88  Assuming steps/importance of connection

Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 19:19:49 -0800
From: Dan Boccia <redfox@ALASKA.NET>
Subject: Assuming steps/importance of connection

Steve wrote:
{".......If both partners know what pattern they are to reproduce, a lack of
balance or other lead and follow skills are less of an obstacle to the
appearance of learning. Students have the impression that they have learned
some new dance steps whether or not they have the requisite lead and follow
skills to dance well.
Fabian Salas is a particular genius at teaching tango because he designs
step combinations to teach his students that will only work if the students
develop the proper leading and following techniques."}


I totally agree. If instructors choose to teach with patterns, which I
think is perfectly valid, it is very beneficial to the students if the
patterns are chosen to highlight a particular technique, musicality concept,
etc. Then the technique can be focused on during class. I'm a social
dancer and as such, my measure of progress is the ability to dance
comfortably and musically with a wide variety of people who dance different
styles and have different levels of experience with the dance. Thus, I feel
better served in a class where we work on technique with several different
partners than I do just trying to get through a pattern, assuming steps.
Assuming steps ruins the process of learning improvisational dance.
Connection is the holy grail of social dancing for me. When I have a great
night, I think of how well I connected with my partners and the music. If I
have an off night, I think of how I wasn't connecting well with my partners,
or even myself for that matter, or the music. I rarely remember what steps
I dance, and I forget them as soon as I do them. If I can connect with
someone, we can dance, regardless of our respective experience. And
connection doesn't come verbally, especially at a milonga!
Happy connections!

Dan

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:40:40 -0500
From: "Melanie Eskoff" <melanieeskoff@austin.rr.com>
Subject: [Tango-L] connection
To: <tango-l@mit.edu>

Michael wrote: " My observation, not based on scientific sampling, is that those who dance close are more interested in connection and those that dance open seem to be more interested in figures."

Open (which dosen't mean arms length) salon is only danced well when the connection is paramount to both partners. Frame and connection are exactly the elements that make figures really work, otherwise they fall apart, literally and physically. I would say that open requires more connection, not less. The connection required is not as blatant as close dancing and not easy, but well worth the effort.

Connection and communication in dance is not just a product of greater square inches of body contact.

ME

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 13:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Trini y Sean \(PATangoS\)" <patangos@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] connection

Nicely put Melanie. Too bad that the close embrace
commandos* will argue that they are talking about an
emotional connection rather than a physical connection, and
they can not comprehend that an emotional connection is
possible at any distance. (And maybe for them, they really
can't manage it.)

*I dance close embrace because I like it, not for religious
fervor. But when it's over 75 degrees at the milonga, I
dance wide open salon, with at least 6" of breathing room
between our chests. And when I'm dancing with a really
good, creative dancer, then I'll dance that freaky nuevo
stuff.

Sean

--- Melanie Eskoff <melanieeskoff@austin.rr.com> wrote:

Open (which dosen't mean arms length) salon is only danced
well when the connection is paramount to both partners.
Frame and connection are exactly the elements that make
figures really work, otherwise they fall apart, literally
and physically. I would say that open requires more
connection, not less. The connection required is not as
blatant as close dancing and not easy, but well worth the
effort.

Connection and communication in dance is not just a product
of greater square inches of body contact.

ME


PATangoS - Pittsburgh Argentine Tango Society
Our Mission: To make Argentine Tango Pittsburgh's most popular social dance.
http://www.pitt.edu/~mcph/PATangoWeb.htm

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 14:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: steve pastor <tang0man2005@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] connection
To: "Trini y Sean \(PATangoS\)" <patangos@yahoo.com>, Tango-L

Well, I don't consider myself to be a close embrace commando (maybe I am), but I
prefer much more than an emotional connection. And I prefer that the connection be
through my torso rather than my arms and shoulders, or the ether.


"Trini y Sean (PATangoS)" <patangos@yahoo.com> wrote:
Nicely put Melanie. Too bad that the close embrace
commandos* will argue that they are talking about an
emotional connection rather than a physical connection, and
they can not comprehend that an emotional connection is
possible at any distance. (And maybe for them, they really
can't manage it.)

*I dance close embrace because I like it, not for religious
fervor. But when it's over 75 degrees at the milonga, I
dance wide open salon, with at least 6" of breathing room
between our chests. And when I'm dancing with a really
good, creative dancer, then I'll dance that freaky nuevo
stuff.

Sean

--- Melanie Eskoff wrote:

Open (which dosen't mean arms length) salon is only danced
well when the connection is paramount to both partners.
Frame and connection are exactly the elements that make
figures really work, otherwise they fall apart, literally
and physically. I would say that open requires more
connection, not less. The connection required is not as
blatant as close dancing and not easy, but well worth the
effort.

Connection and communication in dance is not just a product
of greater square inches of body contact.

ME


PATangoS - Pittsburgh Argentine Tango Society
Our Mission: To make Argentine Tango Pittsburgh's most popular social dance.
http://www.pitt.edu/~mcph/PATangoWeb.htm

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 16:19:27 -0500
From: "Ron Weigel" <tango.society@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] connection
To: "Trini y Sean (PATangoS)" <patangos@yahoo.com>
Cc: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>
<cff24c340607191419w96ef84dq6223b6d688896c09@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/19/06, Trini y Sean (PATangoS) <patangos@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Nicely put Melanie. Too bad that the close embrace
> commandos* will argue that they are talking about an
> emotional connection rather than a physical connection, and
> they can not comprehend that an emotional connection is
> possible at any distance. (And maybe for them, they really
> can't manage it.)

Indeed we will, Sean.

When we commandos dance chest-to-chest, cheek-to-cheek, our heartbeat
and breathing become one, and the sweat dripping down our cheeks mix,
and I can be enveloped by the scent of her perfume. Assuming we are
both well-bathed and the perfume has an attractive rather than
overwhleming scent, this is quite a sensual mix. It's what makes tango
a really unique dance (although I have seen some Latinos do some
pretty hot merengue and bachata).

Can't get that sensual mix with open embrace.

Commando Ron

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 17:32:26 -0400
From: "WHITE 95 R" <white95r@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] connection

>From: "Trini y Sean (PATangoS)" <patangos@yahoo.com>

>Nicely put Melanie. Too bad that the close embrace
>commandos* will argue that they are talking about an
>emotional connection rather than a physical connection, and
>they can not comprehend that an emotional connection is
>possible at any distance. (And maybe for them, they really
>can't manage it.)

Out of sight out of mind? ;-)

>*I dance close embrace because I like it, not for religious
>fervor. But when it's over 75 degrees at the milonga, I
>dance wide open salon, with at least 6" of breathing room
>between our chests. And when I'm dancing with a really
>good, creative dancer, then I'll dance that freaky nuevo
>stuff.

You are right about dancing with excellent, skilled dancers. It's a real and
rare pleasure to play and experiment with the right partner. I'm basically a
social dancer although my wife (and tango partner) and I perform in all
sorts of occasions. I can dance all sorts of neat, more elaborate steps and
movements with her even during milongas because we have a lot of experience
dancing and exercise control as well as consideration for other dancers. I
also dance "open" with Gaby, our partner in Tango Rio as well as with other
dancers who can actually dance like that.

Generally, I dance in a very rhythmic style and with a very close embrace.
It's very enjoyable and easier to dance. Also with lots of dancers, there is
not much of an option because they can only dance a simple (albeit perfectly
good) close embrace. I had the good fortune to dance with several
outstanding women over this past weekend and it was awesome to dance so
creatively and playfully. This kind of "open" embrace (I hate that label :P)
is just phenomenal with the right partner. It's a fantastic experience which
requires a totally concentrated connection to one's partner as well as the
other people in the dance floor. To say that only a close embrace embodies
"connection" is just plain wrong. Only a person who has not danced in a more
flexible, creative, enjoyable manner could say that and truly believe it.

I think the hatred that some people exhibit against those who do not dance
exclusively the apilado style, probably comes from experiencing the rude,
inconsiderate and hostile/aggressive dancers who populate certain milongas.
IMHO, these people are not the exponent or example of "open" dancing. They
are just very selfish people who are showoffs and jerks. Although some of
them seem to have reasonably good command of their steps and the floor, they
are not social dancers, but rather anti-social dancers. Although most appear
to use more "showy" figures, they just misuse the basic tango steps. There
are also some of the apilado persuasion who are obstacles or misguided
missiles on the dance floor. Dance style is independent of temperament and
does not indicate who's a jerk and who isn't. That's a subject for a
different topic.

Sincerely,

Manuel

Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:00:02 +0200
From: Alexis Cousein <al@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] connection
To: Ron Weigel <tango.society@gmail.com>
Cc: "Trini y Sean \(PATangoS\)" <patangos@yahoo.com>, Tango-L
<tango-l@mit.edu>

Ron Weigel wrote:

>
> Can't get that sensual mix with open embrace.
>

That's what *you* think. How about dancing close in an open
embrace?

--
Alexis Cousein al@sgi.com
Solutions Architect/Senior Systems Engineer SGI
--
Bad grammar makes me [sic].

Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:37:54 -0700
From: "Darrell Sanchez" <darsan@mindspring.com>
Subject: [Tango-L] step
To: "'Tango-L'" <tango-l@mit.edu>

>6. The stationary-step thing remains a topic of interest to me. Anyone
>wanna pick that one up?
>
>Jake Spatz
>DC
>

I don't want to get too involved in this analysis but you posed a
question a few emails back asking what is a step. The term "stationary step"
seems to me a confusing oxymoron. Consider the following definitions for the
word step:

step (stp)
n.
1.
a. The single complete movement of raising one foot and putting it down in
another spot, as in walking.
b. A manner of walking; a particular gait.
2.
a. The distance traversed by moving one foot ahead of the other.
b. A very short distance: just a step away.
3. One of a series of rhythmical, patterned movements of the feet used in a
dance

These clearly define a step as to locomote, travel, cover some
distance (large or small), stride, etc., using the feet to leave and return
to the ground. Your use of the term "stationary step" seems to me more in
the category of a weight change and you are referring it to what people do
with the rest of the body in relation to it. Why not call a step and step
and a weight change a weight change?

Darrell Sanchez
Colorado

Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:53:50 -0700
From: Tom Stermitz <stermitz@tango.org>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] step
To: Tango-L <tango-l@mit.edu>

On Nov 28, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Darrell Sanchez wrote:

> ...
> These clearly define a step as to locomote, travel, cover some
> distance (large or small), stride, etc., using the feet to leave
> and return
> to the ground. Your use of the term "stationary step" seems to me
> more in
> the category of a weight change and you are referring it to what
> people do
> with the rest of the body in relation to it. Why not call a step
> and step
> and a weight change a weight change?
>
> Darrell Sanchez
> Colorado

Darrell,

You are breaking one of the rules of this thread by using only three
paragraphs to explain something.


The concept of a step-in-place or the together-step is one that I
have enjoyed working with extensively for the past couple of years.
The issue is about resolutions and beginnings of a musical phrase,
and also about suspension and surge. Tango movement needs this breath
or dynamic.

Without resolutions, suspensions and surges, your dance is one-long-
run-on-sentence-with-no-commas-and-no-perieods, a robotic sense of
movement.

I'm not sure how these energetic concepts fit in with Jake & Brian's
extensive discussions about ochos (or not), crossed feet (or not),
salidas, matrices....

But to tell you the truth, I stopped reading that discussion last
week, so maybe it has moved on to other details.




Tom Stermitz
http://www.tango.org
2525 Birch St
Denver, CO 80207

Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 20:14:28 -0500
From: "Jake Spatz (TangoDC.com)" <spatz@tangoDC.com>
Subject: Re: [Tango-L] step
To: tango-L@mit.edu

Hi Darrell,

Please see below.

Darrell Sanchez wrote:

> I don't want to get too involved in this analysis but you posed a
> question a few emails back asking what is a step. The term "stationary step" seems to me a confusing oxymoron.

Me too. But more on that later.

> Consider the following definitions for the word step:
>
> step (stp)
> n.
> 1.
> a. The single complete movement of raising one foot and putting it down in
> another spot, as in walking.
> b. A manner of walking; a particular gait.
> 2.
> a. The distance traversed by moving one foot ahead of the other.
> b. A very short distance: just a step away.
> 3. One of a series of rhythmical, patterned movements of the feet used in a dance
>

This last (3) would seem to include changing weight not only from foot
to foot, but within one foot itself. And in any case, such a movement is
possible, and part of tango.

> Why not call a step and step and a weight change a weight change?
>

Usually I do. Except that every step includes a weight-change; the
latter being no more than a "step" minus the extension and collection.
Since they're thus related, I wanted to see what happens when we apply
"step analysis" to this other case, which is usually not analyzed at all.

My conclusion, I believe, is that a weight change (or stationary step)
may have as much variety as a regular one, and that it's therefore not
right to think of it as just a minute sidestep.

Torso dissociation also produces "open" and "cross" positions (not even
pivots, properly speaking).

Ultimate point being: Either the analysis has been very much watered
down by those who've been circulating it, or else was incomplete to
begin with. In either case, I want more detail, and I'm starting to get
it. So is everyone else here, if they want it.

I surmise, however, that it WAS left incomplete to begin with. As a
result, the dance has changed. Fabian asks followers not to dissociate
during pivots, for example: this may be for any number of reasons, but I
notice how it has the side-effect of simplifying the dance to suit his
analytical terms. (It gives boleos a much different shape as well.) As I
said in an earlier post (on another topic entirely), these things are
all related. Style, musicality, structure, analysis, technique: in
influential dancers, all seem to be of a piece.

I just see more value, at this point, in a piece de resistance.

Jake Spatz
DC

p.s. Tom's "suspension and surge" are probably covered by the (musical)
term arrastre, and I agree with him regarding the need to include (and
explore) such concepts. We started addressing that last week, when Brian
(I think it was Brian) was talking about teaching the molinete, and I
suggested that monosyllables were rhythmically inconvenient, because the
arrastre-downbeat ("vrrrROOM") is not played as written ("blip").

> Darrell Sanchez
> Colorado
>
>
>
>
>
>