PDA

View Full Version : Learning Blues...



David Bailey
1st-February-2012, 03:40 PM
So, last year's "dabble in" project was WCS.

This year, I'm going to try to learn a bit about Blues. Which should be fun, mainly because no-one seems to know what it is...

But I've had a class recommended to me - "Blues in My shoes (http://www.swingpatrol.co.uk/bluesinmyshoes/)" - which is in London on Thursday evenings, so works for me. (And, and this is the great bit, they even do class notes (http://www.swingpatrol.co.uk/class-notes-blues-in-my-shoes-25-january-2012/). :grin: )

I'll write up my thoughts on here as I go along - feel free to comment, question, laugh etc.

CheesyRobMan
1st-February-2012, 08:10 PM
Get a partner, cuddle them, sway roughly in time to the music. Just don't grope them.

straycat
2nd-February-2012, 12:40 AM
Get a partner, cuddle them, sway roughly in time to the music. Just don't grope them.

...and you might be having fun. But it won't bear much resemblance to actual blues dancing. :whistle:

Blues in My Shoes, on the other hand, has great teachers who actually do know a lot about the subject matter, and I for one very much recommend them. Great decision - enjoy!

David Bailey
2nd-February-2012, 10:51 AM
Get a partner, cuddle them, sway roughly in time to the music. Just don't grope them.

That's not blues dancing - that's (what I call) Modern Jive Blues. I can do that - hell, almost anyone can do that.

I want to learn - for want of a better term - "Real" Blues dancing.

daveb9000
2nd-February-2012, 01:05 PM
There's a distinct lack of Blues teaching in Scotland (as far as I can tell). There are frequently blues rooms at Ceroc parties, but the only teaching I get is from my annual trip to Southport weekenders :-(

Franck
2nd-February-2012, 01:23 PM
There's a distinct lack of Blues teaching in Scotland (as far as I can tell). There are frequently blues rooms at Ceroc parties, but the only teaching I get is from my annual trip to Southport weekenders :-(It is true that blues (MJ blues or traditional blues) is not taught very often in Scotland. We used to run more workshops, but demand seemed to taper down.

There should be some good news for you later in the year as we have a few events planned with top teachers focused on blues! Watch this space.

David Bailey
3rd-February-2012, 06:39 PM
Argh. Due to having to go home unexpectedly last night, I couldn't start the Big Blues Journey of 2012.

Next week.

Definitely

straycat
3rd-February-2012, 06:48 PM
There's a distinct lack of Blues teaching in Scotland (as far as I can tell). There are frequently blues rooms at Ceroc parties, but the only teaching I get is from my annual trip to Southport weekenders :-(

Apart from the weekly classes in Edinburgh (http://www.edinbop.co.uk/?page_id=145) and Aberdeen (http://www.granitecityblues.co.uk/#/granite-calendar/4558055855)? :innocent:

CJ
3rd-February-2012, 09:48 PM
There's a distinct lack of Blues teaching in Scotland (as far as I can tell). There are frequently blues rooms at Ceroc parties, but the only teaching I get is from my annual trip to Southport weekenders :-(

There is a fair bit of Blues taught in Scotland. You juat have to be willing to look beyond the "Ceroc" banner to find it.

daveb9000
5th-February-2012, 03:21 PM
Apart from the weekly classes in Edinburgh (http://www.edinbop.co.uk/?page_id=145) and Aberdeen (http://www.granitecityblues.co.uk/#/granite-calendar/4558055855)? :innocent:

I believe the Edinburgh classes only started late last year, and as they clash with my Ceroc night I'm unable to attend.

straycat
5th-February-2012, 04:48 PM
I believe the Edinburgh classes only started late last year, and as they clash with my Ceroc night I'm unable to attend.

But at least you can go to your Ceroc night secure in the knowledge that there's plenty of blues classes in Scotland :cool:

(Oh - and Edinbop have been teaching blues for a good few years now)

whitetiger1518
7th-February-2012, 08:42 AM
It is true that blues (MJ blues or traditional blues) is not taught very often in Scotland. We used to run more workshops, but demand seemed to taper down.

There should be some good news for you later in the year as we have a few events planned with top teachers focused on blues! Watch this space.

:innocent:- you mean I should have been yelling louder all this time???? :devil:

WT

David Bailey
10th-February-2012, 01:08 PM
So, I finally managed to make it to the "Blues In My Shoes" class last night - and Ruby was there guest teaching, which was a lovely bonus.

We started with connection exercises - swaying from side-to-side (no hands), then handhold, then open embrace (we did close embrace in the improver's class).

We worked on sidesteps, turning sidesteps, an "outside turn" (clockwise) and an inside turn (counter clockwise).

In the improver's class we worked on a "crossing tracks" forward-and-back pattern (very similar to the Milonga box step), on stylistic variations ("straight" and "swung") on that pattern.

Some general thoughts:
- I noticed their legs were apart (that is, not collecting), but the advice was to "pick a leg and stay on it"
- Posture-wise, the upper body was quite similar to AT - it's the hips doing all the movement
- I found it difficult to relax my shoulders and get out of Tango Mode. More difficult than I'd thought I would, in fact.
- The general advice was to stay moving on the beat - or pulsing to acknowledge it. Again, that was a bit tricky for me, I'm used to stopping and pausing frequently, and being able to disregard the beat at will.
- Interesting advice was if dizzy, jump up and down a little, I'll give that a go#
- Don't imitate a teapot (leaning the upper body over)
- Keep the legs under the hips

Other random thoughts:
- The venue itself is tiny - it's a room in a pub - and it was also ridiculously packed - maybe 30 people there in all. Which, OK, it's Blues, but when you're teaching turns and stuff, there's a minimum amount of space required, and some people (like in all dance forms) have zero sense of floorcraft
- There may be less of a distinction between "MJ Blues" and "Real Blues" than I'd thought.
- That said, there clearly is something called "Blues" and it clearly is a dance form with actual technique, style, culture and movements.
- For some reason, some of the guys wear flat caps. God knows why, they look like pidgeon-fanciers to me.

I'll plan to return next week. The cost is a bit more than I'm used to (£8 a class or £12 for two), but it's Central London, after all.

I'll also have a think about the differences and similarities to AT.

David Bailey
17th-February-2012, 11:29 AM
Week 2 - this time we were back to the regular teachers (Adamo and Pippa), so this was my first experience of what the normal class would be like. Still quite packed, but not so rammed as last week's session, so certainly more bearable. And no flat caps either, which was a bonus...

Thinking about it, usually when I've encountered two teachers, one has been the "technical geek" and one has been the "comedy man". And the "technical geek" role has almost always been the woman, whilst the "comedy man" has always been the woman. (Note: these terms are not at all derogatory, of course, just descriptive). In contrast, the roles seemed reversed here - Adamo was the serious one, and Pippa the jokester.

They both encouraged questions and discussions, which was great. I didn't notice much individual interaction whilst doing the class, but possibly they simply didn't need to interact with me because I was doing everything perfectly :)

The beginner class started with a warmup, then we went into movements. The class was done in the round - necessary given the size and layout. I don't think Blues is an inherently progressive dance, however - I meant to ask last night, but forgot.

Some technique points:
- You need to "bounce" to the beat (or at least, keep moving or acknowledge the beat with a pulse); that takes a while for me to get used to, I'm used to being able to ignore the music at whim. :)
- In handhold, need to keep the hands low - again, I'm used to lifting my left hand, so another habit to unlearn
- Followers move core first then feet catch up - again, difficult to unlearn for a tango follower I'd imagine
- Keeping knees relaxed allows you to keep the weight forward. I'll have to have a think about that one...
- Keep offset with your partner - allows feet to fit together without bashing knees together. That makes sense given the posture and closeness
- No tension in arms by default - unless you want to "send a message" to your partner (e.g. for interpretation)

We did the "basic step" (side to side), which was weird from my point of view, as we lifted ourselves up on the sidestep - again, I had to unlearn the "lower to step across" concept, I found that extremely difficult.

We then did a "blues walk" - basically an Americano then bringing to face, adding a "slide" (long sidestep) to the movement.

For the improver class, we built up a large sequence - it was definitely more of a routine-oriented class than the beginner one. We did a:
- Triple step
- Triple with a "turn in" at the end
- Triple with a "turn in" at the end then an underarm turn (clockwise) to face
- Then (double hand hold) triple step back-and-forth
- Weight change into a wrap (basket) then a side lean to finish

Lots of interesting concepts there.

I did a couple of freestyle dances at the end, but left early. There were, as always, a few snoots there, and many people who were not even close to being as good as they think they are, but blimey, after 20 years of dancing I really can't be bothered to notice any more.

One of the things I think I'll find most difficult is letting go (lterally and physically) and allowing the woman to "play" a bit more. But then, working on that area is one reason why I'm doing this in the first place.

I'm working on a "comparing tango and blues" article also, I think the similarities and differences are worth exploring.

DavidY
18th-February-2012, 03:26 PM
Followers move core first then feet catch up - again, difficult to unlearn for a tango follower I'd imagineI'd be interested if you could elaborate more about this particular difference.

I'd thought (but bear in mind I know next-to-nothing about Tango) that the lead in Tango generally worked by having close contact at core level. So I'd assumed that when a leader moves his core, the follower's core moved at the same time, and then the follower would move feet later. Presumably something different to this is going on though?

David Bailey
20th-February-2012, 11:40 AM
I'd thought (but bear in mind I know next-to-nothing about Tango) that the lead in Tango generally worked by having close contact at core level. So I'd assumed that when a leader moves his core, the follower's core moved at the same time, and then the follower would move feet later.
Pah, rookie mistake. ;)

The sequence of all movements in AT is:
1. Leader moves his chest / centre / core (depending on how you define it) slightly in a direction, without moving his feet
2. Follower moves her free leg out in that direction
3. Both transfer weight together in that direction


Presumably something different to this is going on though?
Yes, I think so - the teacher (Pippa) seemed quite clear that the feet catch up with the core movement. It's quite possible I misunderstood, of course, but it seems like the weight transfer is the driver for the foot movement, for both partners.

David Bailey
20th-February-2012, 11:55 AM
So, I went to a proper blues night (well, sort of) on Saturday at Sara White's Purple Party thing, in Buckden.

I deliberately tried to dance "proper blues" - in so far as I understand it, at least - rather than some weird hybrid MJ thing, throughout the evening.

Some interesting things that I came across based on doing this in social dancing; mainly the use of elongation for effect. I also found that a couple of my regular partners - women with whom I'd happily danced MJ and Tango for many years - actually danced Blues style (that is, "proper Blues") and were extremely good at it.

Bit of a revelation, that... I'd assumed that their dancing styles were simply their own individual styles, it turns out that they were dancing to an actual dance style all this time... :doh:

And someone mentioned some rubbish about Baby Jesus, I ignored that totally :whistle: :wink:

straycat
20th-February-2012, 12:48 PM
Yes, I think so - the teacher (Pippa) seemed quite clear that the feet catch up with the core movement. It's quite possible I misunderstood, of course, but it seems like the weight transfer is the driver for the foot movement, for both partners.
You understood correctly ;)

David Bailey
20th-February-2012, 04:23 PM
You understood correctly ;)

Good :)

That's basically the way the leader moves in AT anyway. It's just not the way the follower moves. One thing I've noticed is that the difference in posture with Blues mandates a more offset posture - you simply can't be in parallel in close embrace, you'd be knocking knees all the time.

jivecat
20th-February-2012, 05:03 PM
- There may be less of a distinction between "MJ Blues" and "Real Blues" than I'd thought.
- That said, there clearly is something called "Blues" and it clearly is a dance form with actual technique, style, culture and movements. I've no idea what the difference is either - are you going to enlighten us with a video?


- For some reason, some of the guys wear flat caps. God knows why, they look like pidgeon-fanciers to me.Ah well, each dance genre has to have its defining head-wear. Trilbys and tango, bandanas and jive, far more important in establishing one's persona as a Good Dancer, than actual technique.

David Bailey
20th-February-2012, 06:04 PM
I've no idea what the difference is either - are you going to enlighten us with a video?
Christ, no, that'd involve actual work.

But I think that what the MJ world calls "Blues" is effectively, grinding. Whereas "Proper Blues" / "American Blues" / "Whateveryouwanttocallit Blues" seems to have more clear rules about posture, more clearly-defined musical styles, and so on.

Not to mention the hats.

geoff332
20th-February-2012, 07:08 PM
Not to mention the hats.If only there were a word that rhymed with 'hat' that we could use to describe people who wear them...

On a less serious aside, I like your project of learning a new dance each year. Although you're mostly confirming my view that it's all just dancing...

frodo
21st-February-2012, 01:05 AM
.Whereas "Proper Blues" / "American Blues" / "Whateveryouwanttocallit Blues" seems to have more clear rules about posture, more clearly-defined musical styles, and so on.
Makes sense. A modern jive derived blues variant always was going to have less technique.


.But I think that what the MJ world calls "Blues" is effectively, grinding.
Not just slower dancing without the concertina action (as in different from MJ).

The majority of lessons don't appear to be about grinding.

David Bailey
21st-February-2012, 11:47 AM
On a less serious aside, I like your project of learning a new dance each year. Although you're mostly confirming my view that it's all just dancing...
The way I see it, a new dance form every year gives me the opportunity to diversify, it gives some context and breadth to my own experience, and I get to see how other teachers approach their own dance forms.

I may even try Kizomba next year, who knows... ;)

straycat
21st-February-2012, 01:02 PM
If only there were a word that rhymed with 'hat' that we could use to describe people who wear them...
I wear a hat a lot of the time.

