I believe the fundamental problem lies in what this sentence actually means. Specifically that it means different things to different people.
I think a lot of people who hear traditional tango music for the first time just hear chaos. The rhythm keeps shifting, apparently randomly. And if you take the view that tango is a collection of "moves", boleos, ganchos etc, then it's perfectly reasonable to say you can tango to anything.
Unfortunately that also means that if someone taught an aerobics class and only used tango moves, they too could claim to be doing tango.
However it turns out that there actually is a structure to tango. Both in the way it's composed, played and danced. As David said there's a symbiosis and evolution between them. And there's a structure within that structure. And a structure within that structure. And so on a la Inception
So to someone who knows say four structures down, if the music that is being played only has the first structure, then they can quite reasonably say that they can't tango to it. Whereas someone who's not aware of any structures or only the first one can rightly claim that they can.
This is particularly true if you include the word "dance". Try doing Ceroc but without stepping on an actual beat. You can do it, but it'll probably torque your wa enough that what you're doing stops being "dancing" and becomes mental gymnastics.
To further confuse things, as there's no Supreme Ultimate Draconion Authority in tango (although there's a few people trying for the position!) if people want to redefine the structures then they can eg nuevo. For example in traditional music the rhythm is played with the note of an instrument. Changing this to a drum beat will make it shorter and that in turn then needs a different convention as you no longer have the same length of time for that part of the step.
So whether the clip you mention is actually tango depends on your definition. What complicates things in tango is that the definition of the structures seem to be passed on by osmosis with better dancers or one-to-one, rather than written down in a Big Book of Rules. I suspect this is simply because the increasing complexity just doesn't lend itself well to text, or indeed quick explanations "You won't understand what I'm talking about for another 5 years or so" isn't really an answer a lot of people want to hear. But it's a mistake to assume that because it's not blatantly jumping up and down it doesn't exist.
This was kind of my origional point though, Tango, Salsa, Ballroom, WCS, Lindy, 2 Step, WCS etc etc all have a basic structure. A structure that you can play about with in some cases, but still a structure.
If you fall out of that structure or fall in to another, then you are no longer doing that dance.
With MJ there is no defined, clear structure. What one teacher teaches, may be the complete opposite to what another teaches. Even differences within organisiations.
Nowhere is there anything stating exactly what Modern Jive is and no single person is expert enough to give a definition of it's structure.
So with no structure, can you say MJ is a single dance? Surely if you are leading a mambo step then you are dancing mambo, then if you follow that by leading an ocho, you are doing tango. Just mashing it all up together to get MJ.
Of course you can have a connected and 'zoned' dance in any style but it depends on what your definition of 'in the zone' is. I described cadence of breath and heartbeat and you simply cannot feel that unless your in close and IMO opinion there is no better way to tell if your partner is in total sync with you..
Ok, so what I've noticed is that just because I've expressed an opinion that some WCS dancers don't like it is assumed that 1.) I don't know what I'm talking about and 2.) I must hate WCS dancers, music and everything that it stands for - so let's put that to bed shall we..
Firstly, I didn't want this to become a willy waving contest but as my knowledge of WCS has been brought into question, let me inform you of my background in the dance.
I have had private lessons with Paul, Cat, Brent & Kellese, Kyle and Sarah and Jason Colicino. I have attended WCS workshops and freestyles and have even taught a WCS beginners class. I have DJed pure WCS slots at numerous events and have exchanged music with the top WCS DJ's in the US - I have also even been asked to DJ at some US WCS weekend events.
In addition whilst B&K and Jason have been over they have stayed with us and I have had the opportunity to discuss at length their view on the pros and cons of WCS.
Further, as co-creator of Utopia, I believe we, more than any other organization, have done more to create events where EVERYBODY can dance and in any style they want to. We have run WCS classes, coasting classes and slotted jive classes and have therefore done more to showcase WCS dancers by virtue of them attending our events than any other Jive based organization in the UK.
My only reason for not developing my pure WCS lead is that with all the classes, workshops and freestyle we run I simply don't have the time to devote to freestyling it.
Based on the above I think you'll find that I do understand the structure and philsophy of the dance and do understand the music. I also believe that WCS is a beautiful (but IMO a limited) dance style and have no hesitation in saying that IMO learning WCS does improve people's dancing.
So put that in your pipe and triple step up and down it..
Well, I don't have to go and figure because it's entirely obvious.. follows are never going to say after a dance 'thanks, but you may enjoyed that but it was a bit average for me' are they?? And secondly, who in their right mind given some of the sniping on this thread and in general on this Forum are going to put their head above the parapet and have it 'whipped' off??
Go figure indeed..
I thought I had explained it, but anyway let me try again..
In MJ you can develop your style by learning the basic structure of other dances so that you can integrate it into your dancing. As a teacher I continually do this to improve my teaching, and as a dancer I do this so that I can offer some variety in how my follow experiences the dance.
On this basis if I dance with the same follow to a series of tracks with different musical 'feels' every dance would be different. If it were a fast swing track I would be softer in the knees, use more rock steps in my footwork, more momentum in the moves I lead and keep my partner closer so that we can both respond more quickly. If it were a Latin based track, I would stand more upright and use a more structured frame and lead some cha cha and mambo steps whilst also concentrating on moves that have a more fluid structure. If it were a WCS based track I would triple step and slot more as well as using more in the way of whip based moves and double time spins. If it were an MJ based track I would be more inclined to follow my partners circular motion, use more complex arm movements and smile more. And finally, if it were a Blues based track I would use more closs hold, more caress and veil type moves and develop more intimacy in the dance.
In other words I change my style and and the attitude of my body, footwork, moves and lead to match as closely as I can (with my limited ability) the genre of the music being played.
Now tell me, how many people do that in WCS?
I will accept that not many people do it in MJ either, but the whole point of what I've been saying is that it IS taught in MJ. It's an open structure and there are countless workshops both locally and on weekenders where it is positively encouraged to embrace the tenets of other dance styles to become a more musical and giving lead.
And I can count on the foot of a three toed sloth how many WCS classes I've seen that encompass the concept of embracing other styles. And in fact I would go so far as to say that the ONLY ones I've seen have been on Ceroc weekenders where we have physically requested that those teachers try and teach a fusion WCS class...
Me, because obviously I am..
Really? But you keep telling me it's a rapidly growing market and that the gap between the choice and spread of classes is closing in on MJ..
Seriously though, if money was the only driver for being a dance teacher and event organizer I'm sure most of us would have given it up years ago.
No it wasn't - your point was that WCS was a "real dance" because it was tied to the music, whereas MJ was an "artificial dance" because it was not.
And my rebuttal was that your argument is rubbish - both WCS and MJ are clearly only loosely-tied to the music. So either both are "real", or both are "artificial".
I've no idea how consistent WCS classes are, but I can tell you that there's far more consistency in MJ teaching than in Salsa or Tango teaching, so that, again, is rubbish.
I never mentioned music, I was talking about the structure. It was Rocky who mentioned music. Re-read.
Again, I was not talking about the music.
But I bet they teach the same structure ie the basics are the same.
so answer this, if you went to a MJ class on an MJ night with an MJ teacher and MJ DJ with an MJ dance partner, would you still be doing MJ if you had a whole dance of doing mambo's to a latin track?
Again, everyone thinks they have the prettiest wife at home.
LOL. It's not because you expressed an opinion, it's because you expressed an opinion other people thought was fundamentally wrong. Lets not get all paranoid .
Well, no one said anything about making comments to support your claim immediately after a dance! .
So firstly, I've had many conversations that have touched on followers likes and dislikes, both in MJ and WCS, and I refuse to believe you've never touched upon this in MJ conversations at least. Never once, as I said, has any WCS follower said to me anything even remotely resembling "I would like more mix and match in my dances". That's all I was saying.
And secondly, it's part of a leads job to know his followers likes and dislikes. For example, even beginner MJ leads mostly pick up pretty quick that a lot of follows don't like 'windmill' type moves. Albeit it gets more subtle as the standard goes up, but I defy you to find one good lead who isn't aware on some level of his followers likes and dislikes ? I don't truly believe you think it isn't discussed. Hence my point stands, how WCS leads don't steal enough from other dances is just not a hot topic of debate amongst WCS followers.
Probably, and again I come back to this, because WCS isn't MJ Blues.
Ah, that's not really fair now is it ? Seems some followers did come on to disagree with you. After all, you've been known to whip off a few heads, and they didn't seem to mind your sniping did they ?
This is the point I was making, you can't claim some long time dancing advanced people at the top of the MJ tree do it, then claim WCS is a limited dance because Mr and Mrs WCS Joe average at your freestyles can't dance like Tatiana Mollmann.
I mean, you really think this is "stepping thru the moves" or "musically limited", or "has no variety" ?|?|?|?|? I know you don't. So your point is that not so experienced WCS dancers don't "vary" it enough or maybe "step thru the moves", fair enough but hardly surprizing that lesser mortals learning a hard dance haven't quite reached these heights.
Faint heart never won fair lady.
Good point. But it's quite telling that you're not even considering the music... Your "real" / "artificial" divide seems to be based on an incorrect set of assumptions about MJ dance style, and in fact an incorrect set of assumptions about what a dance style actually is.
Do they hell. Salsa and Tango classes are, shall we say, "varied"...
If by "latin track" you mean "track with a Latin flavour but a pop beat" - that is, the only sort of "latin track" played at MJ events, then yes.
MJ with a Latin "accent", but MJ, because fundamentally that fits the musical structure.
Actually, I do...
Umm... paranoid is when you think someone is saying something about you. When they actually say it, that's not paranoid it's dealing with the issue they have raised. Hope that's cleared that up for you?
They maybe just don't want to hurt your feelings, but it doesn't mean they're not thinking it... don't worry about it though, I don't want to make you paranoid...
Hmmm... so you can steal the entire dance from Lindy and dumb it down, you can steal from Shag, you can steal from Hustle, you can steal from Line Dancing... sorry, what was your point again?
One actually... what is it with you WCS dancers and exagerration?? You'll be telling me WCS is a real dance next..
And as regards sniping: the people who I have sniped back at started it - you wait 'til I get my Dad onto them... no wait, he's dead..
I can claim anything I like as long as I can back it up with facts. It's irrelevant what MJers do - the fact is they are given the opportunity to learn about other dance styles to integrate into their dancing to make them more accomplished dancers. And the fact is that doesn't seem to happen much, if at all, in WCS.
No, it's great (although as much as I love Keeks, I don't think the dance was a good as I imagined it could be.. I blame the lead..) And again, it's not the point! Average MJers are shown how to integrate other styles into their dancing, and WCS dancers aren't. Good grief, I mean we're even teaching mambo steps and throw out moves in the beginners class now ...
Well, I don't know what you actually meant by that.. but faint heart could easily win a fair lady with no heart at all.
Hmmm..... a fair lady with no heart... now, what dance does that remind me of?
Last edited by Rocky; 30th-March-2011 at 06:47 PM.
Sure, you can. Most people don't though, and your average dancer probably doesn't even want to either.
I think you're limiting your observations only to the most serious MJ dancers. That's fine, but I don't think it's fair to compare what they do with almost every WCS dancer. You've stressed multiple times that you're not talking about every WCS dancer, and even specified Robd (one of the more serious WCS dancers out there unless I miss my guess) as not being a representation of the approach you're criticizing. Why the imbalance?
Yay!On this basis if I dance with the same follow to a series of tracks with different musical 'feels' every dance would be different. If it were a fast swing track I would be softer in the knees, use more rock steps in my footwork, more momentum in the moves I lead and keep my partner closer so that we can both respond more quickly. If it were a Latin based track, I would stand more upright and use a more structured frame and lead some cha cha and mambo steps whilst also concentrating on moves that have a more fluid structure. If it were a WCS based track I would triple step and slot more as well as using more in the way of whip based moves and double time spins. If it were an MJ based track I would be more inclined to follow my partners circular motion, use more complex arm movements and smile more. And finally, if it were a Blues based track I would use more closs hold, more caress and veil type moves and develop more intimacy in the dance.
In other words I change my style and and the attitude of my body, footwork, moves and lead to match as closely as I can (with my limited ability) the genre of the music being played.
I suspect quite a few, if you're looking at the bigger picture.Now tell me, how many people do that in WCS?
OK, here's where it get's a little more contentious.I will accept that not many people do it in MJ either, but the whole point of what I've been saying is that it IS taught in MJ. It's an open structure and there are countless workshops both locally and on weekenders where it is positively encouraged to embrace the tenets of other dance styles to become a more musical and giving lead.
And I can count on the foot of a three toed sloth how many WCS classes I've seen that encompass the concept of embracing other styles. And in fact I would go so far as to say that the ONLY ones I've seen have been on Ceroc weekenders where we have physically requested that those teachers try and teach a fusion WCS class...
Firstly, every WCS I've been to has had workshops on modifying your dancing to suit the music in question. The difference is that in general they aren't so interested in copying some other dances style to do that. And why should they be? If you want to dance in a distinct latin style to latin music, it makes a lot of sense to learn to dance an appropriate latin dance. Likewise, despite the name I didn't choose to learn WCS so I could dance in an appropriate style to big band music from the earlier half of last century.
It seems to me that in other social dancing scenes where there is a wide variety of music played, the dancers generally do dance multiple dances. The Ballroom scene has god-knows-how many dances under it's banner for example. When I was last in the USA I visited a few country and western bars and everybody there seemed to be able to dance WCS as well as NC2Step, County 2 Step and know half a dozen different line dances. Salsa often encompasses Bachata and Merengue as well. MJ takes a different approach.
I appreciate that what you're arguing is that MJ encourages copying other styles to achieve some degree of musicality. WCS doesn't discourage it, it just doesn't make a big deal out of it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks