lead is a lead that originates in the leaders' body, not in their arm. In slightly more detailed (and idealistic) terms, to perform a good body lead, you need to connect your own core to your partner's, and move their core by moving your own. Clearly, you need a point of contact with your partner to do this, whether it be a handhold, arm on the back, etc. Done well, this kind of connection gives you a two-way communication between you and your partner of incredible depth, subtlety and power. To my mind, the vast majority of Lindy and MJ moves can be (and in the case of Lindy, need to be) body-led.
One key thing about body leading is the need for physical relaxation. It's easy to assume that if both lead and follow tensed up and locked their frames, a body lead would become easier, but in fact, quite the reverse is true - it's as if you're putting a blockage between you and your partner, and it becomes very hard to feel the aforementioned subtle communication. Relaxation is essential - and it's amazing just how good (and even powerful) a lead one can achieve without barely any engagement of the arm muscles.
I sometimes refer to body-leads as a kind of Bruce Lee thing - the art of leading without leading - you move your partner by moving yourself.
It can still be done badly, and a good arm-lead is definitely preferrable to a bad body-lead, but overall, body leading is a technique which can add an almost limitless extra dimension to anyone's dancing.
straycat
18th-November-2009, 04:44 PM
It would be really usefull to see the contributors put video (of themselves?) on this thread to demonstrate the application of their words.
Make up your mind. When I suggested that, you said it was unnecessary (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/showpost.php?p=563907&postcount=55) :na: :flower:
ant
18th-November-2009, 05:38 PM
Yes. :na:
At long last :cheers:
Originally Posted by Gav
No. There's no need for me to look at that because my post quoted the bit of your post that was suggesting that swing dance only used body leads to look good!
Please do try to read peoples posts before defending yourself unnecessarily with irrelevant references ant. :rolleyes:
Gav, I think you have got the wrong end of the stick here. My reference to visual lead was descibing body movement being picked up visually by the follower which induces a step as opposed to inducing a step through body contact. It was not meant to suggest in any way that swing dance only used body leads to look good!
For instance in tango I can move my body either left or right by engaging my core only, without stepping. The follower will pick this up and step in the required direction even when we are not in contact.
IMO the part of Gadgets post I was referring to was about visual leads. The exercise referred in that part of the post was about inducing a movement in the follower without contact. Infact contact was specifically excluded and that is the part of the post I highlighed.
Alan Doyle
18th-November-2009, 05:47 PM
A body lead is a lead that originates in the leaders' body, not in their arm. In slightly more detailed (and idealistic) terms, to perform a good body lead, you need to connect your own core to your partner's, and move their core by moving your own. Clearly, you need a point of contact with your partner to do this, whether it be a handhold, arm on the back, etc. Done well, this kind of connection gives you a two-way communication between you and your partner of incredible depth, subtlety and power. To my mind, the vast majority of Lindy and MJ moves can be (and in the case of Lindy, need to be) body-led.
I agree with you
straycat
18th-November-2009, 05:53 PM
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
Gav, I think you have got the wrong end of the stick here. My reference to visual lead was descibing body movement being picked up visually by the follower which induces a step as opposed to inducing a step through body contact.
Thanks for explaining that - I did misunderstand your original post. However - one would still be wrong to assume that body leads used in swing dance (or WCS :devil:) are in any way visual in nature.
ant
18th-November-2009, 05:58 PM
Thanks for explaining that - I did misunderstand your original post. However - one would still be wrong to assume that body leads used in swing dance (or WCS :devil:) are in any way visual in nature.
You were not the only one.
I made that comment because I assumed that part of Gadgets post was referring to swing dance and these types of visual lead were were normal in swing dance.
Incidentally I agree with your general desciption of body leads, However I think that there are different types of body lead and it was this distinction that Gadget was trying to bring out and I was then trying to dovetail into Tango which was mentioned in Jim's original question.
It does however seem we are going off topic but body leading does seem to be of interest to people.
NZ Monkey
18th-November-2009, 07:00 PM
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).I won't debate anything else in your post, because I see where you're coming from and I can't say you're wrong.
You can generate a surprising amount of movement in your partner with very little body movement of your own even when trying to body lead though - provided you both have a good connection. For a couple of dance related clips that illustrate this see http://www.youtube.com/user/BoogieInBethesda#p/u/3/alYpKReeSS4 and http://www.youtube.com/user/BoogieInBethesda#p/u/2/myn_OwI0ir4. In both clips you don't really notice the guys body movements because they're so small, but it makes a very clear difference to the dancers themselves.
On another note, although not with the result you really want when dancing - here's another demonstration of the amount of force that can be generated with practically no arm movement and very title body movement: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxlzDNGDXb0&feature=related :D
jim
18th-November-2009, 08:05 PM
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?
I did have a little go at lindy recently.
I liked the fact that I was told to keep a straight back and put the bend in the knees.
I liked the fact that I got told to lead off the shoulder blade not the waist.
And I liked the fact that the teacher kept his fingers closed on the back all the time just like my ballroom teacher.
I specifically noticed because I had been woundering if i'd taken to much from ballroom and I was wondering if I was dancing to 'formally'.
Then my salsa teacher flew a salsa couple over from france to do a demo and that guy had his fingers closed as well. That's 'salsa' couldn't acuse those guys of being to 'ballroom'.
And now I thinks it's just generally good practice in what ever dance I'm doing to try and 'control my fingers'.
Gadget
19th-November-2009, 12:41 AM
IMO the part of Gadgets post I was referring to was about visual leads. The exercise referred in that part of the post was about inducing a movement in the follower without contact. Infact contact was specifically excluded and that is the part of the post I highlighed.
It was: I see body leads as a separate entity from frame and core - although it's easier to accomplish body leads when using the core and leading from it, the understanding of a frame and how to lead from the core is not essential to being able to body lead.
Similarly, the core and frame can drive arm leads and any other lead you want - it's not tied solely to body leads.
To me, a lead directly influences my partner: Engaging a frame and leading from the core enable that lead to be communicated with a bit more control and subtly; but the frame and moving from the core directly influence my body so that I can lead better - it's a step removed. (*)
I agree 100% that it'a all beneficial to your dancing, but I think that the concept of body leads can be used as an introduction to the core, frame and all that stuff. And I think that only using the core and frame for body leads is a waste.
(* understanding your own 'core' also helps the realisation that your partner has one too; you should try to lead that bit of the follower - using the contact points with your partner to direct the core rather than moving the arms for your partner to follow... Subtle difference and probably won't make any sense unless you are already doing it.)
straycat
19th-November-2009, 10:13 AM
And I liked the fact that the teacher kept his fingers closed on the back all the time just like my ballroom teacher.
Coincidentally, Dave & Ursi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv_TmcEKKVQ#t=4m03s) (blues & lindy gods) covered this briefly at a workshop this weekend - Dave's take was that he really wasn't bothered.
He was simply at pains to make sure no-one was trying to use their fingers on their partner's back to lead - he preferred a lead that came through the lower palm / wrist, which is a lot more comfortable for the follower.
I agree that visually, closed looks better... but I'm not really that fussed either.
straycat
19th-November-2009, 10:43 AM
It was: I see body leads as a separate entity from frame and core - although it's easier to accomplish body leads when using the core and leading from it, the understanding of a frame and how to lead from the core is not essential to being able to body lead.
I disagree here - to me, good body-leads are generated from your core. Frame.... means different things in different dances, and for simplicity's sake, I'm not going to get into that here.
And I think that only using the core and frame for body leads is a waste.
My goal is to use my core for every part of my dancing - to generate every single movement from my core. It's not easy, but it opens up so many possibilities in one's dancing. Very much worth it.[/QUOTE]
straycat
22nd-November-2009, 08:39 PM
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.
OK. I shall comply ;) Finally put something on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHEgfzZ7Oik) that I'm not 100% unhappy with, although it was filmed about 18 months ago. I'm not asking for a critique (particularly as this is slow Lindy, not MJ) - but don't let that stop anyone who has any particular comments to make...
Gadget
26th-November-2009, 02:53 PM
I'm not asking for a critique (particularly as this is slow Lindy, not MJ) - but don't let that stop anyone who has any particular comments to make...{Edit: whatcha posting here for if not a critique? :confused:}
Since it's Lindy, I can't really put forward anything but the sketchiest comments:
- The main thing I found was that there was very little discipline in floor positioning: could be that the lead didn't have a defined ending or location to move the follower to, or could be that the lead just followed the follower over the floor or could be hundred other things.
... just about everything else I spotted could be attributed to either not starting a movement facing each other or being off each other's axis or general positioning.
From someone who doesn't know Lindy, I would say it looked like a cross between MJ and Lindy: weight on the toes and bouncy steps - I would expect Lindy to have a bit more dynamics with more bent knees, more contrast between open and closed and a dynamic change between the two; could be my expectations, could be the music?
straycat
27th-November-2009, 11:22 AM
{Edit: whatcha posting here for if not a critique? :confused:}
Just responding to Gus' request. So I can comment about other people with a clear conscience ;)
It's interesting that what others see is often so different from what one sees oneself. Your points about positioning are completely valid, for example - but I don't tend to worry about that in Lindy - at least not when we have the whole floor to play with. With a few other people on there, it becomes a different matter.
A few of my own thoughts on it.
1) My posture. Awful. 'Nuff said.
2) Inconsistent bounce. Bounce in Lindy is a key thing for getting the lead and connection with partner, floor & music right, and ... I'm not doing it very well.
3) Rock steps. Often too big, and often, I put my weight onto my heel when I do them (a habit I've since - I hope - shed). This may not sound like a big thing, but it can kill the tension / stretch between moves, and gives very inconsistent signals to the follower.
4) While I'm doing a lot with the music, there's far too many little leg flicks and suchlike which don't come from my core, and which I don't communicate with my partner. They amount to me getting carried away with the music, at the expense of the dance as a whole.
DJ Mike
3rd-February-2011, 10:03 AM
Honestly, I would not care one bit for this sort of class - I do MJ because it's fun, it's simple, and it's sociable, and I certainly have no aspirations of mastery or perfection. To me that would suck all the fun and reason out of why I started doing MJ in the first place!
Prian
3rd-February-2011, 11:03 AM
Honestly, I would not care one bit for this sort of class - I do MJ because it's fun, it's simple, and it's sociable, and I certainly have no aspirations of mastery or perfection. To me that would suck all the fun and reason out of why I started doing MJ in the first place!
:respect:
This is the reason I do not do competitions. I feel they take away some of the fun element. IMHO
David Bailey
3rd-February-2011, 11:10 AM
Honestly, I would not care one bit for this sort of class - I do MJ because it's fun, it's simple, and it's sociable, and I certainly have no aspirations of mastery or perfection. To me that would suck all the fun and reason out of why I started doing MJ in the first place!
Critiques, to me, are a very good way of improving your dancing. In any dance discipline.
And in my experience, the better you dance, the more you enjoy it when dancing socially.
straycat
4th-February-2011, 12:42 AM
Critiques, to me, are a very good way of improving your dancing. In any dance discipline.
And in my experience, the better you dance, the more you enjoy it when dancing socially.
:yeah:
I do wonder sometimes what people understand by the term 'technique' (or similar) in this context. If you look at it in terms of getting the hand positions right, turning the toes out a bit more... in essence cosmetic things to make a dance look better, I can understand where Mike is coming from.
Looking at it in such terms as improving my connection with my partner, or my core footwork technique (which helps me move better, dance better to faster music, and connect better with my partner) - working on anything like this can only serve to put more fun into my dancing, not take fun out of it.
NZ Monkey
4th-February-2011, 04:55 AM
:yeah:
I do wonder sometimes what people understand by the term 'technique' (or similar) in this context. If you look at it in terms of getting the hand positions right, turning the toes out a bit more... in essence cosmetic things to make a dance look better, I can understand where Mike is coming from.
Looking at it in such terms as improving my connection with my partner, or my core footwork technique (which helps me move better, dance better to faster music, and connect better with my partner) - working on anything like this can only serve to put more fun into my dancing, not take fun out of it.:yeah:
But then, I'm also a technique geek and enjoy the first stuff you mention as well. I have a feeling we're in the minority though.
Andy McGregor
4th-February-2011, 09:28 AM
Honestly, I would not care one bit for this sort of class - I do MJ because it's fun, it's simple, and it's sociable, and I certainly have no aspirations of mastery or perfection. To me that would suck all the fun and reason out of why I started doing MJ in the first place!I think Mike has the view that's held by most people who dance MJ. Most people who attend MJ lessons seem to like the hands-off approach of the group lessons. The last thing they want is personal feedback. Especially if that feedback was delivered in a public forum.
My heart sinks when a guy asks "what do you think of my dancing?". Especially if I've taught them! I try to get away with a comment about the most obvious area for improvement. This is normally posture. If they push me for more I usually respond with questions like "do you really want to improve or are you happy with the way you dance?" or even "are you up for some constructive criticism?". Mostly I run for cover and change the subject. But if they really do seem to want to improve I ask them to come 30 mins before the lesson starts and give them a private lesson for free.
In my experience, most guys are happy to carry on dancing the way they've always danced. The say they'd like to improve, but they don't want to go through the pain of changing their habits - as they say, it's ten times as hard to shift a bad habit compared to developing a good habit. Especially when their bad habit has given them so much pleasure over the years - bouncing the hand and sticking out their bottom is more of a naughty pleasure to them :devil:
David Bailey
4th-February-2011, 10:10 AM
:yeah:
I do wonder sometimes what people understand by the term 'technique' (or similar) in this context. If you look at it in terms of getting the hand positions right, turning the toes out a bit more... in essence cosmetic things to make a dance look better, I can understand where Mike is coming from.
Looking at it in such terms as improving my connection with my partner, or my core footwork technique (which helps me move better, dance better to faster music, and connect better with my partner) - working on anything like this can only serve to put more fun into my dancing, not take fun out of it.
Maybe we should find a different word instead of "technique"... mind you, I can't thnk of one offhand.
Andy McGregor
4th-February-2011, 11:03 AM
:yeah:
I do wonder sometimes what people understand by the term 'technique' (or similar) in this context. If you look at it in terms of getting the hand positions right, turning the toes out a bit more... in essence cosmetic things to make a dance look better, I can understand where Mike is coming from.
Maybe we should find a different word instead of "technique"... mind you, I can't thnk of one offhand.I think that straycat is talking about decorations. Those things that make the dance look better.
However, hand positions for leading or following hands are technique. It's what you do with your free hand that provides the decoration.
In workshops I sometimes talk about learning to dance being like building a house from scratch. When you're putting in the foundations and putting up the walls you don't need to be choosing the fabric for the curtains. But you need to make sure you've got windows in your plan so you've got somewhere to hang your curtains.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.