If that helps any...

Whitebeard
23rd-February-2012, 02:52 AM
I've no idea what the difference is either - are you going to enlighten us with a video?


Here are two videos which I see as being very much within the spirit of what we refer to as MJ Blues. Yet they originate from a dedicated Blues group (young and enthusiastic) in the American North West. I believe this helps to show that the Blues dance form encompasses a much wider spectrum of style variations than is generally recognised and acknowledged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vquqYc93mGg&list=UUV0R5uYojN5Tw6x_lvD7uaQ&index=1&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vquqYc93mGg&list=UUV0R5uYojN5Tw6x_lvD7uaQ&index=1&feature=plcp)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2YXCra5EuA&list=UUV0R5uYojN5Tw6x_lvD7uaQ&index=2&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2YXCra5EuA&list=UUV0R5uYojN5Tw6x_lvD7uaQ&index=2&feature=plcp)

How I love that pared down to the essence guitar of Colin Lake.

And here is a video of a more traditional Blues form, from a dedicated Blues group based in London, which breaks away to some extent from the Lindy influence and approaches perhaps more than normally toward an MJ Blues style, but is still typically rather faster and more animated, danced more openly (room for lots of those dratted baby Jesus‘), has more footwork, and tolerates flat caps.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YzEl2vlaDo&list=UU1PdnBNmvFMfojRYTrArGcA&index=1&feature=plcp (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YzEl2vlaDo&list=UU1PdnBNmvFMfojRYTrArGcA&index=1&feature=plcp)

Great Band!

Rocky
23rd-February-2012, 02:28 PM
Week 2........

Well, there are some issues I would take with some of the technique you have described - but as you recognize, it may just be that your description of it isn’t as accurate as it could be.


... But I think that what the MJ world calls "Blues" is effectively, grinding. Whereas "Proper Blues" / "American Blues" / "Whateveryouwanttocallit Blues" seems to have more clear rules about posture, more clearly-defined musical styles, and so on..


Makes sense. A modern jive derived blues variant always was going to have less technique..

Ok, well I’m obviously going to take exception to the idea that American Blues is somehow more ‘proper’ than UK based blues.. And Frodo’s comment I’m afraid typifies a lot of the same old rubbish that has been repeated over and over again with regard to MJ too. MJ/Ceroc is a very technical dance. It combines frame, core, compression, connection, leverage, momentum and footwork and all of those elements are taught to varying degrees by numerous teachers. Less is taught in beginners classes because the focus is on simply getting people moving in the hope that they will at least come back a second time. However, there are numerous workshops that teach the technical aspects of the dance if people want to learn it..

As regards Blues I personally think that US style Blues (just like Lindy in fact) has the potential to look like a ‘comedy’ dance even if it’s performed at a competent level. The exaggerated posture and movement along with the ‘self expression’ stuff that is taught generally leads to something that I (and many others who have commented before on this subject) find embarrassing to watch. It has also lead to this odd style of blues (and I have no idea where it came from) that has lead a certain number of people to develop and teach that involves people ‘dancing’ to extremely slow blues by going from one pose to another followed by a wiggle or a mince, or whatever and a shuffle of the feet.. very strange...

Our own style of Blues has developed over the 10 years we have been teaching it and I would say has evolved more in the last couple of years as we have refined the major elements of technique. Our method of teaching is all about core, frame, connection and the synchronicity of weight transfer in both open and closed hold, and also in transition. Learning these techniques in conjunction with a series of moves that highlight them is the only path to being able to express the musicality that is a defining principle of the dance. I’m not going to bore you any more with it, but I would say that if anyone has the impression that UK based Blues is not about technique, then they need to think again – we’re running 3 workshops at Newbury this year with the intro (Groove The Blues 1) on 12th May. If anyone doubts what I’ve said then maybe you should book one of the workshops and come down and see for yourself.

Finally, as regards ‘grinding’. When Lucky (Lucky Skillen) was last over a couple of weeks ago I was fortunate in being invited to see the documentary he is working on regarding the origins of dancing in the US. In it he features the last ever interview with Frankie Manning before he died. Frankie, as I’m sure many of you know, was one of the founding fathers of Blues and Lindy dancing in the US, and his recollection of Blues is that it was ALL about grinding... That said, as Frodo mentions, most teachers don’t teach people to grind in Blues workshops these days. Our personal focus is on social blues dancing with either a counter balanced hold with no body contact at all, or a closer hold with upper body contact only.

straycat
23rd-February-2012, 03:40 PM
Here are two videos which I see as being very much within the spirit of what we refer to as MJ Blues. Yet they originate from a dedicated Blues group (young and enthusiastic) in the American North West. I believe this helps to show that the Blues dance form encompasses a much wider spectrum of style variations than is generally recognised and acknowledged.

