1412 Tango, Baile Nuestro
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 12:28:41 -0400
From: sharon gates <sharon7301@NETSCAPE.NET>
Subject: Tango, Baile Nuestro
After watching the video "Tango, Baile Nuestro", I think it's very clear that real milongueros were the ones inventing and using all kinds of fancy steps, including boleos, ganchos, sentadas, etc. The notion that real milongueros only danced the so-called "close embrace" style is a joke. I am convinced that "close embrace milonguero style" is a marketing creation and does not really represent the true milongueros of Buenos Aires.
Cheers,
Sharon.
Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today!
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:01:51 EDT
From: Mallpasso@AOL.COM
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
How can you say that? Have you been to Buenos Aires?
mallpasso
In a message dated 6/12/2003 09:35:21 Pacific Standard Time,
sharon7301@NETSCAPE.NET writes:
> Subj: [TANGO-L] Tango, Baile Nuestro
> Date: 6/12/2003 09:35:21 Pacific Standard Time
> From: <A HREF="mailto:sharon7301@NETSCAPE.NET">sharon7301@NETSCAPE.NET</A>
> To: <A HREF="mailto:TANGO-L@MITVMA.MIT.EDU">TANGO-L@MITVMA.MIT.EDU</A>
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
> After watching the video "Tango, Baile Nuestro", I think it's very clear
> that real milongueros were the ones inventing and using all kinds of fancy
> steps, including boleos, ganchos, sentadas, etc. The notion that real milongueros
> only danced the so-called "close embrace" style is a joke. I am convinced
> that "close embrace milonguero style" is a marketing creation and does not
> really represent the true milongueros of Buenos Aires.
>
> Cheers,
> Sharon.
>
> Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial
> today!
>
>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2003 13:29:39 -0500
From: "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
Sharon and friends,
"Tango, Baile Nuestro" is very interesting, but it is not gospel nor of much
help in deciphering the relative popularity of the dance variations it
exposes. In my opinion, there is no gospel. As we've been kicking around
on this forum lately, even the historical recollections of those who 'were
there' are likely quite colored by influences we can never understand.
Although my mind is not closed to the possibility that there is a 'true'
tango lineage, those who argue for authenticity (whatever style of tango to
which they adhere) seem suspiciously sales oriented or insecure. The notion
that historical Argentine tango may have resembled current 'ballroom' tango
is disquieting to some. I am not attracted to nor dance 'ballroom' tango,
but to my eye, the rigidity of that dance at least suits the march-like
quality of the music to which it's performed! Yet, it is my perception that
ballroom tango hasn't changed much during my life. I consider it stagnant.
I feel that no dance can avoid stagnation unless it changes. The
'classical' dances are prime examples. The energy of change itself actually
strengthens and legitimizes the original or older forms of movement. For
example, the ballet choreography of Marius Petipa looks quite prosaic in
light of Balanchine, but at one time it was considered innovative, fresh and
energetic - even described as 'rescuing a failing art form' in 19th century
Russia. [ref. https://webserver.rcds.rye.ny.us/id/Dance/danceHLF.html] I
was drawn to Argentine tango because it *felt* like the limits were merely
technical (like ballet), rather than legislated by stylistic codes (like
'ballroom'). That seemed really healthy - great for the head and an
interesting technical study for the body.
You and I and the leading dancers in BA are, at this moment, changing tango.
Reviving or perhaps reinterpreting old forms is, after all, as much a force
of change as inventing new forms. Bringing fantasia (much less cortes and
quebradas) to the milonga or banning it, playing Piazzolla etc. in the
milonga or hating when it is played, even the somewhat petty debates in
which we engage here - all of that *energy of change* vitalizes tango and
ensures it's place as a dance that is truly art. Ultimately, it's healthy
to disagree so much! ;-) Perhaps it seems like a cliché, but the one
uniting concept that seems true to me has been said before: The essence of
tango is not in movement, it is *the feeling* evoked by the music that
inspires the movement. You gotta be in touch with your feelings to make
good art...
Enough for now,
Frank in Minneapolis
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 11:31:24 -0700
From: Tango Guy <tangomundo55@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
The apparent rigidity of Ballroom Tango is due to the elaborate codification promoted by various Ballroom organizations as well as the dancers themselves. I like the improvisational freedom that our Argentine Tango gives me. That is why I prefer it over Ballroom Tango. However, Ballroom Tango can not be called stagnate. Ballroom Tango is what it is because it works so well. Because of this so-called rigidity, people can easily learn it. Once they learn it, they can count on it. Overtime, It has given many people countless hours of pleasure. This is why it continues to exist today and will continue to exist in the future. Not everyone wants to improvise. Not everyone thinks and feels the same as Argentine Tango dancers. To call Ballroom Tango or any other Ballroom dance stagnant is an insult to all those who have learned to do it well. To them it is not stagnant. Ballroom dancers are not stagnant people because there is so much to learn. If one chooses, a Ballroom dancer can continue
learning over a life time. In no way can that be called stagnant. In addition, as they become better dancers, the dancers themselves learn to improvise if they so choose. Often this improvisation becomes accepted practice as such things happen in Argentina Tango. I know of people who do both forms of dancing. It can be hardly be called stagnant when one is learning to do both Ballroom and Argentine Tango at the same time without confusing the two. Ballroom is not all that easy to learn. I challenge all Argentine Tangueros to try it. You may even like it.
Warm Regards
Tango Guy
"Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU> wrote:
Sharon and friends,
"Tango, Baile Nuestro" is very interesting, but it is not gospel nor of much
help in deciphering the relative popularity of the dance variations it
exposes. In my opinion, there is no gospel. As we've been kicking around
on this forum lately, even the historical recollections of those who 'were
there' are likely quite colored by influences we can never understand.
Although my mind is not closed to the possibility that there is a 'true'
tango lineage, those who argue for authenticity (whatever style of tango to
which they adhere) seem suspiciously sales oriented or insecure. The notion
that historical Argentine tango may have resembled current 'ballroom' tango
is disquieting to some. I am not attracted to nor dance 'ballroom' tango,
but to my eye, the rigidity of that dance at least suits the march-like
quality of the music to which it's performed! Yet, it is my perception that
ballroom tango hasn't changed much during my life. I consider it stagnant.
I feel that no dance can avoid stagnation unless it changes. The
'classical' dances are prime examples. The energy of change itself actually
strengthens and legitimizes the original or older forms of movement. For
example, the ballet choreography of Marius Petipa looks quite prosaic in
light of Balanchine, but at one time it was considered innovative, fresh and
energetic - even described as 'rescuing a failing art form' in 19th century
Russia. [ref. https://webserver.rcds.rye.ny.us/id/Dance/danceHLF.html] I
was drawn to Argentine tango because it *felt* like the limits were merely
technical (like ballet), rather than legislated by stylistic codes (like
'ballroom'). That seemed really healthy - great for the head and an
interesting technical study for the body.
You and I and the leading dancers in BA are, at this moment, changing tango.
Reviving or perhaps reinterpreting old forms is, after all, as much a force
of change as inventing new forms. Bringing fantasia (much less cortes and
quebradas) to the milonga or banning it, playing Piazzolla etc. in the
milonga or hating when it is played, even the somewhat petty debates in
which we engage here - all of that *energy of change* vitalizes tango and
ensures it's place as a dance that is truly art. Ultimately, it's healthy
to disagree so much! ;-) Perhaps it seems like a clichi, but the one
uniting concept that seems true to me has been said before: The essence of
tango is not in movement, it is *the feeling* evoked by the music that
inspires the movement. You gotta be in touch with your feelings to make
good art...
Enough for now,
Frank in Minneapolis
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:08:57 -0700
From: Ricardo Tanturi <tanturi999@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Tango Stagnant (was Tango, Baile Nuestro)
--- Tango Guy <tangomundo55@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> The apparent rigidity of Ballroom Tango is due to
> the elaborate codification promoted by various
> Ballroom organizations as well as the dancers
> themselves. I like the improvisational freedom that
> our Argentine Tango gives me. That is why I prefer
> it over Ballroom Tango. However, Ballroom Tango can
> not be called stagnate. Ballroom Tango is what it is
> because it works so well. Because of this so-called
> rigidity, people can easily learn it. Once they
> learn it, they can count on it. Overtime, It has
> given many people countless hours of pleasure. This
> is why it continues to exist today and will continue
> to exist in the future. Not everyone wants to
> improvise. Not everyone thinks and feels the same as
> Argentine Tango dancers. To call Ballroom Tango or
> any other Ballroom dance stagnant is an insult to
> all those who have learned to do it well. To them it
> is not stagnant. Ballroom dancers are not stagnant
> people because there is so much to learn. If one
> chooses, a Ballroom dancer can continue
> learning over a life time. In no way can that be
> called stagnant. In addition, as they become better
> dancers, the dancers themselves learn to improvise
> if they so choose. Often this improvisation becomes
> accepted practice as such things happen in Argentina
> Tango. I know of people who do both forms of
> dancing. It can be hardly be called stagnant when
> one is learning to do both Ballroom and Argentine
> Tango at the same time without confusing the two.
> Ballroom is not all that easy to learn. I challenge
> all Argentine Tangueros to try it. You may even
> like it.
>
> Warm Regards
> Tango Guy
>
> "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU> wrote:
> Sharon and friends,
>
> "Tango, Baile Nuestro" is very interesting, but it
> is not gospel nor of much
> help in deciphering the relative popularity of the
> dance variations it
> exposes. In my opinion, there is no gospel. As we've
> been kicking around
> on this forum lately, even the historical
> recollections of those who 'were
> there' are likely quite colored by influences we can
> never understand.
> Although my mind is not closed to the possibility
> that there is a 'true'
> tango lineage, those who argue for authenticity
> (whatever style of tango to
> which they adhere) seem suspiciously sales oriented
> or insecure. The notion
> that historical Argentine tango may have resembled
> current 'ballroom' tango
> is disquieting to some. I am not attracted to nor
> dance 'ballroom' tango,
> but to my eye, the rigidity of that dance at least
> suits the march-like
> quality of the music to which it's performed! Yet,
> it is my perception that
> ballroom tango hasn't changed much during my life. I
> consider it stagnant.
>
>
> I feel that no dance can avoid stagnation unless it
> changes. The
> 'classical' dances are prime examples. The energy of
> change itself actually
> strengthens and legitimizes the original or older
> forms of movement. For
> example, the ballet choreography of Marius Petipa
> looks quite prosaic in
> light of Balanchine, but at one time it was
> considered innovative, fresh and
> energetic - even described as 'rescuing a failing
> art form' in 19th century
> Russia. [ref.
>
https://webserver.rcds.rye.ny.us/id/Dance/danceHLF.html]
> I
> was drawn to Argentine tango because it *felt* like
> the limits were merely
> technical (like ballet), rather than legislated by
> stylistic codes (like
> 'ballroom'). That seemed really healthy - great for
> the head and an
> interesting technical study for the body.
>
> You and I and the leading dancers in BA are, at this
> moment, changing tango.
> Reviving or perhaps reinterpreting old forms is,
> after all, as much a force
> of change as inventing new forms. Bringing fantasia
> (much less cortes and
> quebradas) to the milonga or banning it, playing
> Piazzolla etc. in the
> milonga or hating when it is played, even the
> somewhat petty debates in
> which we engage here - all of that *energy of
> change* vitalizes tango and
> ensures it's place as a dance that is truly art.
> Ultimately, it's healthy
> to disagree so much! ;-) Perhaps it seems like a
> clichi, but the one
> uniting concept that seems true to me has been said
> before: The essence of
> tango is not in movement, it is *the feeling* evoked
> by the music that
> inspires the movement. You gotta be in touch with
> your feelings to make
> good art...
>
> Enough for now,
>
> Frank in Minneapolis
>
>
>
>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 12:32:44 -0700
From: Ricardo Tanturi <tanturi999@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Tango Stagnant (was Tango, Baile Nuestro)
Sorry, guess I sent an emtpy msg. w/ a slip of the
finger.
I totally agree with the Tango Guy on this, and
to chime in with my two cents worth -
I think that this idea that some people have
that an art form needs to change to avoid
"stagnation" is totally wrong. "Stagnant" means
"stale or foul from standing, as a pool of water."
When something is standing still, it doesn't
necessarily become stale. I don't think Bach
or Mozart has become stagnant. Neither have
any or the forms of tango, even when you stick
with tradition.
This argument doesn't even consider the improvised
nature of Argentine tango. Each dance is uniquee
in the history of the universe: these two partners
together, these steps to this music, these particular
emotions - never before and never again. How anyone
can think a dance like this is "stale or foul from
standing" is really beyond me.
"Ricardo"
--- Tango Guy <tangomundo55@YAHOO.COM> wrote:
> The apparent rigidity of Ballroom Tango is due to
> the elaborate codification promoted by various
> Ballroom organizations as well as the dancers
> themselves. I like the improvisational freedom that
> our Argentine Tango gives me. That is why I prefer
> it over Ballroom Tango. However, Ballroom Tango can
> not be called stagnate. Ballroom Tango is what it is
> because it works so well. Because of this so-called
> rigidity, people can easily learn it. Once they
> learn it, they can count on it. Overtime, It has
> given many people countless hours of pleasure. This
> is why it continues to exist today and will continue
> to exist in the future. Not everyone wants to
> improvise. Not everyone thinks and feels the same as
> Argentine Tango dancers. To call Ballroom Tango or
> any other Ballroom dance stagnant is an insult to
> all those who have learned to do it well. To them it
> is not stagnant. Ballroom dancers are not stagnant
> people because there is so much to learn. If one
> chooses, a Ballroom dancer can continue
> learning over a life time. In no way can that be
> called stagnant. In addition, as they become better
> dancers, the dancers themselves learn to improvise
> if they so choose. Often this improvisation becomes
> accepted practice as such things happen in Argentina
> Tango. I know of people who do both forms of
> dancing. It can be hardly be called stagnant when
> one is learning to do both Ballroom and Argentine
> Tango at the same time without confusing the two.
> Ballroom is not all that easy to learn. I challenge
> all Argentine Tangueros to try it. You may even
> like it.
>
> Warm Regards
> Tango Guy
>
> "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU> wrote:
> Sharon and friends,
>
> "Tango, Baile Nuestro" is very interesting, but it
> is not gospel nor of much
> help in deciphering the relative popularity of the
> dance variations it
> exposes. In my opinion, there is no gospel. As we've
> been kicking around
> on this forum lately, even the historical
> recollections of those who 'were
> there' are likely quite colored by influences we can
> never understand.
> Although my mind is not closed to the possibility
> that there is a 'true'
> tango lineage, those who argue for authenticity
> (whatever style of tango to
> which they adhere) seem suspiciously sales oriented
> or insecure. The notion
> that historical Argentine tango may have resembled
> current 'ballroom' tango
> is disquieting to some. I am not attracted to nor
> dance 'ballroom' tango,
> but to my eye, the rigidity of that dance at least
> suits the march-like
> quality of the music to which it's performed! Yet,
> it is my perception that
> ballroom tango hasn't changed much during my life. I
> consider it stagnant.
>
>
> I feel that no dance can avoid stagnation unless it
> changes. The
> 'classical' dances are prime examples. The energy of
> change itself actually
> strengthens and legitimizes the original or older
> forms of movement. For
> example, the ballet choreography of Marius Petipa
> looks quite prosaic in
> light of Balanchine, but at one time it was
> considered innovative, fresh and
> energetic - even described as 'rescuing a failing
> art form' in 19th century
> Russia. [ref.
>
https://webserver.rcds.rye.ny.us/id/Dance/danceHLF.html]
> I
> was drawn to Argentine tango because it *felt* like
> the limits were merely
> technical (like ballet), rather than legislated by
> stylistic codes (like
> 'ballroom'). That seemed really healthy - great for
> the head and an
> interesting technical study for the body.
>
> You and I and the leading dancers in BA are, at this
> moment, changing tango.
> Reviving or perhaps reinterpreting old forms is,
> after all, as much a force
> of change as inventing new forms. Bringing fantasia
> (much less cortes and
> quebradas) to the milonga or banning it, playing
> Piazzolla etc. in the
> milonga or hating when it is played, even the
> somewhat petty debates in
> which we engage here - all of that *energy of
> change* vitalizes tango and
> ensures it's place as a dance that is truly art.
> Ultimately, it's healthy
> to disagree so much! ;-) Perhaps it seems like a
> clichi, but the one
> uniting concept that seems true to me has been said
> before: The essence of
> tango is not in movement, it is *the feeling* evoked
> by the music that
> inspires the movement. You gotta be in touch with
> your feelings to make
> good art...
>
> Enough for now,
>
> Frank in Minneapolis
>
>
>
>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 14:39:39 -0500
From: "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
Tango Guy & friends,
Hold the phone.
> To call Ballroom Tango or any other Ballroom
> dance stagnant is an insult to all those who have learned to do it well.
Question: Does the fact that - let me think of a good example - Bruck's
Scottish Fantasy (for violin) hasn't changed much lately make all those who
master it's nuances 'stagnant' musicians??? No way. Of course, learning is
exciting and worthwhile and represents change in an individual. But I'm
sticking to my opinion. I was talking about dances, not dancERS. However,
if it will make you feel better you may change 'stagnant' to 'static'.
What if people decided that, considering Beethoven's genius, no more trios
needed to be written after the Archduke. That music is just as great today
as in 1811. "We like it. We're done. We'll just keep playing that one
better and better but if we get tired of it we'll throw in a little Hayden."
Silly, obviously. Had dancers done that then we might have never known the
thrill of the Macarena.
> Ballroom dancers are not stagnant people because there is so much to
learn.
Amigo, I quite agree. Their dances, on the other hand...
Frank - Mpls.
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 16:02:17 -0400
From: John Gleeson <jgleeson@CONCENTRIC.NET>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
But . . . . . it's time to clarify:
Ballroom Tango is not static (in the sense of not changing). Just like
the other Ballroom dances (waltz, fox-trot, cha-cha, etc), new steps
are developed every year and others are dropped.
Not the basic/beginning steps of course - they remain the same, that's
what give the dance it's "look and feel", but new steps/variations are
added, others are dropped.
It's what keeps the dance studios in money - you spend a year and big
bucks learning the figures for the level following the one that you have
attained (Bronze 1-4, Silver 1-4, Gold 1-4), then you spend additional
money to unlearn some of the now-dropped steps and learn this-year's
new steps.
I am talking about the American Ballroom curriculum (which I do have
knowledge of) not the International version (which I don't).
Been there - done that!
John G.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, June 13, 2003 3:39 PM
Subject: Re: [TANGO-L] Tango, Baile Nuestro
Tango Guy & friends,
Hold the phone.
> To call Ballroom Tango or any other Ballroom
> dance stagnant is an insult to all those who have learned to do it well.
Question: Does the fact that - let me think of a good example - Bruck's
Scottish Fantasy (for violin) hasn't changed much lately make all those who
master it's nuances 'stagnant' musicians??? No way. Of course, learning is
exciting and worthwhile and represents change in an individual. But I'm
sticking to my opinion. I was talking about dances, not dancERS. However,
if it will make you feel better you may change 'stagnant' to 'static'.
What if people decided that, considering Beethoven's genius, no more trios
needed to be written after the Archduke. That music is just as great today
as in 1811. "We like it. We're done. We'll just keep playing that one
better and better but if we get tired of it we'll throw in a little Hayden."
Silly, obviously. Had dancers done that then we might have never known the
thrill of the Macarena.
> Ballroom dancers are not stagnant people because there is so much to
learn.
Amigo, I quite agree. Their dances, on the other hand...
Frank - Mpls.
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 13:28:05 -0700
From: Ricardo Tanturi <tanturi999@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
I'd like to add a quick footnote - I don't disagree
with Frank on this post and I think it clarifies his
position, but....
I think changing the word "stagnant" to "static"
points
to a flaw I think is _sometimes_ IMPLICIT in the
arguments of _some_ of the anti-traditionalists:
they point that if something is not changing, it is
"static" (that is a tautology), but then they go on to
use the word "stagnant" as a synonym for "static".
That is sneaking in a value judgement, because
"stagnant" usually carries the additional sense of
"staleness". End of rant.
"Ricardo"
--- "Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU>
wrote:
> Tango Guy & friends,
>
> Hold the phone.
>
> > To call Ballroom Tango or any other Ballroom
> > dance stagnant is an insult to all those who have
> learned to do it well.
>
> Question: Does the fact that - let me think of a
> good example - Bruck's
> Scottish Fantasy (for violin) hasn't changed much
> lately make all those who
> master it's nuances 'stagnant' musicians??? No way.
> Of course, learning is
> exciting and worthwhile and represents change in an
> individual. But I'm
> sticking to my opinion. I was talking about dances,
> not dancERS. However,
> if it will make you feel better you may change
> 'stagnant' to 'static'.
>
> What if people decided that, considering Beethoven's
> genius, no more trios
> needed to be written after the Archduke. That music
> is just as great today
> as in 1811. "We like it. We're done. We'll just
> keep playing that one
> better and better but if we get tired of it we'll
> throw in a little Hayden."
> Silly, obviously. Had dancers done that then we
> might have never known the
> thrill of the Macarena.
>
> > Ballroom dancers are not stagnant people because
> there is so much to
> learn.
>
> Amigo, I quite agree. Their dances, on the other
> hand...
>
> Frank - Mpls.
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 19:22:20 -0500
From: Bibi Wong <bibibwong@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Tango, Baile Nuestro
List members,
I have a few thoughts after reading the recent postings that compare tango
and ballroom dance.
I would look forward to hearing the comments of vetaran dancers of **ALL
three types** (AT, American and International), not the "one sided pointing
finger across the fence" critics which tend to be bias.
But I agree that there is a maze of curriculum set by the ballroom dance
community, but I also agree that without the system, it would be less
mangeable for most common dancers across the globe to visualise the scope of
the dance and their path of progress.
AT on the other hand, does not have a set style nor a curriculum. You don't
even know where you stand in that universe. The dancers may think they know
everything.... Is it why we tend to argue till the cows come home?
If people criticize that the rankings of curriculum (Bronze, Silver & Gold)
in ballroom dance is to lure people to take classes, I don't see AT being
more innocent about it. In fact, AT may be even worst, because sometimes we
don't even know what exact level the teachers (particularly the travelling
international teachers) are teaching which easily leads to dancers learning
advanced material before they are ready to do them. In the extreme cases,
some of the prestigeous teachers do not to tell the students if they are
teaching tango, milonga or waltz, much less any specific movements.
Bibi
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 13:38:45 -0400
From: Nicole Dowell <bailadora2000@EXCITE.COM>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
John Gleeson wrote:
(Ballroom Tango is not static (in the sense of not changing). Just like the other Ballroom dances (waltz, fox-trot, cha-cha, etc), new steps are developed every year and others are dropped. Not the basic/beginning steps of course - they remain the same, that's what give the dance it's "look and feel", but new steps/variations are added, others are dropped.)
There's so much more to that than what you wrote John, though you are right. Everything has to evolve to continue existing. Just as our technology evolves and advances, art does the same. All dances grow (just like any other art form) through time, seeing evolved changes in styles, steps, and techniques. Ballroom Tango (both American and International style) are always changing not just because of the new steps that the studios want to charge their students money to learn, but because the "best" of the dancers that dance these dances (coaches, competitors, etc) start to discover new things that work better technically that improve the dance. If you want to see constant change, watch a DanceSport competition from 5-10 years ago and then watch one from this year. So much changes. International Standard (which includes International Tango) is one of the categories of dance that has not changed that much I will admit. It was invented by the English and the dancers have tr
ied to keep it's "classic style" alive for the past 60 + years. But there are many new advancements in not only steps but technique and understanding of the dances. I recently was able to look at a syllabus book from the 60's of International Standard, and compare it to the current internationally recognized book of today, and it was very interesting to see the changes just in technique explanation alone.
Argentine Tango, for all those who don't want to admit it, has seen more changes influence by the ballroom world (and especially the "American way of teaching dance) in the past 10 years than anything. The old ways of dancing tango and teaching tango only exist in the few leftover purists. But if you attend a class by the masters Osvaldo and Lorena, Fabian and Carolina, Fernanda and Guillermo, Hugo and Miriam, Diego and Carolina (just to name a few) and you have any experience in ballroom or classical dance instruction you will find the influence. Years ago in Argentina you would not have learned anywhere near the scope of tango technique that is being taught today. Also, many new patterns have been created. Just they are not subscribed within a "standardized syllabus" (created in ballroom NOT for the purpose of selling lessons, but for the purpose of judging competitions), but are individual stylistic patterns created by each of these tango teachers themselves and then
spread onto their students. But the idea of teaching technique at all never came from Argentina, but the influence of the way other dance is taught in both Europe and the United States. Argentine Tango has evolved tremendously, mostly because of it's new popularity throughout the rest of the world. Every dance has been influenced by another...whether it's salsa, swing, hustle, cha cha, waltz, or Argentine tango. Just as every artist is influenced by the current and previous artists.
And, I'm speaking from someone who dances all three styles: Argentine Tango, American Tango and International Tango....as well as ALL the styles of Salsa, ALL the styles of Swing, both American and International style ballroom and latin, and many of the styles of Hustle.
Nicole
Miami
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 14:37:13 -0400
From: Alan McPherron <mcph+@PITT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
On Fri, 13 Jun 2003, Bibi Wong wrote:
> I have a few thoughts after reading the recent postings that compare tango
> and ballroom dance.
> . . .
> If people criticize that the rankings of curriculum (Bronze, Silver & Gold)
> in ballroom dance is to lure people to take classes, I don't see AT being
> more innocent about it. In fact, AT may be even worst, because sometimes we
> don't even know what exact level the teachers (particularly the travelling
> international teachers) are teaching which easily leads to dancers learning
> advanced material before they are ready to do them. In the extreme cases,
> some of the prestigeous teachers do not to tell the students if they are
> teaching tango, milonga or waltz, much less any specific movements.
>
And worse than that, they sometimes teach one routine (Step?) and then go
on to another without making it clear that they're getting into something
different, and what the relationship is between the two. That can make
for big confusion and wrecks retention.
A l a n Tangueros-Unidos de Pittsburgh
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 15:56:35 -0700
From: Bruno <romerob@TELUSPLANET.NET>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
<The old ways of dancing tango and teaching tango only exist in the few
leftover purists.>
The old ways of dancing tango in the form of historical figures are still
around in the dance halls and milongas and you may see it in the form of
ochos, sits, corridas, media luna, etc., The intention, feeling, and way to
dance of tango have changed as well as the music. What I am getting at is
that the old ways of dancing tango are part of the Tango culture and have a
sentimental value. My hair can stand up from listening and dancing antique
tango, and I might be able to experience similar feelings to those from
people who danced tango during those times.
Regards,
Bruno
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2003 14:42:10 -0700
From: Tango Guy <tangomundo55@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Tango, Baile Nuestro
I think change is a good thing. But then so is a lack of change. Things change or don't change for both bad as well as for good reasons. The use of the words "bad" and "good" is really a judgment call in and of itself.
If I was against change, I wouldn't Argentine Tango. However, I wouldn't Ballroom dance either since it also changes. It may change differently then Argentine Tango BUT it does change.I am neither a traditionalist nor an advocate for change. Although, I usually don't classify myself, I might be better classified as a " Practicalist" That is, if it works, don't change it. If it doesn't work, change it. Everyone is free to make the decision as to how well something works and free to decide how to change or not change it.
If you are concerned about what word would make me feel better, no word that implies a lack of change such as "static" would do it because Ballroom does change.
I agree that without change, the macarena may not ever have existed. But if nothing remained unchanged, the macarena may not ever have existed either. There would not have been a stable base for it to have come into existence.
Please read my e-mail in regards to Ricardo Tanturi's response for a fuller explanation of my point-of-view.
I'm glad that we both agree that Ballroom dancers are not necessarily static or stagnant.
Smiles
Tango Guy
"Frank G. Williams" <frankw@MAIL.AHC.UMN.EDU> wrote:
Tango Guy & friends,
Hold the phone.
> To call Ballroom Tango or any other Ballroom
> dance stagnant is an insult to all those who have learned to do it well.
Question: Does the fact that - let me think of a good example - Bruck's
Scottish Fantasy (for violin) hasn't changed much lately make all those who
master it's nuances 'stagnant' musicians??? No way. Of course, learning is
exciting and worthwhile and represents change in an individual. But I'm
sticking to my opinion. I was talking about dances, not dancERS. However,
if it will make you feel better you may change 'stagnant' to 'static'.
What if people decided that, considering Beethoven's genius, no more trios
needed to be written after the Archduke. That music is just as great today
as in 1811. "We like it. We're done. We'll just keep playing that one
better and better but if we get tired of it we'll throw in a little Hayden."
Silly, obviously. Had dancers done that then we might have never known the
thrill of the Macarena.
> Ballroom dancers are not stagnant people because there is so much to
learn.
Amigo, I quite agree. Their dances, on the other hand...
Frank - Mpls.
