2173  leading - the right stuff

Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 15:23:58 -0600
From: "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU>
Subject: leading - the right stuff

Hi friends,

I have been mulling over some of the recent submissions that described the
process of leading tango. Yesterday we learned some mechanics that
hopefully lead to a follower's cross and were reminded that Fabian teaches
the automatic cross while others do not. ...and woe is the poor follower
who has been reduced to a tango robot... Previously, we were teased - well,
stimulated - by Carlos' 'thought experiments' in leading ochos. The
exercise supposedly challenged some or all of the general acceptance for
'The Mantra' - that the leader only suggests and the follower accepts in her
time and way and then the leader dutifully follows the follower... That, of
course, defines not only leading but following as well.

I've been pondering... What is the essence of a tango lead? The spectrum
of opinion seems to be that leading tango (in the traditional sense - for
now let's not confuse things even more with 'exchange of lead' situations)
is at least one of these three things: 1) the leader creates situations in
which there is a mechanistic imperative, to be recognized and then responded
to in only one way, 2) the leader humbly suggests what to do via postural
and directional cues, hopefully mostly with the torso, and then he waits to
see what happens and follows along 3) the leader physically 'guides' the
follower, for those 10-20 second "thought ochos" and other stuff that the
follower doesn't or shouldn't recognize.

Anybody who is fairly new to tango, reading these approaches, must be
somewhat befuddled with what is and is not a lead. And you followers have
my sympathy - the broad range of 'stuff' thrown at you as a 'lead' must be
challenging at best. So I'm asking again, "What IS the right stuff for
leaders?" For starters, what is the most basic 'unit' of lead/follow? Is
it a step?

Beginners, of course, are first taught to simply step. For them, a walking
step is probably the most fundamental unit in the dance. One beat, one
step. We have discussed beginners who tend to be 'ocho machines' - for
them, it seems, the basic unit is not only one pivot plus weight change.
For them, it is one whole 'ocho drill' from their beginning classes! ;-)
But in general, beginners steps are all very similar to one another. They
haven't developed a vocabulary of ways to step. On this subject, Astrid
mentioned Florencia Taccetti. Florencia is a dancer who has a jillion ways
to step. Beginners: mostly one way to step - one velocity, one size,
timing, etc..

How do we lead beginners? We either have to create a dance that they
understand or we have to physically move them in a way that we think they
should move. Sometimes we can trick them into doing nice things that are
not yet included in their vocabulary, but if we always have to rely on 'The
Mantra' (her accepting every suggestion before the leader can follow her
follow) - forget it! ...not worth it... In that situation, the mantra is
useless.

Then, what about leading at the very highest level? What is the smallest
basic unit for the best dancers? It's not one whole step, that's for sure!
Let's imagine that, say, Pablo Veron (IMHO, unsurpassed in breadth and
creativity) runs into his old friend Florencia Taccetti. Let's say that
they've known each other for years, formerly toured in some of the same
performance companies, were always each a little rebellious, but have now
mellowed with a friendly respect for each other. Let's get these two
together and let them dance just for the fun of it. What do you think would
be the nature of the lead and how is it followed?

Knowing Florencia, I can give you her report of that exact situation. The
choreographic concepts and feelings were wide-ranging and mercurial. The
ideas flowed easily and continuously, the interplay was crisp and timely,
there was never an 'oops', and the details of execution (being second
nature) were irrelevant. The lead? It was concepts and ideas held together
by music. The mantra? With Florencia, you know it was there. But after
all, if one shrinks and shrinks the 'time constant' for leading according to
'The Mantra', it eventually becomes a continuous interplay. Simple physical
guiding? Yes. With good ideas built in, even Florencia likes that too.

So I would claim, friends, that the most important part of leading is the
IDEAS that generate the movement. What is the minimal 'unit' of the lead?
You could argue it is not a movement at all but an *idea* per se. For
example, a rhythm, a direction, an energy, or perhaps some element of
surprise. I think the way a couple communicates these ideas is less
important, as long as the mechanism is mutually agreeable.

While dancing in a single axis, close and sharing some mass, a physical lead
messing with momentum and rhythm can be delightful (e.g. Milonga traspie).
While dancing with separate axes, with dynamic energy and lots of space for
individual flair, the mantra is great fun (e.g. Piazzolla & Tango Nuevo). I
would argue that there is not a wrong way to lead (what the follower thinks
is) a good idea.