I'm not sure the US blues scene is the best one to use as MJ blues examples (although I admit there's not a lot of videos to choose from there)
Might it be better to look at the leading teachers?
Nigel & Nina

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqD41yhEdQk

David (Rocky) & Val
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNFlW9r5H6o

For traditional(?) blues, well - here's a couple of competition videos that are quite fun:
Blues Shout
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRVTZzVfWHw

Lone Star Championships
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqfwRl2hvQY

For an off-the-cuff distinction, I'd say that MJ blues is generally more move-based, whereas US / standard / traditional / whatever you want to call it is very much movement-based.

David Bailey
23rd-February-2012, 03:44 PM
Ok, well I’m obviously going to take exception to the idea that American Blues is somehow more ‘proper’ than UK based blues.. Well I'm not even sure there is such a difference. I'm just a beginner.

Based on observation, however, there's clearly "what MJ dancers dance socially and call it Blues", and there's "what Blues dancers dance socially", and they're obviously different beasts. Well, mostly. Whether that implies that "MJ Blues" is different, I don't know. And whilst obviously plenty of people in the MJ world have been teaching Blues for a long time, I don't see much evidence of MJ dancers actually adopting a "authentic" (?) Blues style in MJ rooms.

Even at Sara White's thing on Saturday, a lot of people were doing slow-motion Jive - "moondancing MJ" as one person called it. And that's with a crowd of extremely high-quality dancers, too.

Also, I note that on the Ceroc Storm schedule , there's an explicit class called "Ceroc to Blues: Adapt your Ceroc Dancing to work in the Blues Room". Which certainly seems to imply that Ceroc, at least, think there's a difference between "Proper Blues" and "MJ Blues". (I'd go to the class, but it's on at 10:45am on a Sunday morning, so I suspect that's unlikely)


I’m not going to bore you any more with it, but I would say that if anyone has the impression that UK based Blues is not about technique, then they need to think again
Yeah, I'm not sure Frodo's comment is reasonable either.

Our personal focus is on social blues dancing with either a counter balanced hold with no body contact at all, or a closer hold with upper body contact only. Blimey, where's the fun in that?

Rocky
23rd-February-2012, 05:24 PM
I'm not sure the US blues scene is the best one to use as MJ blues examples (although I admit there's not a lot of videos to choose from there)
Might it be better to look at the leading teachers?...

Hmmm... well I don't think the clips really help - ours is just a 'walk through' to a random piece of music and the other 3 are performances. As I've said I absolutely believe in teaching simple moves to reinforce the use of technique and as you can see we are just simply going through the 3 basic positions and showing how you can seamlessly coordinate weight transitions from closed to open hold and back in again.


...For an off-the-cuff distinction, I'd say that MJ blues is generally more move-based, whereas US / standard / traditional / whatever you want to call it is very much movement-based.

I guess this description is fair although I would say that the last video had quite a lot of reliance on moves rather than just movement.


... Also, I note that on the Ceroc Storm schedule , there's an explicit class called "Ceroc to Blues: Adapt your Ceroc Dancing to work in the Blues Room". Which certainly seems to imply that Ceroc, at least, think there's a difference between "Proper Blues" and "MJ Blues". (I'd go to the class, but it's on at 10:45am on a Sunday morning, so I suspect that's unlikely)

Well, yes that is something we started to introduce last year and is now being taken up by other teachers - we called it X-Style Blues. It's really a first step into Blues for people who are nervous of the genre and just shows them how they can take moves they already know and 'Bluesify' them. I don't actually know what Steve is going to teach at Camber but it is really about stylizing the moves rather than just doing slow Ceroc.


... Blimey, where's the fun in that?

There is little 'fun' in that, but that comes later on the dance floor! It just makes for a more comfortable environment for everyone to learn in that's all...

straycat
23rd-February-2012, 06:16 PM
Hmmm... well I don't think the clips really help - ours is just a 'walk through' to a random piece of music and the other 3 are performances. As I've said I absolutely believe in teaching simple moves to reinforce the use of technique and as you can see we are just simply going through the 3 basic positions and showing how you can seamlessly coordinate weight transitions from closed to open hold and back in again.
Aye - it's hard to find MJ blues equivalents to the competition videos. To try and balance things out, here's a US clip of a workshop summary. (Chris & Campbell :worthy: )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0fnbpUK88U


I guess this description is fair although I would say that the last video had quite a lot of reliance on moves rather than just movement.
Fair point - being a comp (and with regular partners, hence more preparation possibilities), that's inevitably going to happen to some degree or other.
Interestingly, the ones who were pretty much 100% movement based won - Evita (in red) & Jeremie - and the worst (IMO) offenders came in third.


Back to something you said earlier:

Learning these techniques in conjunction with a series of moves that highlight them is the only path to being able to express the musicality that is a defining principle of the dance.
I wouldn't agree that this is the only way. It's a perfectly good way, but there's other good methods for achieving the same ends.

Rocky
24th-February-2012, 10:01 AM
Back to something you said earlier:

I wouldn't agree that this is the only way. It's a perfectly good way, but there's other good methods for achieving the same ends.

Well, that depends how you define 'musicality'. You can teach people the structure of blues music until the cows come home but that doesn't mean that they will be able to interpret that structure through the medium of dance with a partner. If you take Chris and Cambells class as an example it was all about moves - no doubt they were covering a lot of technique too in the class, but technique has no value unless you can apply it somehow. How else can you affect your partner if you cannot move her to the feeling of the music?

You can't be a great musician unless you know the structure of scales and chords, all of which give shape to the music. You can't be a great writer unless you have a vocabulary and know how to contruct sentences and paragraphs to give life to the words - so how can you be a great dancer unless you know how to move yourself and your partner in unison to the changes in the music?

David Bailey
24th-February-2012, 01:24 PM
Well, that depends how you define 'musicality'. You can teach people the structure of blues music until the cows come home but that doesn't mean that they will be able to interpret that structure through the medium of dance with a partner.
I've done loads of musicality classes. I've taught musicality classes, for that matter. And I still don't know what the best way of teaching musicality is.

I think the way that works best for me (as a student and teacher) is individual tuition. Because you can assess the way a person "thinks" about the dancing, and tailor the tuition that way. Yes, of course that rule applies to all teaching, but musicality seems to be one of those things that is so individual, subjective and personal, that group classes seem to be more limited in this area than in other areas.

Some people will learn by examples, some by structure, some by general "listen to the music" advice. To be honest, though, I'm not in favour of a "musical analysis" approach - I don't think it really works for dancers. Whenever I hear people talk about beats, bars and phrases, my brain turns to mush.

Weirdly, singing the melody during the class also helps to teach (I say "weirdly" because I really really can't sing at all).

Franck
24th-February-2012, 01:41 PM
One of the problems with teaching musicality, or more to the point, applying musicality in dancing, is that you need a much larger vocabulary of dance, as well as more complex grammar. If all you know are a few basic words (read moves, or basic movements / patterns) then you'll only be able to produce the dancing equivalent of texting, even if you can hear great variation in the music. Once you have a larger vocabulary, and the technique to be able to influence / control your own body, as well as that of your partner, you'll be able to interpret the music with more and more subtlety.
I have seen the results of musicality workshops where dancers were told that as long as you 'feel' the music, you'll be musical. Unfortunately, unless you first invest in learning the technique of dancing, expressing musicality will remain a bit like 'not saying anything whilst staring' makes you mysterious and interesting...

straycat
24th-February-2012, 02:39 PM
Well, that depends how you define 'musicality'. You can teach people the structure of blues music until the cows come home but that doesn't mean that they will be able to interpret that structure through the medium of dance with a partner. If you take Chris and Cambells class as an example it was all about moves - no doubt they were covering a lot of technique too in the class, but technique has no value unless you can apply it somehow. How else can you affect your partner if you cannot move her to the feeling of the music?
I'd say it depends on how you define 'moves'. You can teach musicality off the back of micro-blues, which I don't consider to use 'moves' per se... (but others might see that differently) I personally have attended musicality workshops in both blues and lindy that were move-based, and ones that were not.

Please note - I'm not trying to argue which approach is best - just that other approaches exist, and are perfectly valid.


One of the problems with teaching musicality, or more to the point, applying musicality in dancing, is that you need a much larger vocabulary of dance, as well as more complex grammar.
Why so? You can teach or learn musicality purely with weight-shifts and walking your partner round a room, and I've seen people do some wonderfully creative, musical and connected dancing using no more tools than that.

Franck
24th-February-2012, 03:02 PM
Why so? You can teach or learn musicality purely with weight-shifts and walking your partner round a room, and I've seen people do some wonderfully creative, musical and connected dancing using no more tools than that.Well, several reasons, first of all, what you describe above is already technically complex, it might appear simple, but connected dancing, weight-shifts and walking your partner around the room implies a great technical base for both dancers, which is what I meant by being able to influence / control your own body and that of your partner.
Second, everyone's perception of musicality will vary, so one technique doesn't fit all, in order to be musical (to your own satisfaction) you need to learn the vocabulary, grammar and self control to be able to express what you feel.
Finally, indeed you can be musical by clapping your hands to the beat, or doing really basic stuff, but that isn't what most people aspire to when they want to learn 'musicality'. Most people have already achieved the 'dancing to the beat' and occasionally hitting breaks stages of dancing but they want more. They want to be able to be on phrase, hit accents, add contrast, lead one thing whilst following another instrument with their own body, isolate body movements, communicate what moves them in a piece of music, etc.
All the above take a lot of good technique and a good dance vocabulary (moves, movements, footwork, accents, body isolation, connection, etc.) before they can be included into any dance. In my experience, people don't struggle to hear the music, they struggle to translate it into movements they would be happy with.

Rocky
24th-February-2012, 03:43 PM
I've done loads of musicality classes. I've taught musicality classes, for that matter. And I still don't know what the best way of teaching musicality is..

We've taught it many times and in different formats and what we've found is it's best to teach the concept of musicality within the framework of moves. Once people understand that music has a definite structure that usually repeats eg. Intro, verse, bridge, chorus, middle 8 etc. then what they need is a range of moves that enables them to interpret the changes. For example moves that allow you to drag aspects of them to still hit a break if you start too early. Moves that enable you to dynamically change the speed of a move to still hit a break if you start too late. Double dips and quick fix stops and accents that let you respond quickly to changes if you're not able to think too far ahead etc. etc. Footstep patterns to pick up back beats or changes in the music, light and shade to reflect the dynamic changes inherent in bridges and musical breaks..


I'd say it depends on how you define 'moves'. You can teach musicality off the back of micro-blues, which I don't consider to use 'moves' per se... (but others might see that differently) I personally have attended musicality workshops in both blues and lindy that were move-based, and ones that were not.

Please note - I'm not trying to argue which approach is best - just that other approaches exist, and are perfectly valid.


Why so? You can teach or learn musicality purely with weight-shifts and walking your partner round a room, and I've seen people do some wonderfully creative, musical and connected dancing using no more tools than that.

Yes, of course musicality can take various forms and everything you describe can be used musically. However, it's important to have variation in what you do. Some tracks are all about grinding, some are about very little movement at all, some are very lyrical, some are about dynamic changes. Some tracks are about intimacy, and some tracks are about fun. But unless you have a vocabulary that can describe how you feel and what you want to convey you're going to be pretty shackled.

Franck's point about having an extensive vocabulary and about having an understanding of complex grammar is therefore very valid. But it's important to note that this does not mean that you would execute complex moves with this knowledge. The very best musicians and dancers are those that have a wide breadth of knowledge of their genre that allows them to express the perfect moment in just a single note or a simple touch. Very few people can do this intuitively. Instead it comes from a thorough understanding of structure and technique. Great guitarists practice their scales, chords and both their left and right hand technique constantly and in doing so it allows them to cut loose when they improvise because all of that knowledge and technique comes to bear in the moment. It’s the same with dancing. Practicing figures, movement and technique allows you to be totally free to create the moment with your partner because you will have an implicit knowledge of not only how you move your body, but also how your movement directly affects your partner.

Of course you can run an entire workshop on walking. You can run an entire workshop on micro blues and standing still – but neither of those or going to make you a very rounded dancer. Just as learning how to use punctuation is not going to make you a great writer. Having a library of moves that specifically fit the dynamic structure of Blues music is effectively the meat (or cheese if you’re a veggie..) in your Blues dancing sandwich – everything else is just additional filling that adds to the taste experience. However, with that analogy in mind, there is no doubt that an inspired filling can lift the sandwich to extraordinary heights and tickle your taste buds and a bad filling can induce vomiting..

Gerry
2nd-March-2012, 09:18 PM
A lot of people go on about dancing being a conversation between the two dancers but there is a third person that should be directing the conversation which is the music. As dancers we may have a nice catalog of moves but if we are not talking the same language how can we interpret the music and decide which move we should use.
I have been to lots of musicality classes and I understand phrasing, lyrical musicality etc but I still find that the music just doesn't tell me what to do even though I love music and listen to different genres all the time. ;-(((((((((((((((

Franck
3rd-March-2012, 12:53 PM
A lot of people go on about dancing being a conversation between the two dancers but there is a third person that should be directing the conversation which is the music. As dancers we may have a nice catalog of moves but if we are not talking the same language how can we interpret the music and decide which move we should use.
I have been to lots of musicality classes and I understand phrasing, lyrical musicality etc but I still find that the music just doesn't tell me what to do even though I love music and listen to different genres all the time. ;-(((((((((((((((
The "speaking the same language" analogy you use can be stretched a little bit further.

In a way, learning 'moves' is the equivalent of using a phrase book when travelling, you get many useful phrases, which allow you to communicate when abroad. Those phrases will not be perfect to every situation, but still help.

The other thing you mention is musicality classes, workshops and phrasing, lyrical, etc... This is the equivalent of taking a course on creative writing in a foreign language, you are told how it should feel, sound / look, and many stylistic tricks used by the best writers in that language...

What appears to be missing from the above is 'grammar' and 'vocabulary'.

Grammar is the necessary technique you need for partner dancing, this will include connection, spacial awareness and body positioning, lead & follow skills, weight distribution, momentum, etc. Once those grammar rules are assimilated, everyone's dancing improves significantly.

Vocabulary is the range of body movements you can produce personally (i.e. shoulder shimmy, footwork patterns, arm extensions, head flicks, etc.) combined with the movements you can properly lead or follow and the different patterns you can create with your partners using those movements, it will start with the 'basic' step in and out and will develop into complex series of basic movements (that are led and followed, not pre-agreed).

Once you have learnt the skills above to a sufficient degree, you might find that musicality comes naturally, and effortlessly!

David Bailey
13th-March-2012, 04:58 PM
So, I've been a bit lax on the Blues classes recently, but I did a Blues masterclass thing with Ruby and Jaye at Storm over the weekend.

I took some notes during the masterclass, and here's what we covered:

We covered posture: knees soft, "zigzag" offset feet, and leader's arm around follower's waist. All of which - especially the arm placement - is difficult for me as it's unlearning some habits.

We covered walking forwards and - again a tricky one - backwards.

We did "doubles": which is the bouncing side-to-side step movement. I'm slooowly getting used to these movements, but again it feels a bit unnatural.

We did "singles": basically weight transfers but with feet slightly further apart.

We did a "squash everyone in the corner" exercise also, to teach us good floorcraft - I do a similar thing in my workshops, but they were explicitly encouraging couples to move into spaces in a Brownian motion thing, which was different.

Some nice technique points:
- If you're a relaxed follower, you gain more sensitivity to your partner's signals because you're not focussing on tensing your muscles.
- There's no real "line of dance", but neither is there an expectation to stay in the same place. So I'm not sure where that leaves the movement convention...

We did a rockstep turn, which I liked - I promptly filed the numbers off and used it in my own Tango class on Monday :)

We did triple-steps, then rotating triple steps.

And then we finished.

It was great - both Jaye and Ruby are lovely people, and the class was very friendly and very useful.

David Bailey
10th-April-2012, 12:45 PM
And here's my notes from another class (last Thursday, 5th April). Adamo was absent, so Pippa was teaching with Jaye (not Storm Jaye, another Jaye...), mainly as a demo. The class was very quiet, a pre-Easter thing I imagine, there were only 8 of us at the start, although a few others appeared later on in the evening. What with that, the scratchy 30s music being played, and a late start, I felt right at home :)

Beginner class:
The embrace / hold seems a bit more "V-shaped" than my normal tango style - more open on left side of the embrace, more close on right, with thigh contact, arms flexible.
We spent some time on posture - keeping the knees bent and hips in "neutral" (rather than pushed out or in). Adopting this posture made a real, significant difference to my movements.

There was also some interesting tips on the lead-follow connection. Pippa was fairly clear that the follower moves slightly "behind" (after) the leader; this rubber-band effect can presumably be elongated for dramatic effect, I guess. If I understand this correctly, then that's a small but significant difference between the way AT and Blues handle this area.

In terms of movements, we did a simple forward-ocho-esque pattern, into an outside turn, which more or less worked OK.


Improver class:
In the movements, we worked on "Fishtails" - which in Tango terms would be "ochos done on the wrong foot" :)

Technique-wise, if the follower provides more "tone", she's "asking for more". I think this means that the follower can use resistance to initiate more dramatic or slower movements, which seems reasonable - again, the same happens in AT.

We finished with a wrap-in and cross body lead out combination, which frankly felt a bit weird. So I won't be using that one. :)

For me, the most interesting and useful lessons are the beginner ones. Not because the improver ones are more difficult, but because the beginner ones are more technique-focussed. Which is probably the right way to approach things, but leaves me a little frustrated, as I don't get a lot from the improver classes.

The journey, as the saying goes, continues.

whitetiger1518
12th-April-2012, 01:09 PM
A little off topic, but the Granite City Blues guys have arranged another event for next year... Venues to be confirmed, but Glasgow 19th, 20th and 21st April 2013 Save the dates blues addicts :) Yay I won't have to travel!

WT