Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 42

Thread: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

  1. #21
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiky Steve View Post
    I have found that dancing with people who are learning WCS really messes up their follow in regards to MJ.
    I've encountered this too - not all WCS-ers, not even most of them, but occasionally.

  2. #22
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post
    I did throw a couple of pretty significant qualifiers in there. I stand by the statement that much of the teaching in MJ comes across as being shoddy in comparison to long established dance forms with professionals teaching at a grass roots level.
    Mmm, still not convinced. Both salsa and AT teaching have more than their fair share of numpty teachers - much worse than you'd get at Ceroc, for example.

    But it may be that WCS teaching in the UK is a higher standard, simply because only a few well-trained and gifted people are teaching it here (at the moment).

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post
    Where did I say they "can't" give me a satisfying dance Stewart? I said it was harder to have one now than before I started WCS. Those are hardly the same thing, and I know I'm not alone.
    Ah, you're just an Evil Hotshot Snooty WCS-er, just accept it, OK?

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post
    I find it very difficult to believe that this is just a coincidence. (the first part, not that they're all women...)
    Mental note, never read posts and drink coffee at the same time...

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post
    If you feel that this makes me view MJ as an inferior dance then I won't sugar coat it - I do view it that way in some ways (as noted above).
    I don't think it's an "inferior" dance, but it certainly has a big tail of less-experienced dancers, and it doesn't take too much effort to become a Good Dancer in MJ.

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post
    I know this post has gone significantly outside the strict topics that DavidJames and Stewart38 were referring too
    Yeah - you haven't even ordered your hot beverage of choice yet...

  3. #23
    Registered User stewart38's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ambrosden it gets
    Posts
    7,480
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post




    How, and this isn't just a rhetorical question, does this relate to anything I actually said?


    I know this post has gone significantly outside the strict topics that DavidJames and Stewart38 were referring too and so anything said on the soapbox should be considered a rant to the world at large rather than any individuals

    I’m allowed to say stuff that doesn’t relate to what you have said , well I have been doing so for the last 38 years

    Obviously a ‘great’ dancer (and I say this generally) is probably going to find it ‘harder’ to get a good dance with anyone

    Does Lorry get as much pleasure now from Jivers now she knows so many other dance styles, one reason why im wary of people like that, i.e. ill bore them so am reluctant to ask them to dance now

    Anyway I’m just of the old school and don’t like people constantly knocking jive but if that’s the way of its so be it re ‘plain old jive’

  4. #24
    Omnipresent Administrator Franck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    3,045
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    MJ doesn't seem to teach footwork, connection, frame, lead and follow, musicality, posture or anything that could be called an underlying technique that makes MJ uniquely MJ.
    This is a misrepresentation of MJ. All the above are taught in MJ. Not to beginners and not immediately, but they all belong within the framework (or lack thereof) of MJ.
    The MJ approach is to teach less at the outset to keep more dancers interested (and not put off by complexity) but one of the benefits of that approach is that MJ dancers are not constrained by the artificial limits of each dance, for example you can choose to dance slotted in MJ or not, you can dance in a closed frame hold (as in Ballroom or Tango) or choose to dance from a short distance (as in WCS); you can include all sorts of footwork, from rondes, to triple steps (swing style or Chacha), you can dance all the above to a greater range of music than any other style, etc...
    MJ teaching does however involve footwork, connection, lead & follow, musicality and much more, just not as early as other dances. It might also be argued that in the UK, there are more MJ workshops and classes teaching the above than WCS, based on sheer number of dancers retained.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    So if anyone can actually tell me what 'framework' there is in MJ I would be glad to be properly informed.
    The MJ framework is as DavidB once succintly described:
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidB View Post
    Modern Jive is a Lead/Follow Partner Dance done to the music on the down-beat.
    Within that framework, we can add proper connection, style, footwork and moves gleaned from every possible styles (yes including the Waltz) without restrictions.
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    Secondly, MJ is no more an "uber dance" than something like hustle is - it can adopt some parts of other dance techniques, sure, but that doesn't mean you can do WCS and call it "a bit of MJ".
    I believe that MJ could be a kind of 'uber dance' might change the name to that

    Of course WCS is not 'a bit of MJ' just that most dances that fit into the above definition can be included into MJ, completely if required, but I personally find that dancing only one type (be it WCS, AT, Chacha, rumba, etc...) is too limiting, and I prefer the flexibility of approach of MJ. None of the other dances would (by themselves) be sufficient now that I've experienced a range.

