998  The Latest (seemingly unending) Discussion of Tango styles

Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 01:07:17 -0800
From: lindavalentino <lindavalentino@PRODIGY.NET>
Subject: The Latest (seemingly unending) Discussion of Tango styles

Folks,
This discussion has taken place over and over and over again on this list,
almost always involving the same people expressing the same opinions. I
suggest that everyone come to Tango Fireworks this summer and hear a real
EXPERT, Eduardo Arquimbau, give his lecture and demonstration on the history
and evolution of tango styles. Eduardo, who is 65, has been dancing tango
since he was 13 years old. He was THERE from the early 1950s on. And he is
also quite a scholar, having spent many years documenting the subject,
interviewing milongueros much older than himself, tracking down old film
from the 1920s, '30s and '40s, etc. Many people have been begging him to
write a book, but he just can't stop researching. If you truly want to
understand the difference between salon, orillero, fantasia, "tango danza"
(or show), confiteria, as well as the primitive styles of tango like
canyengue and tango-milonga, come and hear/see his presentation. By the way,
I had the experience of listening to a discussion of this subject last year
among Eduardo, Nestor Ray and Nito Garcia, who together represent about 140
years of dancing. They agreed about 99% regarding the various definitions
and origins of styles, so that's got to count for something! Also
interesting for you folks who are confused about the term "salon," Nito,
whose dancing is usually described by people in this country as "salon" said
emphatically during this discussion, "What I do is fantasia, not salon."
Hope to see you at Tango Fireworks!
--Linda Valentino
PS: By the way, Tom, you left me out of the list of "Rhythmic Close-Embrace"
teachers. You also forgot Nestor Ray, whom we are fortunate to have in this
country.

Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 17:15:36 -0800
From: luda_r1 <luda_r1@YAHOO.COM>
Subject: The Latest (seemingly unending) Discussion of

Hi folks,

What difference does it make what style men CANNOT
LEAD?

In the discussion we had recently about "wet noodles",
etc. there seemed to be a certain consensus of opinion
that men are not taught to lead properly because
there's more money in teaching patterns than
technique. Of which leading is an integral part.

So. If men can't lead, what difference does it make
what style they CANNOT lead? It's equally frustrating
to us women. It's like saying, "I can't communicate in
five different languages". Who gives a rat's
harrumph... tail?

We women are easy to please. We'll dance to any style
that a man can lead. Properly. (Which means CLEARLY,
Frank, of course!). :)))

Luda