Before we get into this, yet again, can you define what you mean by "hijacking"?
Last time we discussed this, we found that people had different definitions of that term.
Leaders – I love being hijacked on every move I lead
Leaders – I like being hijacked but not excessively
Leaders – The odd hijack keeps me on my toes
Leaders – The odd hijack slightly annoys me
Leaders – Constant hijacking is annoying
Leaders – I hate being hijacked on every move I lead
Leaders – For me I think it can be dangerous
Followers - I love hijacking on every move
Followers – I like to hijacking moves occasionally
Followers – I never hijack as I don’t like to
Followers – For me I think it can be dangerous
I’m keeping stum on this issue for the moment…(I’ll reply later)...
Before we get into this, yet again, can you define what you mean by "hijacking"?
Last time we discussed this, we found that people had different definitions of that term.
Hijacking is one of those things where it will work with some people you dance with and not with others.
As a lead I dont mind being hijacked, but only because I can cope with it. There are many men that can't deal with a follow hijacking and therfore will hate it or just wonder what the follow is doing.
I, in follow mode, will hijack some moves, depending on who I am dancing with and if the music dictates.
Something I always hear in class is that MJ is a man lead dance. This is wrong IMO, it's a man suggested dance. The follow should have just as much control over what is happening as the follow.
Sorry, but that's still not very precise. That definition covers the entire spectrum of follower stylistic interpretation, from "playing", all the way up to "sabotage".
Obviously, there is a spectrum here - and different people have different tolerances / predilections at different areas.
So are you calling the entire range "hijacking", or just a subset of that range?
A couple of recent threads in this area:
- http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/i...tion-play.html
- http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/l...l-dancing.html
And another good one:
http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/i...nitiative.html
Last edited by David Bailey; 5th-February-2008 at 05:08 PM.
I am assuming that Mr666 was is meaning Sabotage rather than what most people would call hijacking.
Say two men were dancing, both could lead/follow and then one took over control of the lead for an indefinate period by, say, turning a basket which he is lead in to, in to an octopus which he leads, I would define that as hijacking.
If a follow was to alter the leads intention with a move, by say, ducking when pulled in to a basket (sometimes called a tunnel) but allowed the lead to maintain control, I would define that as sabotage.
I hate that word 'highjacking' or 'sabotaging'.
I don't highjack, I contribute to the dance, musically where possible.
Sometimes it means that I can change the timing of a move a little, or the shape of it. Mostly it happens smoothly, but that takes experience (hence some have to put up with not-so-smooth experimentations at times... well, sorry, but it'll get better )
If I'd had to follow only and not add/change anything, I'd have the impression to be a robot. Not what dancing is about to me.
As I said earlier, It should only be a man sugested dance, at least once the dancers are past a certain level.
For me it is one of the things that makes a good dancer rather than just going through the moves learnt in class systematicly with the follower just plodding along.
Infact I think it would be impossible for a follow to inject any musicality in to a dance without altering a leads move one way or another be it in the timing, shape or any other way.
If all follows danced the same then us men would have the same dances with every follow we lead.
I thought hijacking refered to taking someone else's partner, and maybe giving them your cast off in return
Sure.
It's really really bad. Don't do it.
Oh, OK. See here:
http://www.cerocscotland.com/forum/i...-sabotage.html
I've not changed my mind since then.
Last edited by David Bailey; 5th-February-2008 at 05:40 PM.
Clearly too much can be bad and annoying, but a little is fun and keeps people on their toes. Whether you like it or not is fair enough, but what annoys me is if you do a variation on a move and the guy just repeats it until you do it "His way". To me, this is not dancing with somebody but sticking with a fixed, unflexible routine.
from this 'here' place:
Have to disagree here... when done well, sabotage can be fantastic. YES - it's hard to do it well, (and it's definitely best done with a leader who's up for it), but it can add a great dynanmic to a dance.
Nicest example someone's sprung on me was in Leeds recently - I'd led some kind of underarm turn which involved me turning in some way as well - and before I new it, my partner had used her momentum and mine to continue my turn, turned me under her arm, and took the lead over for a few bars. The whole thing felt completely natural, went perfectly with the music, and reminded me a) just how seamless and how much fun a good piece of sabotage can be, and b) that she's a better lead than I am.
Yes, do it, sez I. Just do it carefully, and avoid doing it with DJ if he hasn't taken his pills that day (if he starts pulling 'funny' faces at you during a dance, sabotage away )
I think it's quite fun if the follower does something interesting and unexpected, although I've only really experienced the two extremes:
1) A lady I've danced with a couple of times who has quite a 'street' style and does things like duck out of moves and things. It's fun because it keeps you on your toes and makes the dance more of a two way discussion. It's almost like when a couple of english friends have conversations in french for fun (or maybe I just have a strange sense of fun).
2) Another lady I've danced with a bit insists on slowly and 'seductively' walking in a circle under my arm every second return I lead. This would be fine except it gets a bit boring after a while, and I stop trying to keep dancing, sigh and just wait for her to finish 'her thing'.
So I guess my thoughts are: ça depend...
Dan
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks