Is Modern Jive an "uber-dance" that contains all the others?

[MartinHarper]

I hear people say that all partner dances are merely subsets of Modern Jive. In this view, Modern Jive is the "uber-dance" that straddles all those dances, containing all their moves, incorporating all their footwork, and danced to all their music.

Are they right?

[StokeBloke]

No. I can't see how this can possibly be true. Take Tango as an example - there maybe some moves you can do in MJ that ape the Tango style. But to say that there is any similarity between the two disciplines beyond the move being a similar shape is crazy talk! What have they been feeding you in America?
As for all their music, have you seen MJ 'danced' to Candyman

Uber-Dance... great phrase and worth a thread just to say it

[MartinHarper]

What have they been feeding you in America?

Nah, this is a UK thing. Here's a few recent examples:

Loosely speaking, you might think of WCS as a strict subset of MJ, as pretty much everything you can do in WCS can be done in the framework of MJ.

WCS is a subset of MJ (which imho is the 'uber' dance - above ALL others).

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...

[Lory]

Its possible but I don't think the average MJ'er utilizes the freedom MJ offers to this degree (YET)

As I said in my other post.. I do believe that it's possible to add a 'flavour' of a lot of other dance styles within the framework of MJ.

Because of the lack of constriction to conform to a certain set of 'styling' and 'timing' rules, one can incorporate the essence of a lot of other styles, to gain an appropriate feeling to go with lots of different genre's of music.

MJ is like a big melting pot of all other styles and trends and I think this is a pretty unique quality, one that's under rated IMO

[Franck]

No. I can't see how this can possibly be true. Take Tango as an example - there maybe some moves you can do in MJ that ape the Tango style. But to say that there is any similarity between the two disciplines beyond the move being a similar shape is crazy talk!

Maybe not as crazy as you would think. Having spent some time teaching MJ (coming up to 15 years), learning techniques from Argentinian Tango, Ballroom and others, I have come to realise that MJ gives me the loose framework where all those techniques can be fitted in and used to great effect.
This is not about 'aping' any moves, this is about learning great connection, musical footwork and control, opening up new shapes, introducing progressive patterns, Using body leads / arm (and other body parts) leads / visual leads and much more.
Each dance have developed a set of rules to fit its origins, but is ultimately limited by the original rules. MJ is fairly unique in having no rules and still being in early development, it offers the opportunity and as Lory says, the potential to become an Uber dance with all encompassing technique.

Its possible but I don't think the average MJ'er utilizes the freedom MJ offers to this degree (YET)

Absolutely, we're a long way from seeing this happen at the moment (especially on a national scale), but from where I'm standing, and seeing the progress made by MJ dancers, I'm catching glimpses of it already.

MJ is like a big melting pot of all other styles and trends and I think this is a pretty unique quality, one that's under rated IMO

That's exactly my point, and I have experienced the intensity of Tango, the smooth musical connection of WCS within MJ...

[Marc Forster]

Its possible but I don't think the average MJ'er utilizes the freedom MJ offers to this degree (YET)

As I said in my other post.. I do believe that it's possible to add a 'flavour' of a lot of other dance styles within the framework of MJ.

Because of the lack of constriction to conform to a certain set of 'styling' and 'timing' rules, one can incorporate the essence of a lot of other styles, to gain an appropriate feeling to go with lots of different genre's of music.

MJ is like a big melting pot of all other styles and trends and I think this is a pretty unique quality, one that's under rated IMO

From a DJ's perspective, the scope of music now stretches over so many different genres to accommodate the talent of the dancers. It's not uncommon to touch upon say a pure Argentine Tango or a pure West Coast track when the room calls for it.

With Tango in particular, the skilled dancers help set the mood and you can see and feel the MJ'ers mimicking the timing and picking up on the emotion.

With more teachers concentrating on technique, this points the way to a higher standard of lead and follow, enabling individuals to separate movement from style.

[David Bailey]

Are they right?

Nope, wronger than a very wrong person in the land of Wrong.

Maybe not as crazy as you would think.

Hmmm, still pretty crazy though.

Having spent some time teaching MJ (coming up to 15 years), learning techniques from Argentinian Tango, Ballroom and others, I have come to realise that MJ gives me the loose framework where all those techniques can be fitted in and used to great effect.

Yes, I think most of us would agree with this. MJ is clearly loose enough to use some techniques and ideas from some similar dances in it. And Jango shows that - with a hell of a lot of work - it's barely possible for a few people to incorporate a fusion of AT into MJ in a dance.

But that's a long way from claiming that - for example - salsa is or can ever be a subset of MJ. It really isn't; at best there are some few styling techniques and the occasional move that can cross over. And as I've spent 10 years doing both dances, I think I can speak with some confidence on that one.

There's a massive difference between a melting-pot and a "superset".

[David Bailey]

With Tango in particular, the skilled dancers help set the mood and you can see and feel the MJ'ers mimicking the timing and picking up on the emotion.

Pah, if we let them, anyway :snooty AT icon:

Anyway, shouldn't you be off directing the next Bond movie, not wasting your time posting on the Forum?

[Franck]

Yes, I think most of us would agree with this. MJ is clearly loose enough to use some techniques and ideas from some similar dances in it. And Jango shows that - with a hell of a lot of work - it's barely possible for a few people to incorporate a fusion of AT into MJ in a dance.

Absolutely, to incorporate all dances would take way too much effort for any single person, but MJ as a dance concept is more inclusive. So I'm not saying that MJ dancers are Uber-dancers (though some are getting there), but that the dance itself, as a concept could become all inclusive.
Keeping entry levels low and allowing for a wide diversity of musical styles so that dancers could decide where to focus their efforts whilst still retaining a broad ability to dance to most styles.

But that's a long way from claiming that - for example - salsa is or can ever be a subset of MJ. It really isn't; at best there are some few styling techniques and the occasional move that can cross over. And as I've spent 10 years doing both dances, I think I can speak with some confidence on that one.

Well, surely Salsa isn't a proper dance anyway but seriously, Salsa might have become an Uber-dance had it not decided to narrow its musical scope so strictly.

[Gus]

Isn't Line Dancing the true Uber-Dance ... it can incorporate everything MJ does, plus solo dance plus more formal styles. (ODA of course)

[David Bailey]

Absolutely, to incorporate all dances would take way too much effort for any single person, but MJ as a dance concept is more inclusive. So I'm not saying that MJ dancers are Uber-dancers (though some are getting there), but that the dance itself, as a concept could become all inclusive.

Maybe, within certain limits imposed by tempo ranges - but it's about as far from trivial a task as you could imagine. Amir's spent years trying to fuse AT and MJ, and I reckon he's only about half there even now.

Also, being brutal about it, the standard of the best MJ dancers isn't up to the standard of the best dancers in other forms. And to get the standard of MJ dancers up to that level, you'd need things which MJ just doesn't have at the moment - assessments, qualifications, a formal MJ-wide framework, medals, meaningful competitions, and so on. Unless Ceroc is willing to sponsor such a change, which would mean talking to its competitors, then it just won't happen.

Well, surely Salsa isn't a proper dance anyway but seriously, Salsa might have become an Uber-dance had it not decided to narrow its musical scope so strictly.

Possibly - God knows most salsa music sounds the same - but salsa dnacing is typically more advanced than MJ, and it's been around for a similar amount of time (less time, in the UK, in fact). You could also argue that there's a whole family of salsa-like dances, ranging from Rumba thru cha-cha and bachata to club salsa proper, which can easily match the range of MJ variants.

[Gus]

Possibly - God knows most salsa music sounds the same - but salsa dnacing is typically more advanced than MJ, and it's been around for a similar amount of time (less time, in the UK, in fact).

Hold on ... aren't we missing the point. Historically the msuic came first and the dnace followed. Whether it be the jump dancing of the Masai warriors or Tango at Milongas ... the dance has developed to interpret the music, not the other way round.

This IS where MJ is different ... being the mongrel that it is it is more adaptive ... but it is wide and shallow (covers much, but without deep feeling) whereas dances like Tango and Salsa are narrow but deep (restricted in music, but wonderfully rich in how they interpret that music). N'est ce pas?

[StokeBloke]

This IS where MJ is different ... being the mongrel that it is it is more adaptive ... but it is wide and shallow (covers much, but without deep feeling) whereas dances like Tango and Salsa are narrow but deep (restricted in music, but wonderfully rich in how they interpret that music). N'est ce pas?

Because a dance style is able to absorb the techniques of other styles does not make it an uber-dance form. It just means that the structure of it is looser - this I think can be a good thing. There is a problem with this though, as a lead if you learn to incorporate ballroom moves/style into your MJ dancing you may find that many of your partners are unable to follow your extended-MJ due to the loose way that MJ follows are taught.

Remember that MJ is marketed as an 'easy' dance to learn. No need to learn about connection, musicality, breaks, footwork, tension or any of the other stuff that makes dancing 'hard'. Forty-five minutes is all you need to start dancing... etc etc

[straycat]

Hold on ... aren't we missing the point. Historically the msuic came first and the dnace followed. Whether it be the jump dancing of the Masai warriors or Tango at Milongas ... the dance has developed to interpret the music, not the other way round.

Well - actually - not necessarily. To my knowledge, tango music and the dance evolved together, with the music shaping the dance, and the dance shaping the music. Lindy and swing music had a similar mutual evolution, which is why each dance is so incredibly rich in musical interpretation - the music was always intended that way.

[Franck]

There is a problem with this though, as a lead if you learn to incorporate ballroom moves/style into your MJ dancing you may find that many of your partners are unable to follow your extended-MJ due to the loose way that MJ follows are taught.

This is a misunderstanding of the concept, you assume I'm talking about 'incorporating ballroom moves/style into MJ', this is not what makes MJ an Uber-dance.

My contention is that we can incorporate all the deep and basic techniques from other dances to develop the holy grail of technique that would suit any music or mood. This is a theoretical, possibly utopian vision, but one that I could see happen in the next 20 years.

Most dancers, as they reach the pinnacle of their discipline tend to give similar advice (regardless of the style of dance they started with), having learnt from many experts in each dance, the fundamental techniques are very similar, but somehow, they have to break through the limit of their chosen dance. I would like to keep MJ free of such limits and open to the fundamental techniques without the constraints of musical history (as Gus pointed out) or a background steeped into old traditions which should not be changed (according to purists).

This is not saying that MJ is in any way a superior dance, each dance is itself wonderful and the intensity of Tango for example can probably only be reached if you're prepared to take on the full journey, but it does feel like MJ is a toddler stumbling, getting patronising comments from well meaning older relatives, yet with careful nurturing, the toddler could grow to become very special indeed.

[Raul]

My contention is that we can incorporate all the deep and basic techniques from other dances to develop the holy grail of technique that would suit any music or mood. This is a theoretical, possibly utopian vision, but one that I could see happen in the next 20 years.

It is a utopian idea, not likely to ever happen. If you think of the number of years it takes to master each of these disciplines.

Jack of all trades, master of none.

Modern Jive an "uber-dance"? no more like a tossed salad. Good in itself but not the Compleat Meal by any means.

[Franck]

It is a utopian idea, not likely to ever happen. If you think of the number of years it takes to master each of these disciplines.

I'm not sure I follow your reasoning as to why it would never happen. Yes, it takes years to master good technique, but all of us have years, and are willing to spend the time.
My point is that each dance takes a different path to the same 'holy grail' of technique, but along the way, each path leaves its mark and blinkers on those that follow it. I'm suggesting MJ could offer a less narrow path to the same goal.

I appreciate that any path will leave marks and blinkers including MJ but I'm probably too close to see it.

[StokeBloke]

This is not saying that MJ is in any way a superior dance, each dance is itself wonderful and the intensity of Tango for example can probably only be reached if you're prepared to take on the full journey, but it does feel like MJ is a toddler stumbling, getting patronising comments from well meaning older relatives, yet with careful nurturing, the toddler could grow to become very special indeed.

I apologise if I misinterpereted your words. I have taken some time to ponder your reply. Much as I feel that analogy is overdone concerning dance to gain an explanation or an insight, please indulge me on this occasion. If we liken dance styles to different languages, it would seem as if you are saying that you can merge the romantics, the Teutonic, the Norse to build a hybrid - like English. Which given time to bloom can reach a point where there is vocabulary to cover pretty much any eventuality or emotion.

If this is the case then I can see the angle that you are looking at MJ in. A bastardisation that actually becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Will it still be modern jive though? Or will MJ be vacuumed up to form just a part of this new dance monster?

[Franck]

If we liken dance styles to different languages, it would seem as if you are saying that you can merge the romantics, the Teutonic, the Norse to build a hybrid - like English. Which given time to bloom can reach a point where there is vocabulary to cover pretty much any eventuality or emotion.

The analogy only works so far, but in essence yes. The main difference is that languages (whilst they might be sharing an original root) do not converge towards the same point, unlike partner dancing, where pretty much regardless of the path you choose, most experts of many years experience tend to come to the same conclusions / set of rules.
A bit like advanced linguists in any language might feel if they realised all along they could have communicated by pure thought, without the need for any language, grammatical rules or specific vocabulary.

If you could use the fundamental rules of partner dancing to achieve ultimate connection with your partner, being told you must dance in a slot to be a 'proper' dancer, might seem pretty trivial in comparison.

[Caro]

If we liken dance styles to different languages, it would seem as if you are saying that you can merge the romantics, the Teutonic, the Norse to build a hybrid - like English. Which given time to bloom can reach a point where there is vocabulary to cover pretty much any eventuality or emotion.

Ideally, it would be great to be able to use the expressions from the language that best fit a particular situation. The trouble is, you need other people to speak all those languages too to understand you (that happens all the time to me as sometimes I just wish I could speak both French and English in the same sentence - but it only works with other bilingual peeps...).

So in a dance context, you would need your partner to have the basic technique of all the dances you want to use to fit the music at a particular time... It is obviously easier for (decent) follows to follow something that relies on a technique from a dance they have never done than for leaders to lead it. A great example of that is Paul F... he constantly uses techniques from various dances, ballroom, wcs, MJ and master them to such a degree that you can follow (some) of it with no previous experience of the dance in question.

Yes you could argue that ultimately, it doesn't matter if you've never done the dance as all techniques should in theory allow you to sharpen your lead and follow to a degree that would allow you total freedom... in practice though, I struggle to see that happening... but again, this could only be a reflection of my own limitations.