If you have the 'right stuff', it comes from your head. Beginners could
certainly be taught (or goaded) to take the same step - memorized or not - a
dozen different ways! That would begin to address the problem of teaching
improvisation. Improv. generally happens within one's spectrum of comfort.
If that happens to be one plain walking step, then fine. The confidence to
try one's ideas on the floor only comes from experimenting with a dozen
ideas and remembering the best ones.

Abrazos,

Frank - Mpls.

Frank G. Williams, Ph.D.
University of Minnesota
612-625-6441

Department of Neuroscience
6-145 Jackson Hall
321 Church Street SE
Minneapolis, MN 55455

Department of Veterinary Pathobiology
205 Veterinary Science
1971 Commonwealth Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55108

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 09:12:40 -0800
From: jnt@NOYAU.COM
Subject: leading - the right stuff

On Wed. Jan. 21, 2004 Frank G. Williams wrote:

> But in general, beginners steps are all very similar to one another.
> They haven't developed a vocabulary of ways to step. On this subject,
> Astrid mentioned Florencia Taccetti. Florencia is a dancer who has a
> jillion >>ways to step. Beginners: mostly one way to step - one
> velocity, one size, timing, etc..

I've been mulling on Frank's post for several days. I think Frank has
spotlighted some very important issues. I hope in the days ahead to get
clarity on what these "ideas" are that Frank refers to elsewhere in his
post. I may or may not entirely agree but I think this is a very important
area to ponder.

Recall learning to read, or helping some one learn to read. In this
example you or the student speaks the language fluently and expressively
but the task of learning to speak from recognizing words on the pages
drops the expression very low initially. So the new dancer though they
move in life with a great deal of fine tuned expressiveness drops into a
very limited range while dealing with the task of learning a new set of
moves in a new set of "moving" relationships.

I am interested if people find this example plausible or meaningful. It
makes sense to me and I see it as being useful in that most students of
dance will have had the experience of learning to read while many of them
may be experiencing learning a dance for the first time.

I am also very interested in the notion and the experience of
"expressiveness". Expressiveness in speech, singing, musical performance
and dance seem to me to share some common features. I will refer once
again to a book that I have found to be extremely helpful in this regard,
Alexandra and Roger Pierce's book EXPRESSIVE MOVEMENT: POSTURE AND ACTION
IN DAILY LIFE, SPORTS, AND THE PERFORMING ARTS. One of the key concepts in
that book is the notion of "phrasing" and "phrase" in movement. Speaking,
singing, playing music or dancing expressively all require sensitive
appropriate phrasing.

My first notion is that the ideas the Frank speaks about are expressed in
the phrased movement of the dancers. But as I have noted that in a list
discussion putting too many points in a single post results in either a
confusing proliferation of threads or in important aspects being
overlooked. I want to keep the focus on learning expressiveness in general
in order to discover if my experience that there is a similar dynamic in
learning to read, in learning a musical instrument, in learning other
skills, and learning to dance makes sense to others on the list. And if it
doesn't make sense what problems do you have with the comparison? If it
turns out this does make sense to folks I am thinking this might lead to
some new ways at looking at teaching or learning expressiveness in dance.

And Frank that was a very rich line of thought you posted. Thanks.

peace, Jonathan Thornton

Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:51:28 -0800
From: jnt@NOYAU.COM
Subject: Re: leading - the right stuff

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004, Frank G. Williams wrote:

> So I'm asking again, "What IS the right stuff for leaders?" For
> starters, > > > what is the most basic 'unit' of lead/follow? Is it a
> step? Then, what about leading at the very highest level? What is the
> smallest basic unit for the best dancers? It's not one whole step,
> that's for sure!

I am thinking of the origins of physical interactive improvisation in the
relationship of adult and child beginning with the infant. Recall the
developing of play in lifting, turning, and then the more exciting games
of "flying" or being swung. The adult leads a movement that the young
child experiences and adapts to, and later the child's response may invoke
a response, a following response if you will in the adult. And for this to
work the time unit must be very close at times to the reflex response of a
human being.

Physical improvisation is something we've all experienced. It won't come
as a surprise to anyone here, even if they've never heard of the dance
form called Contact Improvisation that beginning in the first class the
students are encouraged to experiment and improvise in small interactions.
Initiating and responding to movements visually and physically is
developed through out the class. Improvisation is something that is
developed from infancy and is also teachable given an appropriate context
and approach.

> So I would claim, friends, that the most important part of leading is the
> IDEAS that generate the movement. What is the minimal 'unit' of the lead?
> You could argue it is not a movement at all but an *idea* per se. For
> example, a rhythm, a direction, an energy, or perhaps some element of
> surprise. I think the way a couple communicates these ideas is less

* important, as long as the mechanism is mutually agreeable.

And this brings me to ask for some amplification from Frank on his use of
the term IDEAS. When I first think of"ideas" I think of symbolic
concepts but in listing "a rhythm, a direction, an energy" it does appear
Frank has a larger definition of idea. I think that although "conceptual
ideation" has a role in improvisation in the flow of movement it must give
way to present sensory awareness and that improvisation emerges as a
non verbal, non conceptual, felt meaning. We use words when writing and in
teaching situations but the act of dancing is a non verbal activity. As
the beginning dancer becomes more familiar moving they are better able to
attend to the sensory experience of the dance and the continuous
interaction of initiation and response that can move into the two
organisms moving in a developing improvisation that can include a
communication of feelings or felt meanings.

Frank, am I understanding you? Are we in agreement here or had you wished
to emphasis a conceptual component of dance improvisation?

Where I am going with this is towards putting more emphasis in social
dance classes on sensory awareness training along the lines already
successfully used in teaching contact improvisation. The basic shared
vocabulary of steps and patterns has it's role but I believe the addition
of sensory awareness and improvisational interaction would benefit most
dancers. One way to do that is to take classes in Contact Improvisation,
but it would also be helpful to move from conceptual instruction of "How
To Do Step FOO" and include what are you sensing, what are you aware of,
can you move slower? softer? firmer? quicker? etc developing movement
qualities in addition to large movement patterns.

With regards to musicality in dancing I think the quality of how the step
or movement is done is much more important and expressive than what step
is actually selected. The challenge is to develop expressive movement
phrasing and interaction.

And to look again at the difference between how a child learns to speak
and learns to read. Babbling is very expressive, but reading involves a
much greater conceptual processing that for a time suppresses the natural
verbal expressiveness of the individual. I see a parallel to learning a
dance. The conceptual struggle to learn the conventions of a particular
dance, for example tango, inhibits the natural expressiveness of the
individuals. I have sometimes wondered if it would be possible to learn to
speak a foreign language by beginning not with rules of grammar but by
babbling in the "music" of that language to get a general feel for the
speech sounds and rhythms that underlie fluency. In the same way spending
time experimenting with movements that express musical qualities might
speed up the fluency of dance expression.

Peace, Jonathan Thornton

Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 04:41:17 +0000
From: Oleh Kovalchuke <oleh_k@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: leading - the right stuff

Jonathan,

You may wish to pick and look through the book "The Society of Mind" by
Marvin Minsky. The author is cofounder of the Artificial Intelligence Lab.
Significant portion of the book is about how we learn stuff (stuff like
eating, walking and would apply to dancing too). I think you'll find your
answers there. Fascinating read too.

Cheers, Oleh K.

https://TangoSpring.com

>From: jnt@NOYAU.COM
>Reply-To: jnt@NOYAU.COM
>To: TANGO-L@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
>Subject: [TANGO-L] leading - the right stuff
>Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 09:12:40 -0800
>
>On Wed. Jan. 21, 2004 Frank G. Williams wrote:
>
> > But in general, beginners steps are all very similar to one another.
> > They haven't developed a vocabulary of ways to step. On this subject,
> > Astrid mentioned Florencia Taccetti. Florencia is a dancer who has a
> > jillion >>ways to step. Beginners: mostly one way to step - one
> > velocity, one size, timing, etc..
>
>I've been mulling on Frank's post for several days. I think Frank has
>spotlighted some very important issues. I hope in the days ahead to get
>clarity on what these "ideas" are that Frank refers to elsewhere in his
>post. I may or may not entirely agree but I think this is a very important
>area to ponder.
>
>Recall learning to read, or helping some one learn to read. In this
>example you or the student speaks the language fluently and expressively
>but the task of learning to speak from recognizing words on the pages
>drops the expression very low initially. So the new dancer though they
>move in life with a great deal of fine tuned expressiveness drops into a
>very limited range while dealing with the task of learning a new set of
>moves in a new set of "moving" relationships.
>
>I am interested if people find this example plausible or meaningful. It
>makes sense to me and I see it as being useful in that most students of
>dance will have had the experience of learning to read while many of them
>may be experiencing learning a dance for the first time.
>
>I am also very interested in the notion and the experience of
>"expressiveness". Expressiveness in speech, singing, musical performance
>and dance seem to me to share some common features. I will refer once
>again to a book that I have found to be extremely helpful in this regard,
>Alexandra and Roger Pierce's book EXPRESSIVE MOVEMENT: POSTURE AND ACTION
>IN DAILY LIFE, SPORTS, AND THE PERFORMING ARTS. One of the key concepts in
>that book is the notion of "phrasing" and "phrase" in movement. Speaking,
>singing, playing music or dancing expressively all require sensitive
>appropriate phrasing.
>
>My first notion is that the ideas the Frank speaks about are expressed in
>the phrased movement of the dancers. But as I have noted that in a list
>discussion putting too many points in a single post results in either a
>confusing proliferation of threads or in important aspects being
>overlooked. I want to keep the focus on learning expressiveness in general
>in order to discover if my experience that there is a similar dynamic in
>learning to read, in learning a musical instrument, in learning other
>skills, and learning to dance makes sense to others on the list. And if it
>doesn't make sense what problems do you have with the comparison? If it
>turns out this does make sense to folks I am thinking this might lead to
>some new ways at looking at teaching or learning expressiveness in dance.
>
>And Frank that was a very rich line of thought you posted. Thanks.
>
>peace, Jonathan Thornton

Check out the coupons and bargains on MSN Offers!

Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 12:23:39 -0600
From: "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU>
Subject: Re: leading - the right stuff

Hi Friends,

In reply to my last post, Jonathan had a few queries and equated learning
language to movement:

> Recall learning to read, or helping some one learn to read. In this
> example you or the student speaks the language fluently and expressively
> but the task of learning to speak from recognizing words on the pages
> drops the expression very low initially. So the new dancer though they
> move in life with a great deal of fine tuned expressiveness drops into a
> very limited range while dealing with the task of learning a new set of
> moves in a new set of "moving" relationships.

My reaction, Jonathan, is that written/read/spoken language is more complex
than social dance. Words are symbolic but narrowly defined, even when
representative of broad concepts. Perhaps at a very advanced level of
dancing, the range of discriminative movement nears the complexity of
language. It seems to me, though, that excellent fluency in language
doesn't make one a good story teller. Neither does knowing a load of
'moves' ('inside' or 'outside' of tango) make one a good tango dancer. I
think that learning music is much more similar to dance than language per
se. Dancing tango is more like learning to play an instrument. Sight
reading is optional! Once you can make the tones, what's in your head that
needs expressing? Tango leaders have this instrument (a follower) that can
make beautiful expression if you treat it right, they have some beautiful
music already playing, what do they have to add? Some leaders never get
beyond 'Twinkle Twinkle', but lead it well. Others want to start off with
the 'Ride of the Valkyries' and give up when they crash and burn. It is one
thing to be moved by artistic expressions like music, it is quite another to
*transmute* your reaction to music into a different medium like movement.
For beginners, that is the art of leading.

> My first notion is that the ideas the Frank speaks about are expressed in
> the phrased movement of the dancers.

As I've said here before, most social dancers (not to mention classical
choreographers) define 'musicality' in fairly narrow terms. By this I mean
that the more one's movement mirrors the musical fundamentals, the more the
followers seem to like it. ...and why not? It makes their role
conceptually simpler, and for the leader it means that following the
follower (when that happens) is also following the orchestra. Leading,
then, becomes a translation service. For example: triple-step (or traspie)
that ric-tic-tic, sink into the floor and make a strong thrust on that big
'Yumba', or cut a step and wait for the orchestra when they're playing
rhythmic games with the music (& dancers). Of course phrasing will be
there. It's up to you whether it contributes to your choice of steps, the
energy of those steps, the rhythm, speed or the size of the movements. One
of the most obvious places to obey the musical phrasing is at the end of the
'verse' in a vals. If you use the 1-2-3-1-pause-pause as a resolution, the
music sounds 'fresh' when you go on. Try it. ...and introduce a new idea**
right after that 'resolution'. Your follower will notice and I bet she will
like it. ** e.g. I love corridas in vals and you can easily do a different
one after each resolution. You could build up to something like a corrida
with 1-3s opposite 3-1s. There's a 'connection check'! ;-) ...a good thing
to be sure of before you bust out the whirly syncopated
change-of-directions! ;-)

> And this brings me to ask for some amplification from Frank on his use of
> the term IDEAS. When I first think of "ideas" I think of symbolic
> concepts but in listing "a rhythm, a direction, an energy" it does appear
> Frank has a larger definition of idea.

Bingo. You are creating movement *for somebody else*. You are trying to
entertain her and want her to enjoy what you concoct for her to perform.
The music is YOUR CRUTCH, dudes! At a basic level, it has rhythm, energy
and phrasing. At a higher level it has feelings for you and your partner to
enjoy together. How you feel about the music will be uniquely personal. If
you let your feelings come to the surface, let them guide you, then the way
you mirror that music will be unique and, hopefully, more entertaining! So
if there is a broader concept to suggest, it would be that it's good to
start with feelings and let them shape the more basic 'ideas' of rhythms,
energies, surprises, etc. It behooves you to know how it feels physically to
make those movements you're leading. Hint: 'less' is often 'more' (vals
notwithstanding!).

I had a nice e-mail from a follower who said, from her perspective, the
essence of the lead was the embrace. She reminded that, first of all, tango
is an embrace. Undeniably true! The embrace needs to be so many things...
clear, firm yet light, supportive, and sensitive. You have to show her
first that you will take care of her. ...that she can trust you. AFTER you
have put a smile on her face then you might let her run a little, but don't
ask her to catch a Valkyrie!

Best to all,

Frank - Minneapolis

Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:00:21 -0700
From: Tom Stermitz <Stermitz@RAGTIME.ORG>
Subject: Re: leading - the right stuff

Frank,

These are good points, but I disagree with your basic thought that
Language is more complex than dance.

(1) Presumably, the human brain can ramp-up in complexity to its
potential, whether we are referring to the language of speech or
language of movement.

So you could make a case that they are equally complex.

(2) Brain-muscle interactions are such that we have a lot of "wiring"
already in place for speech. Mouth, facial muscles, fingers and arms,
all have a lot of "fine-motor/nerve" control, i.e. ARTICULATION.
Tango asks us to articulate muscles that aren't normally that fine
tuned, i.e. spiralling the body, extending our awareness into the
movements and nervous system of the follower (extending our
proprioseptic awareness into our partner).

As you mention, on top of that we have to interpret the music, have
ideas about dynamics of movement, etc.

So, I am more inclined to agree with Jonathon, that we move through
life with our "normal" physical expressiveness due to walking,
skiing, or whatever. In dance at first we have access to a smaller
subset of articulate-ness, but with training we develop more
complexity...up to our brain/body capacity.

Again, as I repeatedly claim, beginners doing tango with simple
movements & vocabulary allows them to become more articulate &
musical in short order, compared with constantly feeding in new, and
more complicated vocabulary, which delays this process considerably.

>Hi Friends,
>
>In reply to my last post, Jonathan had a few queries and equated learning
>language to movement:
>
>> Recall learning to read, or helping some one learn to read. In this
>> example you or the student speaks the language fluently and expressively
>> but the task of learning to speak from recognizing words on the pages
>> drops the expression very low initially. So the new dancer though they
>> move in life with a great deal of fine tuned expressiveness drops into a
>> very limited range while dealing with the task of learning a new set of
>> moves in a new set of "moving" relationships.
>
>My reaction, Jonathan, is that written/read/spoken language is more complex
>than social dance. Words are symbolic but narrowly defined, even when
>representative of broad concepts. Perhaps at a very advanced level of
>dancing, the range of discriminative movement nears the complexity of
>language. It seems to me, though, that excellent fluency in language
>doesn't make one a good story teller. Neither does knowing a load of
>'moves' ('inside' or 'outside' of tango) make one a good tango dancer. I
>think that learning music is much more similar to dance than language per
>se. Dancing tango is more like learning to play an instrument. Sight
>reading is optional! Once you can make the tones, what's in your head that
>needs expressing? Tango leaders have this instrument (a follower) that can
>make beautiful expression if you treat it right, they have some beautiful
>music already playing, what do they have to add? Some leaders never get
>beyond 'Twinkle Twinkle', but lead it well. Others want to start off with
>the 'Ride of the Valkyries' and give up when they crash and burn. It is one
>thing to be moved by artistic expressions like music, it is quite another to
>*transmute* your reaction to music into a different medium like movement.
>For beginners, that is the art of leading.

...

>Frank - Minneapolis

--

Tom Stermitz
https://www.tango.org/
stermitz@tango.org
303-388-2560

Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 13:14:57 -0700
From: Huck Kennedy <huck@ENSMTP1.EAS.ASU.EDU>
Subject: Re: leading - the right stuff

Tom Stermitz writes:

> Frank,
>
> These are good points, but I disagree with your basic thought that
> Language is more complex than dance.
>
> (1) Presumably, the human brain can ramp-up in complexity to its
> potential, whether we are referring to the language of speech or
> language of movement.
>
> So you could make a case that they are equally complex.
>
> (2) Brain-muscle interactions are such that we have a lot of "wiring"
> already in place for speech. Mouth, facial muscles, fingers and arms,
> all have a lot of "fine-motor/nerve" control, i.e. ARTICULATION.
> Tango asks us to articulate muscles that aren't normally that fine
> tuned,

But that can also be true of language, Tom. For instance,
in English we use a certain part of the mouth to make the
"R" sound (don't ask me which). In trying to learn Spanish,
we need to trill R's with the tip of the tongue, and that can be
difficult for some English speakers because we normally don't use
the muscles required. Trying to learn French or German is even
more difficult, because they use the uvula to make the "R" sound,
which we never use. On the other hand, people trying to learn
English have difficulty with duplicating our "R" sound, or
worse, the "th" sound, which is very foreign to most other people.

Huck

Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2004 21:31:27 -0800
From: Jonathan Thornton <jnt@NOYAU.COM>
Subject: Re: leading - the right stuff

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 Tom Stermitz Stermitz@RAGTIME.ORG wrote:

>Again, as I repeatedly claim, beginners doing tango with simple
>movements & vocabulary allows them to become more articulate &
>musical in short order, compared with constantly feeding in new, and
>more complicated vocabulary, which delays this process considerably.

I had chosen reading because I felt it was an example that would be
available to all the subscribers on the list. I know that not all who show
up at social dance classes have had any formal music education. I was not
intending a tight parallel between learning to read and learning to dance.
It was just an example I felt most people could relate to. And I think Tom
has a good point here about trying not to keep leaders constantly
struggling with more and more difficult material.

I have poor facility with learning steps and moves and do so very slowly.
At the end of my first year of learning to dance tango I heard about close
embrace tango and that it had a smaller selection of steps. I decided if I
had any chance at all this might be it. I had been introduced to sacadas
in open embrace and shown how they could be done to the left and right in
cross and parallel feet. But I could barely do one to the right in
parallel feet. I knew it would take a long time to learn just the one, and
each of the others would take as long also. I despaired.

I was told by a dancer that "milonguero" style was simple but had to be
very musical. I thought just maybe I might have a chance. I realized that
I was setting a metronome in my head at the start of the song and using my
percussionist background to stay on the beat. I resolved to dance
listening to the music the entire tango. This turned out to be very
difficult. I gave up all but the simplest steps and strove to maintain a
continuous awareness of the music and my partner. But no sooner than I
started to dance but I had to dodge another leader and then I realized I
had stopped "hearing the music", and brought my attention back to it. Or
my lead was iffy and my partner did something strange and I began to sweat
and feel bad and stopped listening to the music as my nervous self talk
took over my consciousness.

It was perhaps after year to a year and a half of this discipline that I
began to find I was hearing the music and aware of my partner the entire
time I danced and could still deal with navigation and other challenges.

I can't imagine how one could dance musically without listening to the
music the entire dance. And though I am among the slowest of learners I do
believe that learning to listen to the music the entire dance is a
necessary skill, a fundamental skill for a dancer to develop. This was
something that seemed obvious to me but I don't recall it being taught and
have very rarely encountered it being included in discussions on learning
to dance. My personal experience is that it is not until this functioning
of listening to the music and the partner becomes "second nature" that
musically expressiveness opens up in the dance. Then the
expressiveness of movement develops as one hears the different
expressions and phrasings in the music.

peace, Jonathan Thornton