    I appreciate all of the above doesn't apply to all MJ classes / teachers and dancers, as DavidJames said, MJ has a long tail of new / inexperienced or dancers who are happy with a few moves done fast with little connection or technique, but MJ is still fairly young in its development, and more and more MJ teachers are building the top dancers without having to resort to sending them to 'alternative' dances. I believe that once the number of MJ teachers who teach proper technique reaches critical mass, MJ will indeed become the 'Uber dance'.
    Franck.

    There's an A.P.P. for that!

  5. #25
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Franck View Post
    I appreciate all of the above doesn't apply to all MJ classes / teachers and dancers, as DavidJames said, MJ has a long tail of new / inexperienced or dancers who are happy with a few moves done fast with little connection or technique, but MJ is still fairly young in its development, and more and more MJ teachers are building the top dancers without having to resort to sending them to 'alternative' dances. I believe that once the number of MJ teachers who teach proper technique reaches critical mass, MJ will indeed become the 'Uber dance'.
    Personally, I don't think this will happen, simply because there's such a large tail of "social-only" dancers, who just want to go and have a bit of a bop.

    Let me be absolutely clear - there's nothing wrong with that, and in fact that casual, friendly attitude is one of the best things about the MJ scene for me. I suspect that this was the case with ballroom dancing, back when the ballroom scene was ubiquitous.

    But that also means that (IMO) a larger proportion of attendees simply won't care that much about getting better, compared to other dance forms. So there'll never be as much demand for advancement in MJ as there is in other forms. That doesn't mean that technique is irrelevant, or that it shouldn't be taught - but I think it means that, at the moment, there's not enough call from most MJ-ers for technique classes. And I can't see that changing much.

    Having said that, MJ teaching is definitely improving - 10 years ago, it was almost impossible to find any technique-ased classes. But I doubt that it'll be able to compete with other dance forms in that way.

  6. #26
    Lovely Moderator ducasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    10,015
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    I would be very interested to get your opinion as to what the framework of MJ is (since everyone else on the thread is serving refreshments).
    Hmm... That's a difficult one... I think the key aspect of the "MJ framework" is that it is very loose. DJ recently quoted David B as saying that MJ is "Lead-and-follow dance, emphasis on the downbeat". Is that enough?

    Can't remember from our discussions whether WCS was upbeat or downbeat, and whether that was about emphasis or something else, so maybe there's a difference, but otherwise I can't see anything in WCS that doesn't fit into this framework.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    MJ doesn't seem to teach footwork, connection, frame, lead and follow, musicality, posture or anything that could be called an underlying technique that makes MJ uniquely MJ.
    "MJ" is a dance and don't teach us anything. And while at most Ceroc and other MJ classes these concepts will not be explicitly taught, a huge number of MJ dancers seem to learn these things anyway.

    Are you saying that MJ is devoid of technique?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    It seems to me that the complete lack of 'framework' is what make MJ able to import elements of other dance styles into itself, provided it strips out inconvenient elements of techinique from that dance style.
    Yes and no – it strips out the unnecessary ornamentation that some other dances have, but at the same time allows you to add it back in if you have the ability.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    Lindy hop is often imported into MJ with the triple steps removed. Cha Cha is imported with the hip action removed. AT is often imported with the body and frame lead removed. WCS is often imported into MJ with the elasticty, compression, triple steps, slot, and musicality removed.
    Let's look at it this way... I think that every WCS pattern I've seen can be imported into MJ, with much of the footwork and technique intact. There's probably exceptions... Some technique would have to be changed, such as the double-prep which tends to confuse MJ followers.

    I also believe that there's many things in MJ that cannot directly be imported into WCS without some difficulty. This is why I said that WCS is a strict subset of MJ (as long as you are prepared to be a bit loose on how the technique is employed.)


    Sorry if some of my thoughts are a bit messy – this is something I have just been musing on in the last week or so, and haven't fully cemented my thinking of the matter.
    Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story

  7. #27
    Lovely Moderator ducasi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    10,015
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    Personally, I don't think this will happen, simply because there's such a large tail of "social-only" dancers, who just want to go and have a bit of a bop.
    I'm curious... Ceroc claim to have 100,000 dancers in the UK – how many people dance WCS worldwide?

    Does it also have a long tail of less-skilled "'social-only' dancers, who just want to go and have a bit of a bop."?
    Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story

  8. #28
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    DJ recently quoted David B as saying that MJ is "Lead-and-follow dance, emphasis on the downbeat". Is that enough?
    To be precise, from here:
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidB
    Modern Jive is a Lead and Follow Partner dance where movements take multiples of two beats and finish on beats 1 and 3 of music written with 4 beats to the bar
    I don't think it's enough, for purposes of development of the dance, but I do think it's the best definition I've seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    Can't remember from our discussions whether WCS was upbeat or downbeat, and whether that was about emphasis or something else, so maybe there's a difference, but otherwise I can't see anything in WCS that doesn't fit into this framework.
    I believe the expanded definition would exclude WCS.

  9. #29
    Forum Bombshell - Our Queen! Lory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    North London
    Posts
    9,918
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by stewart38 View Post
    Does Lorry get as much pleasure now from Jivers now she knows so many other dance styles, one reason why im wary of people like that, i.e. ill bore them so am reluctant to ask them to dance now
    Yes I can, and some of the best dances I have nowadays are still MJ!

    I love variety and if I had the choice, I'd probably choose the partner who's dancing IMO most suited the track playing at the time, which might not necessarily be WSC!

    Most important to me, is dancing with people who have a good attitude. Who feel the music and really go for it...

    And the great thing about MJ is ...whether its a funky R'n'B track, a smooth floaty Fred Astaire like number, a raunchy blues, a fun up-beat silly song, a latin track with a Cha cha beat or a Passionate Tango... you CAN use your MJ moves (for want of a better phrase) to create the mood of the dance.....

    But sadly what a lot of men do, is stick to their set routine of moves, with no regard for the music's thats playing whatsoever and I admit, this sometimes does bore me.

    Someone once said on here (it might have been David B?) that if you turned the sound down, while watching a dancing video, you should be able to tell if a couple were dancing to different genres? Im talking emotion and attitude, not just Tempo here!

    I firmly believe all the above totally achievable within the (I hesitate to use this word again) 'framework of MJ' but IMO there's simply not enough MJ leads who seem to be aware of the music at all and sadly, they're clueless as to how to produce a different 'feeling'

    I suppose it comes down to that prickly little subject of musicality again!
    Last edited by Lory; 20th-June-2007 at 03:35 PM.
    MODERATOR AT YOUR SERVICE
    "If you're going to do something tonight, that you know you'll be sorry for in the morning, plan a lie in." Lorraine

  10. #30
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Worcester, UK
    Posts
    4,157
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    ... I believe that there's many things in MJ that cannot directly be imported into WCS without some difficulty. This is why I said that WCS is a strict subset of MJ. ...
    Here are some examples of things in WCS that cannot be directly imported into MJ without some difficulty:
    * The strict slot and all the moves that are only leadable because of the strict slot.
    * Leading the follower into arbitrary combinations of triple steps and step-steps in open.
    * The extent to which followers can extend and alter patterns
    * Anchor steps and holding in anchored position.

    This does not make Modern Jive a subset of West Coast. They are two dances, with some similarities and some differences.

    Quote Originally Posted by Franck View Post
    MJ dancers are not constrained by the artificial limits of each dance, for example you can choose to dance slotted in MJ or not, you can dance in a closed frame hold (as in Ballroom or Tango) or choose to dance from a short distance (as in WCS); you can include all sorts of footwork, from rondes, to triple steps (swing style or Chacha), you can dance all the above to a greater range of music than any other style, etc.
    Nah, that's Lindy Hop.

  11. #31
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Zurich
    Posts
    1,060
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    Hmm... That's a difficult one... I think the key aspect of the "MJ framework" is that it is very loose. DJ recently quoted David B as saying that MJ is "Lead-and-follow dance, emphasis on the downbeat". Is that enough?.
    In saying that the framework is very 'loose' seems to me that it is so loose as to not be present. I can understand Francks statement that technique is not taught early on and this brings in and retains big numbers of people who would otherwise not even start any dance related activity. This is the choice that MJ made that other dance forms have stayed away from, where you need to learn the foundation of technique in order to be able to do the dance.

    This is what I understand as framework. It is something you need to learn in order to be able to do the activity. MJ is something you can do (up to a certain level) without learning any enabling skills. The need to learn them later is entirely optional.

    As for Bavid B definition of MJ, I feel that while it may be entirely correct I just find it as useful as saying that a cow is an animal with 4 legs - True but there are thousands of animals with 4 legs that are not cows.




    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    "MJ" is a dance and don't teach us anything. And while at most Ceroc and other MJ classes these concepts will not be explicitly taught, a huge number of MJ dancers seem to learn these things anyway.

    Are you saying that MJ is devoid of technique?.
    I am not saying that it is devoid of technique - I think Franck just said it when he pointed out that many tens of thousands of people are dancing MJ at this very moment and very few (in relative terms) have ever learnt technique of any description. If technique is not taught explicitly then it is not something that you need. If learning technique is entirely optional for MJ then it is not an essential part fo mass market MJ.


    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    Yes and no – it strips out the unnecessary ornamentation that some other dances have, but at the same time allows you to add it back in if you have the ability..
    You see I don't see technique as ornamentation. I see it as something essential that you need in order to be able to achieve something. With proper technique from both lead and follow you can lead a columbian and its variations. Without technique you have to say 'columbian' to your follower as she goes past you so that she will do it anyway irrespective of what you are doing. At point you are not leading and following you are merely moving in close proximity to each other.


    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    Let's look at it this way... I think that every WCS pattern I've seen can be imported into MJ, with much of the footwork and technique intact. There's probably exceptions... Some technique would have to be changed, such as the double-prep which tends to confuse MJ followers..
    The double prep confuses MJ followers because no one has required them to learn that they should follow their hand. Compression also confuses MJ followers so if you lead their hand towards them then their body stays where it is and their hand goes backwards. No one has taught them to follow their hand.



    Quote Originally Posted by ducasi View Post
    I also believe that there's many things in MJ that cannot directly be imported into WCS without some difficulty. This is why I said that WCS is a strict subset of MJ (as long as you are prepared to be a bit loose on how the technique is employed.).
    It seems that we might be saying the same things. It is the lack of framework that allows som many elements of other dance styles to be imported.

  12. #32
    Omnipresent Administrator Franck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    3,045
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    This is what I understand as framework. It is something you need to learn in order to be able to do the activity. MJ is something you can do (up to a certain level) without learning any enabling skills. The need to learn them later is entirely optional.
    It is optional, but you're mistaken in your assumption that dancers are not "learning any enabling skills", Most MJ classes, whilst not perfect introduce enough elements of lead / follow, and basic stepping footwork. Many people have a surprising understanding and basic ability which allows them to pick-up the basics of the dance simply. Those same people get migraines and give up when you try to enforce a strict (and often artificial) footwork pattern.
    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    As for Bavid B definition of MJ, I feel that while it may be entirely correct I just find it as useful as saying that a cow is an animal with 4 legs - True but there are thousands of animals with 4 legs that are not cows.
    That's not a suitable analogy. MJ is an animal with 4 legs that can change shape and adapt to its environment and terrain, including growing wings if required! In that sense, this is the closest definition we can get as MJ is the 'Uber Dance' because it is not 'just a cow'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chef View Post
    With proper technique from both lead and follow you can lead a columbian and its variations. Without technique you have to say 'columbian' to your follower as she goes past you so that she will do it anyway irrespective of what you are doing. At point you are not leading and following you are merely moving in close proximity to each other.
    This applies to all dances, irrespective of whether they try to teach 'proper' techniques or not. There are thousands of WCS dancers in the US (and in the UK) who dance patterns without proper technique, just following a choreographed routine as taught by their teachers. Yes, the better ones will try to pass on technique (though as discussed in another thread, not all WCS teachers would necessarily have a clue as to what connection is and how to teach it), thousands of Ballroom and Salsa dancers similarly "move in close proximity to each other" and call it dancing. The fact that we make a virtue of the fact, not only makes MJ easier to pick-up, but also makes most of its dancers more approachable.
    Franck.

    There's an A.P.P. for that!

  13. #33
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    That may be the approach that Ceroc take, but it's not the approach of all MJ. We teach footwork, posture, etc from day 1. I'm not in the business of letting people develop bad habits and then getting them to pay for workshops and private lessons to have them corrected.
    Stop giving yourself airs and graces, Andy - you're a MJ teacher, not WCS remember?

    And I don't believe any successful MJ class focusses too much on technique; the business model just isn't geared up for it.

  14. #34
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    St. Albans
    Posts
    2,388
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidJames View Post
    I know even less about WCS, but I'd definitely disagree on that one.

    Firstly, WCS isn't a subset of MJ. WCS culture may be a subset of MJ culture, in the UK, but the dances are different. Cousins, at best - they both share some of the same roots (Lindy), but that's about it.

    Remember, WCS has been going strong in the USA for quite some time now - up to 50 years, by some accounts.

    Secondly, MJ is no more an "uber dance" than something like hustle is - it can adopt some parts of other dance techniques, sure, but that doesn't mean you can do WCS and call it "a bit of MJ".


    Almost any dance takes more effort to learn than MJ - but you get more out of it. IMO, it's almost impossible to become a top-flight dancer through learning MJ alone - most of the great dancers you see in MJ will have done one or more other dance forms.

    As always, it depends what you want to achieve.


    That'll be the drivel from myself, Lory and Tiggerbabe then?

    Besides, I'm thirsty. Hurry up, Stewart...
    Imvho and I bow to your vastly superior knowledge regarding dancing:
    The 'uber' dance comment for me describes a dance form which is almost unrestricted and can evolve. Lindy for example is in a DNA back water - as is East Coast Swing. WCS is certainly more expansive however still constrained by certain conventions. In MJ there are few conventions to the form if you look at it in the round. (eg. when I asked one teacher about where he gets the moves from he referred to the 'Bible' then said - I threw that out ages ok - now I just make it up.....and he does it very well indeed).

    Oh and 50 years........hmmm well does dance form age matter so much? Again, to use the DNA analogy, MJ has just mutated to survive and thrive - and it seems to have a faster evolutionary path than other dance forms - fruit fly versus elephant?. It is interesting to see (on another thread) some discussion about change/development - even just in the last 12 months.......

    Yes - it depends what you want to achieve.......and how much you want to invest in that.

  15. #35
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northeastern Parts
    Posts
    5,221
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by JiveLad View Post
    Imvho and I bow to your vastly superior knowledge regarding dancing:
    The 'uber' dance comment for me describes a dance form which is almost unrestricted and can evolve. Lindy for example is in a DNA back water - as is East Coast Swing.
    Interesting you should say that, and I'm very curious as to how you formed that conclusion.

    I can't commend on ECS, never having even seen it, but having done MJ and Lindy for quite some years, my own feeling is quite the opposite. The sheer versatility and adaptability of Lindy is breathtaking, while these days, I find MJ to be far more limiting. Still a lot of fun, in the right circumstances, but lacking the building blocks / tools that I need to truly dance as freely as I'd like.

  16. #36
    Registered User FirstMove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    r=1-sin(wt)
    Posts
    1,301
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    I don't know if any of you did the "UK Smooth" classes at Southport June 2007, but these taught moves and techniques that were all from WCS minus triple steps (MTS). The essence of the lessons seemed to be that if you want to get better at MJ, you should dance WCS(MTS), e.g. slotted, connected, smooth ... in which case good MJ is a subset of WCS.

  17. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Cruden Bay (Aberde
    Posts
    7,053
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    2c.

    I expressed the opinion several years ago that MJ had the potential to be the "uber" dance style: no boundaries. The only rule is you don't injure your partner.

    Personally I find any dance style that prescribes exact footwork and/or patterns to be limiting simply because you can't deviate from these.
    If you are "good enough" to actually deviate from the patterns and footwork, then what's the difference between what you are doing when you deviate and an equally "good enough" person dancing MJ?

    Is Ceroc WCS in disguise? Nope - Unless Salsa is too. And Waltz. And AT. If you flip your thinking, all the other dance styles are sub-sets of MJ :
    MJ is simply a lead and follow partner dance. As soon as you start imposing other definitions, music structure, footwork patterns, limiting to specific holds and movements, then it becomes another dance. (Ceroc being a subset of MJ too )

    WCS is in my opinion very close to line dancing; set patterns to be selected as the music takes you.

  18. #38
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    St. Albans
    Posts
    2,388
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by straycat264 View Post
    Interesting you should say that, and I'm very curious as to how you formed that conclusion.

    I can't commend on ECS, never having even seen it, but having done MJ and Lindy for quite some years, my own feeling is quite the opposite. The sheer versatility and adaptability of Lindy is breathtaking, while these days, I find MJ to be far more limiting. Still a lot of fun, in the right circumstances, but lacking the building blocks / tools that I need to truly dance as freely as I'd like.
    I formed this conclusion after experiences of Lindy/ECS in the USA and more recently in Sweden. It just seemed so limited: the music in both locations was of a certain stlye/genre and BPM - which provides the initial limitation. The next things I picked up quite rapidly was that even with experienced dancers there was just a subset of moves and 'styles' which could be applied.

    Now - don't get me wrong - to watch great Lindy in action - as I did - including some mind blowing exhibition stuff, is amazing - and breathtaking at times - and sometimes wild (eg. in freestyle, using all the furniture in the dance hall - great stuff). Ultimately though, both in Sweden and the USA I felt it was stuck in a time warp - and never gong to evolve to enable you to dance to say a modern 130bpm track which might be standard fare at MJ.

    Anyway, that's just my opinion right now - I'm sure it will change as my personal experience deepens.

  19. #39
    Registered User timbp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    544
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by straycat264 View Post
    Interesting you should say that, and I'm very curious as to how you formed that conclusion.

    I can't commend on ECS, never having even seen it, but having done MJ and Lindy for quite some years, my own feeling is quite the opposite. The sheer versatility and adaptability of Lindy is breathtaking, while these days, I find MJ to be far more limiting. Still a lot of fun, in the right circumstances, but lacking the building blocks / tools that I need to truly dance as freely as I'd like.
    I don't think I have ever seen ECS danced. The few times I have seen Lindy danced it has always been to music of a particular style and era, and the dancers have been dressed to that era.
    (I accept that I was watching a performance, not a social; nevertheless, my reaction is to associate the dance with the costume and music when it was performed. When CMJ do performances at outside events, costume is "whatever you are comfortable dancing in" and music is 'current top40. and 'sometime in the past top40'. Overall impression: you can dance this to your favourite music wearing what you are now.)

    But the comment about a "DNA back water" to me suggests a fundamental misunderstanding of biology.
    Lindy may well have the adaptability to become the "uber-dance". Just because Lindy dancers prefer to perfect their skills in a limited environment does not mean they will not do well if drawn into a different environment.

    Ever heard of rabbits? Cute furry animals that everyone loves.
    Ever heard of rabbits in Australia: horrible creatures that everyone hates, because they are destroying both the natural Australian environment and the pastoral farming/grazing environment we have tried to introduce.

    Rabbits are fine (and cute) where they belong. But elsewhere they take over and force everyone else out. And they bounce (kangaroos do not bounce -- they leap "along" where they are going).

  20. #40
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Northeastern Parts
    Posts
    5,221
    Rep Power
    14

    Re: Is Ceroc now just WCS in disguise ?

    Quote Originally Posted by JiveLad View Post
    I formed this conclusion after experiences of Lindy/ECS in the USA and more recently in Sweden. It just seemed so limited: the music in both locations was of a certain stlye/genre and BPM - which provides the initial limitation. The next things I picked up quite rapidly was that even with experienced dancers there was just a subset of moves and 'styles' which could be applied.
    Again, speaking just for Lindy - I think I do see how the perception can be formed, but it is very misleading. Lindy is generally danced to swing, sure, but the speeds can vary from (at one extreme) 50BPM, or even slower, up to (at the other) 250 or more (if you're good enough).

    'Subset' of moves... not really - the moves one can do are (within reason) only limited by ones imagination and dance ability - much like MJ (except that Lindy is much more geared towards improvisation & making moves up on the fly).

    Quote Originally Posted by JiveLad View Post
    Ultimately though, both in Sweden and the USA I felt it was stuck in a time warp - and never gong to evolve to enable you to dance to say a modern 130bpm track which might be standard fare at MJ.
    Mmmm. I think you can pretty much do Lindy to anything you could MJ to, and certainly the potential speed range is much much greater in Lindy. The question is whether you want to - I find comparatively little satisfaction these days in dancing to music that doesn't have at least some of the richness and complexity of good swing. Spoiled by too much good music - but that's a door which, once opened, can never be closed....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Does anyone actually pay to go to a Ceroc London Class?
    By cerebus636 in forum Let's talk about dance
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 2nd-April-2008, 10:50 PM
  2. Connection - AT, WCS, MJ etc
    By Ghost in forum The Land of a 1000 dances
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 26th-November-2007, 11:22 AM
  3. WCS or Tango?
    By Twirly in forum The Land of a 1000 dances
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 31st-August-2007, 04:17 PM
  4. Blues and Ceroc
    By Dallen in forum Intermediate Corner
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 18th-May-2007, 06:52 PM
  5. Ceroc US Page
    By killingtime in forum Social events
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 18th-May-2007, 06:13 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •