PDA

View Full Version : Blues and Ceroc



Dallen
10th-May-2007, 07:34 PM
In our Belfast Intermediate class on Wednesday, Danielle went through a Blues routine. A bit daunting for most of us, but I am sure if practised for long enough the routine and the individual moves and perfection of the hand hold would soon click.
Just out of curiosity what is the connection between Ceroc and Blues or which came first, Blues or Ceroc. Apart from The Tramp doing a blues routine at a Freestyle night in Belfast last year, this was my first experience of Blues, so pardon my ignorance in this area.
Looking forward to Blaze this weekend!

David

MartinHarper
10th-May-2007, 09:04 PM
Just out of curiosity what is the connection between Ceroc and Blues or which came first, Blues or Ceroc?

As it was told to me:

First there was Blues music, from some time around the 20s. Maybe earlier.
Then there were people who danced to Blues music.
Then blues dance was killed off, along with the rest of partner dancing, by "The Twist" in the 60s.
Then there was a Lindy revival in the US in the early 80s. Lindy dancers danced to blues music from time to time.
Then some Modern Jive dancers went to Herrang, saw the Lindy crowd dancing to blues, and created a style of Modern Jive that was suitable for blues music.
From there it morphed into dancing to various genres of slow music, of which blues is a small part.

Meanwhile, in the USA blues dancing continued to develop, with some instructors researching authentic pre-war forms of blues dancing. There now seems to be a separate scene with strong links to the Lindy scene. For example, there are weekend events dedicated to blues dance. I don't know to what extent this developing US scene has influenced "blues" dance in a Modern Jive context.

StokeBloke
10th-May-2007, 09:17 PM
Just out of curiosity what is the connection between Ceroc and Blues or which came first, Blues or Ceroc. Apart from The Tramp doing a blues routine at a Freestyle night in Belfast last year, this was my first experience of Blues, so pardon my ignorance in this area.
Looking forward to Blaze this weekend!
Ceroc isn't actually a dance - Ceroc is a company that teaches and promotes modern jive. It's a small but important distinction. Blues, as Martin said started waaaaaaaaay back. Ceroc formed as a company in the 1980's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceroc) and they have brought thousands of people into modern jive partner dancing.

However, like most forms of dancing it's fairly easy to move one form into another, take Amir's Jango (jive tango fusion) for example. If you can slow your modern jive moves right down you'll be OK in a blues room. If you really want to learn more about the difference before Blaze you could do far worse than read the FAQs that Gadget (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/members/gadget.html)has listed in his .sig file.

Have fun at Blaze and make sure you hit the blues room, it's a real education in dancing and so much fun :D

Gus
11th-May-2007, 05:02 PM
However, like most forms of dancing it's fairly easy to move one form into another, take Amir's Jango (jive tango fusion) for example.Surely you jest. Jango may look simple but I would scarcely call it 'easy'. and WCS? Similarly easy to bag?:rolleyes:


If you can slow your modern jive moves right down you'll be OK in a blues room. Not trying to be harsh but this sounds a bit like a major oversimplification ... and possibly abjectly wrong. I've never been taught Blues as just 'slowed down Ceroc'. Don't know who has been teaching that but I really wish it was that simple. Having said that, I'm sure a few lessons from a true Blues teacher, e.g. Nigel & Nina, Val & Rocky, and the basics could be picked up in a short space of time. :grin:

bigdjiver
11th-May-2007, 08:49 PM
...Just out of curiosity what is the connection between Ceroc and Blues or which came first, Blues or Ceroc. ..There was a blues ofshoot of the Foxtrot active around 1919. The Library of Congress has some recordings, sheet music and books aout it, but their site has been "improved" since I scanned them to timeout, and I cannot post a link to the little I found this time.

This was very much upper frame connection. This was adopted and adaped by some swing dancers later on. This was the version taught by Noelle Gray.
I am over 6ft and could not make this work at all with most ladies, and not work well with anybody.

BluesDance for Blues Dance (http://www.bluesdance.org.uk/73401.html)

Nigel and Nina taught a MJ tinged version, which looks to me like it had some of its roots in the down and dirty dancing to blues music done by the coloured folks. Here the connection is thigh to thigh. I love dancing in this vein to expressive numbers, where UCP Manhattans, laybacks and "The Grapevine" fit the music

Peter Phillips taught a version closer to slow MJ, with some nice moves. Unfortunately I could not overcome height differences with most of those either.

StokeBloke
12th-May-2007, 12:19 AM
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by StokeBloke http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/intermediate-corner/12495-blues-ceroc.html#post369598)
If you can slow your modern jive moves right down you'll be OK in a blues room.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Not trying to be harsh but this sounds a bit like a major oversimplification ... and possibly abjectly wrong. I've never been taught Blues as just 'slowed down Ceroc'. Don't know who has been teaching that but I really wish it was that simple. Having said that, I'm sure a few lessons from a true Blues teacher, e.g. Nigel & Nina, Val & Rocky, and the basics could be picked up in a short space of time. :grin:
Gus do you have a PhD in being obtuse. I told the guy he'd be OK, to reassure him that he could go along and join in without feeling like a complete divvy. The same concerns I had when I went to my first blues night. I never mentioned anything about anyone teaching that did I Gus? As for certain dance moves being abjectly wrong, yeah.... ok... who made you chief constable of the dance police?

straycat
12th-May-2007, 11:55 AM
some good-natured, playful banter

I know you guys are best of friends and all, and like to indulge in this playful verbal jousting stuff, but you're in danger of giving newcomers a false impression of the wonderful sense of harmony and unity that normally pervades the forum. :rolleyes: And within five posts, too - impressive, in some very strange way

Anyway - you're both right, of course. One can simply do slowed down MJ moves in a blues room, and have a good time with it. It's a far cry from what's generally regarded as 'proper' blues dancing - but since the definition of 'proper' blues dancing varies so radically from person to person, who's to say?

Ultimately (in my opinion) it could be seen as toolkit of connection techniques & movement skills which allow you to improvise freely to 'blues' music ('blues' in the dancing sense, rather than the musical genre) - it's that philosophy & set of base techniques that the Lindy blues people use, and which was imported (fairly intact) into MJ.

Rocky
12th-May-2007, 01:31 PM
As far as I'm concerned there are only 3 reasons why Blues has become so popular in this Country: Nigel & Nina and Simon Selmon.

Of course it would have developed at some point anyway but these 3 inspirational teachers and dancers led the way and everyone else since has stood on their shoulders.

:worthy: :worthy: :worthy:

Cruella
12th-May-2007, 04:37 PM
everyone else since has stood on their shoulders.

Wow. Never seen move that in a blues room!

TA Guy
12th-May-2007, 08:09 PM
Ultimately (in my opinion) it could be seen as toolkit of connection techniques & movement skills which allow you to improvise freely to 'blues' music ('blues' in the dancing sense, rather than the musical genre) - it's that philosophy & set of base techniques that the Lindy blues people use, and which was imported (fairly intact) into MJ.


I'd be genuinely interested (cos I know there are peeps out there that know far more about this stuff than me) to hear about a connection issue, or some technique used in Blues that just would not be used in everyday MJ if the music demanded it by a dancer who had that technique/skill in his/her armoury ?

What is the fundamental and unique difference between Blues and MJ ?
I'd have a problem answering that without writing a thousand word essay about the emphasizes and subtleties of the two dances.
Sure, you could answer, I dunno... say 'musicality' or 'improvisation' or something, but those are used in MJ as well, so unless you start to argue about the quantities, or the emphasize given to it, it's not really a difference.

Therefore.... for me about the only difference between MJ and (MJ) Blues is that the emphasize on certain things is somewhat different. Mostly either dictated, and/or 'allowed' by the slower paced music. Not that that is a small thing at all, but it's not unique to Blues in terms of any given technique or movement skill as far as I know (see question above :))

Lets face it, the one single move, the closed weight shift sway, that used to be (more or less) unique to Blues has already been stolen and incorporated into everyday MJ by just about everybody. The boundaries, never that well defined to start with, are almost completely blurred now. (IMO).

What is a 'total expression Blues' workshop if it's not a 'slow smoochy Ceroc' workshop ?


Philosophy I wouldn't know about, my dance philosophy is just to have fun. I'm a heathen :)

bigdjiver
12th-May-2007, 09:23 PM
...Lets face it, the one single move, the closed weight shift sway, that used to be (more or less) unique to Blues has already been stolen and incorporated into everyday MJ by just about everybody. The boundaries, never that well defined to start with, are almost completely blurred now. (IMO)...The blurring of boundaries and incorporation were the innovations of N&N and others. They taught a lift from closed sway position that I have not seen anybody else do. (I admit, I do lead a sheltered life.) Noelle taught some slides from that position, and Peter may have too. These are moves I have not seen in any Ceroc class. Blues is a state of mind and emotion, it is not about moves. Blues, MJ, whatever, it is all dance.

StokeBloke
13th-May-2007, 03:20 AM
I think technically where in MJ you move 'in and out', in blues the movement is more 'in and in'. Keeping body contact as much as possible with your partner, and as has been said the slowness of the dance makes it far less of a spectator sport. Most MJ moves can be slowed down and adapted to fit into blues, but to be honest if you are trying hard to pull off lots of moves in a blues room, you've kind of missed the point :whistle:

fletch
13th-May-2007, 03:24 AM
I think technically where in MJ you move 'in and out', in blues the movement is more 'in and in'. Keeping body contact as much as possible with your partner, and as has been said the slowness of the dance makes it far less of a spectator sport. Most MJ moves can be slowed down and adapted to fit into blues, but to be honest if you are trying hard to pull off lots of moves in a blues room, you've kind of missed the point :whistle:



:yeah:

IMO I don't like doing the 'in and out' to bluse music your to far away, but love this move when the music is faster :clap:

MartinHarper
13th-May-2007, 10:27 PM
Lets face it, the one single move, the closed weight shift sway, that used to be (more or less) unique to Blues has already been stolen and incorporated into everyday MJ by just about everybody.

I agree that a "weight shift in closed" (and indeed "weight shift in open") can be danced in both Modern Jive and MJ-based blues. However, it is a more common move in MJ-based blues, coming close to the status of a basic. It also has more variations in the context of MJ-based blues. It is of course possible to mix-and-match moves from any dance into any other dance, but that doesn't mean that dances don't have characteristic moves that are taught early, danced often, and work best.

Gus
13th-May-2007, 10:42 PM
I never mentioned anything about anyone teaching that did I Gus? As for certain dance moves being abjectly wrong, yeah.... ok... who made you chief constable of the dance police?Think you need to look at a dictionary to see what 'obtuse ' means.:whistle:

I was commen ting on what you said ... maybe not your intention. IMHO you mad ea number of comments that I thought were misleading so I tried to clarify. I'm not a chief constable of the dance but I'm a qualified instructor, been teaching a fair while (including Blues workshops) and been on the scene for longer .... doesn't that allow me to express an opinion? As a comparsion, your dance experience would be ......????

The point I was trying to make ... and probably not that well, was that if someone wanst to do Blues I would suggest the best way is to find a Blues event where there is at least an intro lesson or better still fo a Blues workshop with one of the better Blues instructors ..... can we at least agree on that.

straycat
14th-May-2007, 10:37 AM
I'd be genuinely interested (cos I know there are peeps out there that know far more about this stuff than me) to hear about a connection issue, or some technique used in Blues that just would not be used in everyday MJ if the music demanded it by a dancer who had that technique/skill in his/her armoury ?

Connection issues: I don't think it's so much that one uses connection techniques in Blues that aren't used in MJ. It's more the case (I believe) that good Blues teachers teach connection techniques that do not, as a rule, get taught in standard MJ lessons. Once learned, however, they can be applied to other dance areas - and they're fantastic techniques to use in standard MJ.



What is the fundamental and unique difference between Blues and MJ ?
I'd have a problem answering that without writing a thousand word essay about the emphasizes and subtleties of the two dances.

Ask a different person, get a different answer....
My personal perspective: MJ is a move-based dance form, with a structure open enough that you can weave a lot of musicality into the dance. Blues (in its purest form) is a 'moveless' dance form based simply on basic connection techniques, movement skills and musical interpretation, into which one can weave moves and the like from other dance forms (eg MJ)



Sure, you could answer, I dunno... say 'musicality' or 'improvisation' or something, but those are used in MJ as well, so unless you start to argue about the quantities, or the emphasize given to it, it's not really a difference.

IE: It aint what'cha do, it's the way that ya do it... :wink:



Lets face it, the one single move, the closed weight shift sway, that used to be (more or less) unique to Blues has already been stolen and incorporated into everyday MJ by just about everybody. The boundaries, never that well defined to start with, are almost completely blurred now. (IMO).

I don't really buy that. Example: Lindy Hop uses (and always has used) an enormous number of Charleston moves, some intact, and some which it's "made its own" - but there's still a clear distinction between the two dances - there's certainly no blurring of boundaries. Likewise - Blues techniques like the Blues closed-hold sway are also commonly used in Lindy to great effect, but again - there's certainly no blurring of boundaries going on.

This is really why I say that I see Blues as a philosophy, not a dance. One tends to take the techniques in it, and applies them to one's own dance skills, be they Jive-based, Lindy-based, handbag-based, or whatever.



What is a 'total expression Blues' workshop if it's not a 'slow smoochy Ceroc' workshop ?

Blues need not be smoochy (I personally prefer that it isn't), and it need have nothing in common with MJ at all. My slightly more snobby answer to this would be that such a workshop would be 'So much more than a slow smoochy Ceroc workshop is ever likely to be'. OTOH, it's likely to teach you a load of amazing things that can then be applied back into your MJ repertoire with wonderful results...



Philosophy I wouldn't know about, my dance philosophy is just to have fun. I'm a heathen :)
If that makes you a heathen, then that makes two of us. :wink:

jiveknight
14th-May-2007, 12:39 PM
I thought blues dance was originally lindy/swing dancers just dancing to slower (at that time a slower jazzy blues music) and thus creating themselves different moves for expression for that music.

It seems to be being created on here in the UK in present time by Val and Dave etc... so its probably evolving as we speak.:nice:

TA Guy
14th-May-2007, 01:14 PM
Ask a different person, get a different answer....
My personal perspective: MJ is a move-based dance form, with a structure open enough that you can weave a lot of musicality into the dance. Blues (in its purest form) is a 'moveless' dance form based simply on basic connection techniques, movement skills and musical interpretation, into which one can weave moves and the like from other dance forms (eg MJ)


Sounds a bit like the American Blues I have seen on Youtube.
I'm not a huge fan of Blues rooms in that, for example, at weekenders, I get more buzz dancing in the main rooms, so I can't claim any accuracy in this observation, but I can't say I've seen that (with one honourable exception+partners) as the predomnent version of weekender Blues.
It was certainly not what I was taught at my two Blues workshops, which was slow smoochy Ceroc. Actually, the Howard and Nicole one was just slow Ceroc with a bit of a Mangle thrown in to confuse us all (good fun tho) :)




If that makes you a heathen, then that makes two of us. :wink:

Cor, we can start a tribe! :) Mo'Tribe ? :devil:
Note to other readers, unless you suffered as Straycat264 did years ago, you may not get the true genius of that joke. LOL. :)

straycat
14th-May-2007, 01:38 PM
Sounds a bit like the American Blues I have seen on Youtube.
I'm not a huge fan of Blues rooms in that, for example, at weekenders, I get more buzz dancing in the main rooms, so I can't claim any accuracy in this observation, but I can't say I've seen that (with one honourable exception+partners) as the predomnent version of weekender Blues.

I think I should qualify my comments by pointing out that I first started learning Blues dancing at Beach Boogie in '98 from N&N (at least - I think it was BB - could also have been at MJC. Or both) - anyway - the style of class was much more like what you call 'American' blues. Anyway - no smooching.

I've been told that N&N (or just N nowadays, I suppose?) are (is?) now teaching something much more move-based - but I've not done an MJ-based blues workshop in years, so I'm a little out of touch on current trends. I did see a Howard / Nicola performance a couple of years ago ... hmm. Very good, but it wasn't a style that I liked. Sounds like MJ blues trends have changed a bit since I started.



Cor, we can start a tribe! :) Mo'Tribe ? :devil:
Note to other readers, unless you suffered as Straycat264 did years ago, you may not get the true genius of that joke. LOL. :)
:sick: Noooooo! You mentioned the 'M' word.... Just when I thought I was free of all the nightmares... :tears:

StokeBloke
14th-May-2007, 04:35 PM
It was certainly not what I was taught at my two Blues workshops, which was slow smoochy Ceroc. Actually, the Howard and Nicole one was just slow Ceroc with a bit of a Mangle thrown in to confuse us all (good fun tho) :)
I can see the front page of The Dancing Times now - Slow Modern Jive Works in Blues Room Shocker :whistle:


__________________
If dancing the blues is abjectly wrong... I don't wanna be right!

Lynn
15th-May-2007, 08:24 AM
Hopefully Dallen will comment on his impressions of being in the COZ at Blaze.


Anyway - you're both right, of course. One can simply do slowed down MJ moves in a blues room, and have a good time with it. It's a far cry from what's generally regarded as 'proper' blues dancing - but since the definition of 'proper' blues dancing varies so radically from person to person, who's to say?Slowed down MJ isn't 'blues' but its a start because its a recognition of the key to blues which is expressing the music. Slowing down and speeding up parts of moves, holding for pauses etc, with basic moves is a great place to start.

Gadget
15th-May-2007, 01:13 PM
I have lots of opinions on what blues is and isn't (Most are expressed in this link: Blues and Moves (http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/intermediate-corner/9940-online-workshop-blues-moves.html)) and there are loads of threads here that argue about it. In my opinion:

"Blues" dancing is simply dancing to slower music with a connection to your partner. It's called "blues" because origionally that slower music was blues music.

When you are dancing slower, you don't need as much time to communicate or be as 'loud' with your signals. Therefore you can be closer and more subtle in your lead.

When you have a good rapport with your partner, moves that turn them away or move them away or form a barrier between you will hamper that connection. Therefore you try and avoid moves like that or use them to dramatise the music.


{I've was playing with "micro-blues" a bit towards the end of Sunday at Blaze :D Now that is most cool :waycool:... :sigh:}

Lynn
15th-May-2007, 01:38 PM
{I was playing with "micro-blues" a bit towards the end of Sunday at Blaze :D Now that is most cool :waycool:... :sigh:}Micro blues can be lovely (did some on Sun night too) - closest thing I've come to that resembles the connection you can have with AT where you read the intention of the lead for movement, a fraction of a second before the lead itself.

Lory
15th-May-2007, 01:53 PM
Micro blues can be lovely (did some on Sun night too) - closest thing I've come to that resembles the connection you can have with AT where you read the intention of the lead for movement, a fraction of a second before the lead itself.

I also did a bit on Sunday night too... my experience is somewhat different to your though...

For me, it only works by completely surrendering my whole body to the lead and allowing their rhythmical interpretations to transfer through to me.

I don't think I notice anything, even a millisecond before its lead:confused:

But then again, I might have been asleep :D

Lynn
15th-May-2007, 03:03 PM
I also did a bit on Sunday night too... my experience is somewhat different to your though...

For me, it only works by completely surrendering my whole body to the lead and allowing their rhythmical interpretations to transfer through to me.

I don't think I notice anything, even a millisecond before its lead:confused:

But then again, I might have been asleep :DSorry, I wasn't clear - my comments were WRT the AT - not micro blues - I agree with you on that. Its just that micro blues reminds me of that sort of AT connection as I'm reading tiny indications of muscle movement - but its in AT where I read intention before the lead - you know, when you're in close embrace and the man prepares to take a side step and you can feel that 'gathering' and you know he's about to lead you to step.

MartinHarper
16th-May-2007, 12:16 AM
I don't know if this has been linked before, but this is a nice clip showing some of the ways folks danced to Blues back in the day.

YouTube - Vintage Blues Demo - Damon and Heidi (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwXbXhv0aeY)

Following leads from there, I came across this Blues Performance clip that I liked, which seemed to be in a similar style.

YouTube - Speakeasy Blues Performance (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdW1nf2KpVQ)

I'd love to be able to dance like that.

Graham
16th-May-2007, 02:04 AM
I have lots of opinions on what blues is and isn't
Most of which I profoundly disagree with. :wink: Come to think of it half of what I quoted could be removed and my statement would still be true.... :grin:

In my opinion the mistake that you're making here is to take points of similarity between two dance styles and conclude that they are therefore variations of a single dance style. The reason that I consider this to be a mistake is that there are points of similarity between all forms of partner dancing - it's all a question of degree. Whilst it's true that blues can sometimes resemble slowed-down modern jive, you could equally say that modern jive is like French "rock académique" (rock step, triple step, triple step) without the footwork. Many of the patterns are indeed the same, but this is to overlook what I consider to be fairly fundamental differences of look/feel.

Gadget
16th-May-2007, 01:20 PM
In my opinion the mistake that you're making here is to take points of similarity between two dance styles and conclude that they are therefore variations of a single dance style. But isn't every dance style a sub-set of MJ? :innocent:

I am taking points of similarity because we're going from one 'style' into another: MJ into Blues. Personally I have seen no evidence to convince me that Blues is not a variation on MJ.

Are you saying that you can dance MJ with blues style, but that dosn't make it Blues?
Like you can dance MJ with "Jango" style and it's not "Jango".
Or dance MJ with "Ceroc" style and it's not "Ceroc"....???
They are all made up names to try and encompass how someone is dancing and show others how to dance like that. How much of one 'style' of dance needs to be inserted into MJ before it becomes the other style? Music? Footwork? Attitude? Movement? 'Styling'? Timeing?...


but this is to overlook what I consider to be fairly fundamental differences of look/feel.So in your opinion it's the look/feel that defines a dance then? Isn't that (shouldn't that be) defined by the music it's dance to? So dosn't it follow that you can only dance Blues to Blues music?

straycat
17th-May-2007, 08:55 AM
But isn't every dance style a sub-set of MJ? :innocent:
Nope :cool:



I am taking points of similarity because we're going from one 'style' into another: MJ into Blues. Personally I have seen no evidence to convince me that Blues is not a variation on MJ.
Apart from the fact that Blues predates MJ by a long long way?
A lot of the blues taught in this country is a variation on MJ. Similarly - the last blues workshop I went to here taught it as a variation on Lindy. It's why I see it as a 'philosophy' rather than a dance - you can apply the philosophy to a lot of different dance forms, and it just works.



Are you saying that you can dance MJ with blues style, but that dosn't make it Blues?
Like you can dance MJ with "Jango" style and it's not "Jango".
Or dance MJ with "Ceroc" style and it's not "Ceroc"....???

Trick question: MJ with 'blues style' whatever that is) is just MJ with different styling. MJ with 'blues style' is not what blues is.
As for MJ with 'jango' style - well isn't Jango MJ with tango styling, connection and moves? So MJ with 'jango' style would drop the connection and moves... so yes - that's MJ, not Jango.
As for the last - well that probably depends where you do it. Try it at a Blitz venue, and you're probably not doing Ceroc :devil:. At a Ceroc venue, you probably are. (OK - so that's a bit of a silly assertion, but so is the idea that you can dance a trademark :whistle:)



They are all made up names to try and encompass how someone is dancing and show others how to dance like that. How much of one 'style' of dance needs to be inserted into MJ before it becomes the other style? Music? Footwork? Attitude? Movement? 'Styling'? Timeing?...

I think the mistake is to assume that one dance is basically another with different styling / steps etc, and it just doesn't work like that. I would venture to say that if you approach a dance in that fashion - if you start with MJ, and start putting in Lindy or Tango 'styling' or footwork or moves... you're never going to end up doing Lindy or Tango. To learn those dances, you need to start learning their basics first - and those basics are fundamentally different from the basics of MJ.

Example: I go to Salsa from time to time - but I'll probably never learn Salsa - what I do is basically blend a Lindy lead, some Salsa moves, some MJ moves, some Lindy moves (anything that's easy to follow) - and a teensy bit of Salsa styling - but I'm dancing this strange blend of dances. Novices might think it's Salsa, but anyone who knows what they're about wouldn't be fooled for an instant.

To learn Blues, it works best (for me, anyway) if one learns the basics (simple to learn, hard to master) - then applies one's other dance experience to those basics.



So in your opinion it's the look/feel that defines a dance then? Isn't that (shouldn't that be) defined by the music it's dance to? So dosn't it follow that you can only dance Blues to Blues music?

Not really, no :D

ducasi
17th-May-2007, 09:01 AM
To quote the sadly absent ESG – Blues is just "Ceroc with cuddles."

Beowulf
17th-May-2007, 09:07 AM
{I've was playing with "micro-blues" a bit towards the end of Sunday at Blaze :D Now that is most cool :waycool:... :sigh:}

Call me a Numptie Noob.. but what's Micro-Blues? I've only just got to grips with the basic of normal Blues (or is that called Macro-Blues now??)

Sigh! something else for my addled brain to absorb :wink:

EDIT

as for picking up blues, I cannot recommend the beginners blues DVD highly enough. well worth the money. But as usual, it's not about the moves.. it's about the experience and the motivation. There are only 3 dancers I feel comfortable dancing blues with.. one of which (obviously) is my Significant Other (and blues comes Soooo easy when I dance with her) Connection is all important, and in blues IMHO less is more.

straycat
17th-May-2007, 10:00 AM
Call me a Numptie Noob.. but what's Micro-Blues?
Dancing for computer geeks.


I've only just got to grips with the basic of normal Blues (or is that called Macro-Blues now??)

Isn't that a song with the opening line:
"I spent all my money at the wholesale store..."
?

I'll get my coat.

straycat
17th-May-2007, 10:01 AM
To quote the sadly absent ESG – Blues is just "Ceroc with cuddles."

Not really, no :innocent:
(see above)

Lee Bartholomew
17th-May-2007, 10:05 AM
Blues (thank God) seems to be dying out.

The replacement of the COZ and WCS influences are a much better replacement. Blues was ok till people got too old to dance to it. Now the younger lot are comming through, they dont want to hear the same old stuff over and over. Once or twice fine but all the time? Nooooooo

under par
17th-May-2007, 10:24 AM
Blues (thank God) seems to be dying out.

The replacement of the COZ and WCS influences are a much better replacement. Blues was ok till people got too old to dance to it. Now the younger lot are comming through, they dont want to hear the same old stuff over and over. Once or twice fine but all the time? Nooooooo


Your new contract in Bath is obviously money for old rope:whistle:

Not very busy today then WF?

Got lots of time on your hands, enough to arrange for increased popcorn sales on the forum..... mmmmmmmm what is your new contract WF? not a popcorn seller:rofl: ?

Lee Bartholomew
17th-May-2007, 10:45 AM
Your new contract in Bath is obviously money for old rope:whistle:

Not very busy today then WF?

Got lots of time on your hands, enough to arrange for increased popcorn sales on the forum..... mmmmmmmm what is your new contract WF? not a popcorn seller:rofl: ?


Na scientific research in to how people react when told the truth but don't want to hear it.

under par
17th-May-2007, 10:52 AM
Na scientific research in to how people react when told the truth but don't want to hear it.
your truth! you mean.

straycat
17th-May-2007, 11:58 AM
Blues (thank God) seems to be dying out.

Well - no - not really (possibly in the MJ world - I wouldn't know - but in other spheres it seems to be growing)
Regardless - why 'thank God'? No one is forcing you to do it - so why be glad that others who do want to do it are losing out?



The replacement of the COZ and WCS influences are a much better replacement.
COZ is more a variant on the blues idea than a replacement. WCS is a different dance.



Blues was ok till people got too old to dance to it.

No-one is too old to dance blues.



Now the younger lot are comming through, they dont want to hear the same old stuff over and over. Once or twice fine but all the time? Nooooooo
In what way is dancing blues related to listening to the 'same old stuff over and over'? :confused:


Na scientific research in to how people react when told the truth but don't want to hear it.

So you're the main test subject? :na:

MartinHarper
17th-May-2007, 03:00 PM
What's Micro-Blues?

When the music is small, dance small.

There are other meanings, but they're not as useful.

Beowulf
17th-May-2007, 03:16 PM
When the music is small, dance small.

There are other meanings, but they're not as useful.

Small music? Oh I see.. LP to Single to CD to Mini Disk to Compact flash to SD card.. as music gets smaller they have to use smaller devices to store them !! :wink:

I "Think" I know what you mean, but isn't blues already pretty "micro" as it is? it's all about understatement and connection (at least IMHO) What next? Nano blues? Pico blues? zepto-blues ? (that's blues dancing with a curly blond wig.. you're not allowed to speak but you do have a bike horn to honk!)

In a nutshell Micro-blues is "almost standing still to music?" hehe :confused: :wink:

Lynn
17th-May-2007, 04:01 PM
In a nutshell Micro-blues is "almost standing still to music?" hehe :confused: :wink:Sounds about right. :D Its the 'almost' bit that makes the difference though.

ducasi
17th-May-2007, 04:06 PM
Micro-Blues...

Well if Blues is "Ceroc with Cuddles", then Micro-Blues is "'Ceroc with Cuddles' without the Ceroc".


;)

MartinHarper
17th-May-2007, 04:14 PM
In a nutshell Micro-blues is "almost standing still to music?"

You could say that micro blues is almost standing still to music that's almost standing still.
It is rarely musically appropriate to micro blues to an entire song.

straycat
17th-May-2007, 04:40 PM
You could say that micro blues is almost standing still to music that's almost standing still.
It is rarely musically appropriate to micro blues to an entire song.

I have seen it done for entire songs, but the leader needs to be phenomenally good to pull it off..

My partner, on the other hand, once saw a couple doing micro-blues for an entire blues night. By two of the best dancers in a room that wasn't lacking in dance talent.

Gadget
18th-May-2007, 05:54 PM
What is "micro blues"?

Blues without moves.

The connection between partners is through the whole length of a hug. Each small movement is instantly felt and responded to. Patterns in the music are lead as weight-shift patterns. Musicality is expressed in miniscule movements through every point of contact, tensing and relaxing to lead with the smallest of indicators.

The normal physical connection in MJ with your partner is in the hand hold, and perhaps with the arm on the follower's back. In A.Tango the connection is felt through the whole frame. "Micro blues" is closer to AT in this sense.

In muggle dancing, it would be the last dance shuffle when the DJ plays the last slow smootchy record. If you've got "blues" dancers instead of muggles, then it becomes a slow shuffle with internal musicality:wink:

Needless to say that it's only danced with people you know well ... or last thing on a Sunday evening (Monday morning) when it just seems too much energy to dance 'normally' :blush:
I think I danced like this with ZW, Lory, Firefly, L Star, Tattie, Cheeks ... erm.. but it could have been other people as well/instead {:blush::blush: kinna tired at that point and my eyes were shut, so I may have just dreamed it :drool:}

Mac
18th-May-2007, 06:52 PM
If Micro Blues is miniscule movements and expressions of interpretation and musicality then is it paradoxically appropriate to interpret Macro Blues as the opposite? ie strong obvious expressions of interpretation and musicality?:confused:

If so this is what Ive always known as blues dancing generally:cool:

Whilst on the subject. The Blues music we listen and dance to IMO is not Blues as I strictly understand it.:whistle:

Real Blues would have you reaching for the razor blades by daylight if it was played all night at Southport for example.:tears: :tears:

Those blues would be the type of music to micro blues dance to?:what:

IMO The blues experience at daybreak at Southport is unique and is a euphoric feeling that comes of extreme tirdeness, which can only be acheived by genuingly dancing for several hours ( Cheats dont get the real deal here):whistle: a heady mix of "Blues" smoochies :awe: :awe: and the right Partner......:flower: :hug: and long may it live forever :worthy: