Salsa Connection or what is missing?

T

t0mt0m

If I can hijack the thread a bit, and try and link to some of what Jamie's thread started to touch on: Cheeky link now also - I linked to it on the addicted2salsa.com forum thread addicted2salsa.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=629 but no replies as yet :(

blog.salsa-challenge.com has a series of articles about the "salsa connection*". I'll give you a rough definition, as it comes under many names, depending who you talk to, but does seem to permeate threads, if you're looking out for it.

"Salsa connection is the foundational relationship between dance partners that allows them to communicate amazing amounts of information almost instantly so that they dance together smoothly and seemingly effortlessly."

The first article called Introduction to the Salsa Connection Blog Series is blog.salsa-challenge.com/2008/06/16/salsa-connection--part-1-introduction-to-the-salsa-connection-blog-series.aspx

Okay, so now to link up "salsa connection" with a deleted thread:

becomingasalsero's blog post by Walter de Rooij called "Are you dancing salsa the right way?" touched on the "instructor challenge" thread. Walter's post came out of reading Jamie's thread (not sure how many pages the thread was at that point...) Walter felt that Jamie was stating that he felt something was being lost in salsa due to the way it was taught in dance studios.

It seemed to go in two directions -
1) A lack of close hold teaching at studios (if it was really taught earlier on)
2) Teaching potentially being more flashy combos turn patterns etc, rather than what i'll describe as salsa connection.

Obviously LA and NYC style are more open to faster more energetic moves and dancing than say cuban style. The point being made that if salsa is being learnt primarily through lessons at studios, then teaching how to dance salsa close hold, and what styles, moves, leads, styling etc is available for that is not being passed on.

So, to throw out a question as well - how is a lead to learn how to make an interesting and varied dance in a close hold or slow speed salsa? Where do you start?

Opening that out to what leads follows enjoy - is it me or is there a paucity of dvd or other training and or training material out there that tackles this head on? There are many dvds on moves, spins etc - that may or may not be leadable. But what about the fundamentals of salsa connection, which may help get the lead to have a better lead, a smoother one, something that'll make the dance great? Having read another thread, it seems in a way, that Edie's video series on best leads covers this in a way.

It's strange that you don't see it so much in other places.

The feeling of salsa lacking something does seem to have cropped up before, e.g. here

I guess it's what both of you want or would enjoy from the dance. I think people can enjoy all sorts of styles of salsa - the point being that there is a component of dancing not necessarily touched upon in dancing tuition, but very useful to know when on the dance floor, to share with those you'd want to. The higher level intimacy dance is usually for your S.O., i'd imagine, potentially dance partner(s), or if you're single, perhaps to a receptive dancer.

*Nearest thing I can come to a better definition for salsa connection is www.strictlysalsa.co.uk/aboutus.shtml - in the philosophy section.

Hmm, not sure if I've made it clear enough what i'm trying to get to. It's kinda linked to how to teach salsa. I'm not one myself, just a beginner salsero in all your company, but enjoy thinking about the teaching aspect, and what actually might work, what could get improved and so forth. Maybe another thread, another time :)
 
t0mt0m said:
"Salsa connection is the foundational relationship between dance partners that allows them to communicate amazing amounts of information almost instantly so that they dance together smoothly and seemingly effortlessly."


becomingasalsero's blog post by Walter de Rooij called "Are you dancing salsa the right way?" touched on the "instructor challenge" thread. Walter's post came out of reading Jamie's thread (not sure how many pages the thread was at that point...) Walter felt that Jamie was stating that he felt something was being lost in salsa due to the way it was taught in dance studios.



Hmm, not sure if I've made it clear enough what i'm trying to get to. It's kinda linked to how to teach salsa.
Click to expand...





Too many points to cover, so I picked 3 that were relevant to the topic .


Para 1.. ALL dances have connection built in thru their basic structure.. but.. one cannot define that by " closeness " or closed hold. Case in point Intern. style B/room and WCswing .

Without " connection " , even in B/room with its closed hold, it still still would lack in specific areas . The nuance of dance is subtle, and in some cases, in definable /




Para. 2 .... The " right " way to "dance " or teach salsa ?... I dont think there is a "right " way to teach or dance. Of course, if one is not equipped with a sound fundamental knowledge of the product, then that would be a concern .

There are many things in basic work that should be taught, but closed position is very dependant on the class and or private lesson makeup, but is not necessarily high on the initial agenda .

There is good technique, but that again, depends on ones understanding and also how it is delivered .



I clearly understand his point ........ However.. the drawbacks are very obvious as it restricts the variety available. And Yes, I do believe it could be taught in class work when appropriate .


Para. 3... Studio teaching... if the reference was to B/Room schools, I would agree with a high percentage, but what is happening in many schools, is a trend that might get larger. Several I have recently come across ( happened to me recently ) are bringing in teachers who have developed some skills in the genre, and all they teach is Salsa.

I dont even believe that is the root of the problem , a contributor ? possibly .
The reality is this ( it happened with Hustle in the 70s ) A very high percentage get their salsa " fix " from club classes. In many instances, the people teaching at these venues are ill equipped themselves. However, even if one had all the knowledge in the world, the attendees ,by and large, are not interested in indepth instruction ( ya really dont have the time ). And I know, that is not an exscuse for bad teaching .

Even with all my yrs experience, in my class work ,I have to be very careful how much info. I disseminate in any given class . The attention span of groups is measured in seconds . Do I show them " closed " hold.. yes.. do I dwell on it .. no.
 
bump

chrisk said:
Flujo said:
4. There are also some thoughts on connection and whether we need to have a certain amount of things in common stylistically and technically in order for it to be strong...
Click to expand...
Hm, I haven't yet thought much about connection in this regard, but I think that two important factor influencing it, are how you and your partner approach the music and the dance in general. Or what you do mean with 'things in common stylistically and technically'?
Click to expand...
Chris, we can talk about it here. I'm chuffed that you're up for a discussion so yeah, let's bore everyone to death again. :lol:
To be honest with you my thoughts on this aren't really that clear right now but it's pretty much the same as you mentioned - 'how you and your partner approach the music and the dance in general'. I want to connect with someone when dancing, emotionally and stylistically. The technical side is a bit tricky to talk about being out of the loop with lessons and all of that.

At the moment I'm feeling that the stronger connections come from enjoying simple interactions with each other and through enjoying the dynamics of the dance. If I feel no pressure to throw in moves and make things exciting (loud, noticeable, challenging) in the technical sense then it is a LOT easier to build the dance up. You understand what I mean? Hmm, this isn't really a stylistic thing is it? If there is that pressure then the connection is more likely to break down as I try to throw everything at my partner without the skill to do it as perfectly as humanly possible.

There is one follower in particular who I have a really strong connection with as she seems to be really receptive to the basics, is great with eye contact and with subtly communicating her likes and dislikes. I'd probably die if I found out she was just being polite and actually hates dancing with me, hehe. With her the connection isn't about 'if I lead this right then she will follow'. It's about 'if I hold her in this way then she'll respond differently'. The connection is a lot deeper. Some followers seem to have a certain sensitivity about them that is really, really nice to be able to experience. It's like you can whisper to them and they hear you perfectly clearly. That's the best way I can think of putting it.

What are your thoughts on this people?

That's pretty much where the pickiness is coming from Chris. If I know that a dance will be just a bunch of moves then I'm more likely not to ask these days because right now I'm dancing purely for enjoyment and am not in a place where it is about perfecting skills. If I were in lessons my mindset would be completely different and it would be all about getting as much practice as possible.

chrisk said:
At the same time, I've learned or rather reminded myself about some general aspect of dancing: To treat my partner like a woman, build a good connection with her and adapt my repertoire to her level.
Click to expand...
Have you found that partners who ooze femininity are a lot easier to connect with in that respect? And what do you mean by 'treat your partner like a woman' - would you mind expanding on that? I (ed: know) what you mean but wouldn't mind knowing for sure. ;)
 
Flujo's post is a good one. He makes some very good points about keeping the focus on the communication (i.e. the connection) and the music vs. on performing a bunch of moves (as if somehow a flurry of action is the only way to prevent boredom in the dance).

Don Baarns (a.k.a. the Unlikely Salsero) said this in a recent blog post:

More complexity doesn't equal "better dancing", and in the social scene, it's often inappropriate with the music playing at the moment. After a lead spins his partner 6 times, spinning her 12 or 24 times isn't two to four times more fun for the follow. It actually gets boring at some point, and a world-class follow once told me she thinks, "OK... I can spin as much as you want, so how about we dance?"

When you hang out with world-class musicians, dancers or athletes, you find they often approach things differently. While they constantly push to develop extreme technical abilities, they also find a joy in performing "simple" skills, but doing them exceptionally well.
Click to expand...

It was a very loud "amen!" from me when I read that. This is exactly how I feel as a follower. To be honest, the leaders that beginners often fawn over because of how often they lead turns and a bunch of fancy stuff are generally the ones that I don't really enjoy dancing with all that much. Why? Because the majority of them are so focused on leading a bunch of stuff (either because they think it looks good or they think it's what the ladies want or both) that they don't show the slightest bit of attention to the connection with their partner and the music. To echo Don's comments, yes I can spin as often as you want. But I've done it enough times that it doesn't really impress me all that much unless a leader is leading it in a way that fits the music and enhances what we've built in the dance so far. When you find a partner who does both, oh my goodness! But if have to choose between a leader who knows how to spin and do fancy and a leader who knows how to give me connection and musicality, take a wild guess as to which one I will enjoy more.

Don't get me wrong. I love pushing myself physically and technically. I love how I feel in my body when I'm doing turns and tricks and all that flashy stuff. But only when it actually fits the music and the situation. It is extremely frustrating when you hear the music and understand the music and love the music - and are dancing with someone who isn't paying the slightest attention to the music. It forces you to try to ignore the music because your partner is forcing you to choose between following one or the other (him or the music). The best partners do not make you choose. The best dancers allow the music and their partner (and their own personality too) to all equally form the basis for the dance, whether that's complicated or extremely simple (both can be enjoyable at different times depending on your mood, the music, the space available, etc.).

To me, this is the essence of "salsa connection".

And Joy dismounts her soapbox...
 
More complexity doesn't equal "better dancing", and in the social scene, it's often inappropriate with the music playing at the moment. After a lead spins his partner 6 times, spinning her 12 or 24 times isn't two to four times more fun for the follow. It actually gets boring at some point, and a world-class follow once told me she thinks, "OK... I can spin as much as you want, so how about we dance?"

When you hang out with world-class musicians, dancers or athletes, you find they often approach things differently. While they constantly push to develop extreme technical abilities, they also find a joy in performing "simple" skills, but doing them exceptionally well.


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I co-sign this statement. Plenty of follows I know follows who dislike being spun to death... although i also know a few dancers who love to spin but desire to only have it done only once or twice in a dance. I know some dancers who would rather not be spun 349834345985 times but in all moves that could be given a "double" or "triple" they would prefer for momentum purposes I suppose.

I never do more than 3 ... anything more is in officially show mode in my opinion. No reason to bust out competition number of spins.
 
I'm gonna throw a grenade into this

Ok first of all, everything is a move. Most dances I've seen are just a bunch of moves besides the older couples just grooving in close in an unstructured way (which is ok, I'm just saying that's probably not how most of us dance). There is, of course, a difference between dances where the bunch of moves fits the music and the ones where it doesn't. But I think this negatively connoted "just doing a bunch of moves" concept is fallacious.

Second of all, increased complexity doesn't mean just spinning the lady more, nor does it prevent communication from occurring, nor does it mean the leader is ignoring the music. It's just another way of having fun with the dance. It shouldn't be done in excess, but then again neither should anything else.

When I dance it's a mixture of simple and complex. And when I say complex I mean I end up moving around more too. It's rare that I'll even lead a triple spin. I think it's really cool to work as a team and execute complicated stuff, but that doesn't in any way mean I don't enjoy the simpler stuff too. I listen to the music and match what I'm doing to it as well as I can, but it's not easy (and if the floor is crowded don't hold your breath; safety first). Sometimes I don't see a break coming or an accent comes up and I don't get it the way I wanted to. It doesn't mean I'm not listening to the music, just that I misjudged. I give my follower space to do what she wants and I play off it if I can. If she starts grooving at the same time I'm about to start/finish a move, I abort because I'd rather her be able to do what she wants. I communicate as much as I can, but some followers would rather stare off into space. Even in that situation I continuously try to read the follower and adjust accordingly.

Yes, I do a bunch of moves. Yes, I do complex stuff with those who can handle it. I don't think either is a bad thing. Maybe I'm wrong and I'm not a good dancer because of those facts, but I do my best and have fun and that's all I can ask for.
 
GForce85 said:
Ok first of all, everything is a move. Most dances I've seen are just a bunch of moves besides the older couples just grooving in close in an unstructured way (which is ok, I'm just saying that's probably not how most of us dance). There is, of course, a difference between dances where the bunch of moves fits the music and the ones where it doesn't. But I think this negatively connoted "just doing a bunch of moves" concept is fallacious.
Click to expand...
Did those comments come across as a bit of a jab? If so they weren't meant to at all. What I was saying (and I assume Joy is too) is that my 'personal preference' is to approach dancers who like a different kind of interaction. I'm not slating purely technical dancing at all as different people get different things out of it. Joys' articles on 'Flow' talk about the different aspects of dance, like dance as sport, as art, as conversation and so on. I'm more of an art and conversation man. The reason for the post was to share some thoughts on the topic. The intention wasn't to create a 'vs' debate about which approach is better. Dancing is a personal activity and we all enjoy it a way that is specific to us so it doesn't matter - actually let me change that to 'it shouldn't be dependent on' - what anyone else thinks. :)

I'm sure most partners would prefer a good technical dancer to a bad musical one (damn, I've qualified as bad more than a few times :P just to qualify that statement). I think the problem here is in the terms and the perceptions they create. Once again, where you place your emphasis when dancing is purely a personal thing and is not better or worse than anyone else's idea of a good time on the floor.
 
My fault here, upon re-reading I see I came across quite aggressively. My point about the moves didn't come just from what I've read in this thread but rather what I've read and heard multiple places. So now it's like I see or hear the term "bunch of moves" and attack :oops:. I was just trying to say that using moves doesn't necessarily make one less musical or communicative. It's all in how you use them. It can be an empty experience or it can be an adventure together. But the way most people are trained these days, dances are full of moves regardless.

Then regarding the complexity, I was trying to say that dances at a high technical level aren't necessarily purely technical. It was not my intent either to create/perpetuate a versus debate, but rather to point out that technical dances and musical/interactive dances aren't mutually exclusive. You don't necessarily lose the technical aspect for a stronger connection and you don't necessarily lose the connection for higher level technique. I was just a little too "in-your-face" in my approach, and I apologize for that.

For the record, I LOVE being interactive and playing with my partners and I do think it makes the dances a lot more fulfilling. But there's nothing wrong with ramping it up a bit and doing complex stuff together either. It takes good teamwork to make it through smoothly. I think it's easy to tell the difference between complex moves done with two people really communicating together and those done with the guy being a puppeteer and/or the lady being on auto-pilot, and the former looks and feels a lot better.
 
GForce85 said:
Ok first of all, everything is a move. Most dances I've seen are just a bunch of moves besides the older couples just grooving in close in an unstructured way (which is ok, I'm just saying that's probably not how most of us dance). There is, of course, a difference between dances where the bunch of moves fits the music and the ones where it doesn't. But I think this negatively connoted "just doing a bunch of moves" concept is fallacious.

Second of all, increased complexity doesn't mean just spinning the lady more, nor does it prevent communication from occurring, nor does it mean the leader is ignoring the music. It's just another way of having fun with the dance. It shouldn't be done in excess, but then again neither should anything else.

When I dance it's a mixture of simple and complex. And when I say complex I mean I end up moving around more too. It's rare that I'll even lead a triple spin. I think it's really cool to work as a team and execute complicated stuff, but that doesn't in any way mean I don't enjoy the simpler stuff too. I listen to the music and match what I'm doing to it as well as I can, but it's not easy (and if the floor is crowded don't hold your breath; safety first). Sometimes I don't see a break coming or an accent comes up and I don't get it the way I wanted to. It doesn't mean I'm not listening to the music, just that I misjudged. I give my follower space to do what she wants and I play off it if I can. If she starts grooving at the same time I'm about to start/finish a move, I abort because I'd rather her be able to do what she wants. I communicate as much as I can, but some followers would rather stare off into space. Even in that situation I continuously try to read the follower and adjust accordingly.

Yes, I do a bunch of moves. Yes, I do complex stuff with those who can handle it. I don't think either is a bad thing. Maybe I'm wrong and I'm not a good dancer because of those facts, but I do my best and have fun and that's all I can ask for.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, GForce. I think maybe it's the words and phrases that are being thrown around. When we say "just doing a bunch of moves," what we are really trying to say is "just doing a bunch of moves without regard for one's partner and the music." This might seem like such an obvious negative quality, but apparently it's not since so many of us are commenting on this "problem." When we say complicated, I think we are referring to what other people may think they are seeing... "Ooooh, I see a bunch of spins and flashy moves, this must be more complicated and therefore better dancing!" (when sometimes nothing could be further from the truth if the leader/follower/couple in question is in actuality not showing good connection, technique, or musicality).

Based on your description of how you dance, it sounds like you are not one of the dancers in question. But unfortunately, this attitude does not seem to be prevalent. Many do not "get it," and so they spend tons of time and money learning as many moves as they can; meanwhile they don't pay attention to the comfort of their partner or seek to learn more about the music or find a connection that feels good to their partner.

I think I mentioned in my previous post that I enjoy doing moves as well. Sometimes when a certain song comes on I want to dance with someone who can give me some complicated moves and turns because they feel good and they match the intensity I feel for the song. But I don't want that person to sacrifice the music or their connection with me in the process. I think you would agree with that as well, because it sounds like you do that. I don't think we are asking for perfection in the connection or musicality department, but if you are attentive yourself it's pretty easy to tell when someone is listening to the music and to you even if they miss something on occasion. In fact, the "mistakes" can actually be fun because they challenge you to find interesting ways to come out of it and reconnect, which I find quite enjoyable and a nice way of connecting with someone if they have a positive attitude and sense of humor.

I don't think you are saying this, GForce, but going off on a different tangent... I have heard people say this on occasion: "Some people are just interested in moves and that's it. They don't necessarily care about the music or being all smooth for their partner. But that's their choice. Every person wants something different from the dance, and you have to respect that." My answer: I do respect that. And I can't say I would never dance with such a person or that I would look down on that person. But my personal choice is to dance as much as possible with people who have good connection and musicality (or at least the ones who attempt it and desire to achieve it). If someone has that and can give me some more complicated moves that are enjoyable, even better because moves can be so fun! But for those who just want to throw me around the dance floor to prove that they can spin a girl (assuming here that they are not with the music and have no idea what I'm feeling in the dance)... uh, no thanks. I might dance with them on occasion to be friendly and for the experience, but the enjoyment factor for me will be very low because I love the music and I want to be able to dance to it and not against it. But really, if someone dances like that on a consistent basis, I'd rather they ask someone else.
 
GForce85 said:
My fault here, upon re-reading I see I came across quite aggressively. My point about the moves didn't come just from what I've read in this thread but rather what I've read and heard multiple places. So now it's like I see or hear the term "bunch of moves" and attack :oops:. I was just trying to say that using moves doesn't necessarily make one less musical or communicative. It's all in how you use them. It can be an empty experience or it can be an adventure together. But the way most people are trained these days, dances are full of moves regardless.

Then regarding the complexity, I was trying to say that dances at a high technical level aren't necessarily purely technical. It was not my intent either to create/perpetuate a versus debate, but rather to point out that technical dances and musical/interactive dances aren't mutually exclusive. You don't necessarily lose the technical aspect for a stronger connection and you don't necessarily lose the connection for higher level technique. I was just a little too "in-your-face" in my approach, and I apologize for that.

For the record, I LOVE being interactive and playing with my partners and I do think it makes the dances a lot more fulfilling. But there's nothing wrong with ramping it up a bit and doing complex stuff together either. It takes good teamwork to make it through smoothly. I think it's easy to tell the difference between complex moves done with two people really communicating together and those done with the guy being a puppeteer and/or the lady being on auto-pilot, and the former looks and feels a lot better.
Click to expand...

Haha, looks like we were writing our responses at the same time. ;)

Once again, I agree with everything you've written. Thank you for the thoughtful response. And I like the phrase about the puppeteer and the auto-pilot. Can I use that line? :)

I think it is important as we are having this discussion to make sure we include the positive aspect of moves because I really don't want them to go anywhere! But sometimes we do get carried away on a point and can end up taking it to an extreme that we are not intending just to emphasize what we find to be missing in the dance.

Based on what you've written, GForce, I would love to dance with you sometime. And I've been wanting to dance with Flujo for a while. :)
 
Joy in Motion said:
Haha, looks like we were writing our responses at the same time. ;)

Once again, I agree with everything you've written. Thank you for the thoughtful response. And I like the phrase about the puppeteer and the auto-pilot. Can I use that line? :)

I think it is important as we are having this discussion to make sure we include the positive aspect of moves because I really don't want them to go anywhere! But sometimes we do get carried away on a point and can end up taking it to an extreme that we are not intending just to emphasize what we find to be missing in the dance.

Based on what you've written, GForce, I would love to dance with you sometime. And I've been wanting to dance with Flujo for a while. :)
Click to expand...
Thank you for both of your posts clarifying where you were coming from on the issue (and thanks for yours too, Flujo). I have no copyrights on anything I say here -- or anywhere for that matter haha -- so feel free to use whatever you want. I think it would be a pleasure to dance with you too :)
 
terence said:
Para. 2 .... The " right " way to "dance " or teach salsa ?... I dont think there is a "right " way to teach or dance.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree that there is no right or wrong way. I hope that also became clear at the end of that blog entry. The title was a bit provocative on purpose as to get people thinking ;-).

In the entry I mainly discussed physical closeness, not emotional closeness and why I think there is a difference between f.i. Cuban and L.A.
Personally I believe that cultural background has a lot to do with that but then, that is only speculation on my side. I'd be perfectly happy if somebody points out that I'm wrong :)

Connection was something I didn't touch in that entry as that is still something I'm trying to grasp myself. I mean, I know when it is there and when it is not but I'm not sure yet as to why or why it is not there.

Flujo said:
If I feel no pressure to throw in moves and make things exciting (loud, noticeable, challenging) in the technical sense then it is a LOT easier to build the dance up. You understand what I mean? Hmm, this isn't really a stylistic thing is it? If there is that pressure then the connection is more likely to break down as I try to throw everything at my partner without the skill to do it as perfectly as humanly possible.
Click to expand...
I can definitely relate to this. Now all I need to do is find a way to not pressure myself into trying to throw everything (except the kitchen sink ;-) ) at a partner that is a higher level dancer than me.

Although rationally I know it isn't necessarily true there is a part of me that is scared my partner will be bored if I don't throw everything at her. Anybody figure out how to get over that?

Flujo said:
Some followers seem to have a certain sensitivity about them that is really, really nice to be able to experience. It's like you can whisper to them and they hear you perfectly clearly. That's the best way I can think of putting it.
Click to expand...
The best way I could have never put it :-). It makes perfect sense to me.

ptwist said:
More complexity doesn't equal "better dancing", and in the social scene, it's often inappropriate with the music playing at the moment.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Actually, I often find it funny to see somebody spin their partner 6 times when a really slow song is playing where even a triple would seem out of place. Then again, when it comes to spinning I guess I'm weird anyway. I get bored when I'm spinning my partner a zillion times so I rarely do it anyway. The exception being one follow that loves to be spun 8 -12 times but like you said, only once or maximum twice per song. She too says that after that it gets boring.
 
bas said:
In the entry I mainly discussed physical closeness, not emotional closeness and why I think there is a difference between f.i. Cuban and L.A.
Personally I believe that cultural background has a lot to do with that ,

Although rationally I know it isn't necessarily true there is a part of me that is scared my partner will be bored if I don't throw everything at her. Anybody figure out how to get over that?

Agreed. Actually, I often find it funny to see somebody spin their partner 6 times when a really slow song is playing where even a triple would seem out of place.
Click to expand...


Culturally, yes,, but also.. "partnership " dancing ,( as in B/room style ) went thru a metamorphosis, due to the puritanical nature of western culture, going from a closed to open position, and back again . The old style Cuban dances(ers ) really never succumbed to that mindset . Even today, in places like Tampa, most of the older cubanos dance in closed position for ALL of the dances played. ( I always teach my beginners to dance in a closed position in Salsa.. it limits variety, but serves a purpose )


Mambo played a large role in the "separation" due to the type of variety that was introduced .


AS to your "fear ", the old adage " less is more " works remarkably well.. its never content and always quality .

lastly..the spin thing.. thats primarily because students are seldom taught HOW to express music .
 
GForce85 said:
<snip>

Then regarding the complexity, I was trying to say that dances at a high technical level aren't necessarily purely technical. It was not my intent either to create/perpetuate a versus debate, but rather to point out that technical dances and musical/interactive dances aren't mutually exclusive. You don't necessarily lose the technical aspect for a stronger connection and you don't necessarily lose the connection for higher level technique.<snip>
Click to expand...

Since I was quoted earlier I'll stick my nose in a little and repeat what many others have said.

My primary point is complexity IS not bad in context with the right partner and the right music. Too many leads confuse complexity with "good dancing" but most on this board understand that's not the case.

While I used "spinning" as an example of complexity, it's just an example. Complex arm twisty pretzel moves also don't work for me during a nice calm section in a salsa tune (like the tune below...)

youtube.com/watch?v=GQfK_FemYMk
(Lenny Kravitz, Thinking of You)

Around 3:15 I can start making a case for MORE complexity (the horn section is working), but it goes back down to calm when he starts singing again. And of course, simple the whole time can also be boring, it depends on how you do "simple".

Many advanced dancers can do basic or a single spin with such finesse that it looks amazing. The complexity is in the details, but they do it so well it all looks easy (until I try to do it myself...)

For me the real question is does my dance reflect the differences between the calm sections of the tune and the higher energy sections? I prefer the largest contrast possible, within the range the music provides.

In my mind overall this tune is primarily calm/chill with a few high points. (I love the feel...)

I agree with the fact that connection can (and should) happen during the complex moves, it's not one or the other.

And to put it all into perspective: Emotion is dramatically enhanced by contrast. If someone yells at you for an extended period, it doesn't take too long to start tuning them out. If they are the quiet type but then start screaming at you, it's harder to miss.

If your dance reflects a wider dynamic, from calm, simple moves to very complex, AND you use them at times which match the music, your overall dancing is much stronger and more interesting than the dancer who stays closer to one level (even if that is very, very complex).
 
Flujo said:
Chris, we can talk about it here. I'm chuffed that you're up for a discussion so yeah, let's bore everyone to death again. :lol:
Click to expand...

Well, we don't have to as long as we not stray into difficult to follow science. :)

Flujo said:
To be honest with you my thoughts on this aren't really that clear right now but it's pretty much the same as you mentioned - 'how you and your partner approach the music and the dance in general'. I want to connect with someone when dancing, emotionally and stylistically. The technical side is a bit tricky to talk about being out of the loop with lessons and all of that.
Click to expand...

I will completely agree with you about connection emotionally, but not stylistically. I think it's important to connect emotionally since every song that we hear and dance to will provoke some feelings in us. And as those feelings influence the way we move, the moves we pick to lead our partner through and/or the styling elements we or she will use, we want to communicate our feelings to each other. But this isn't necessarily through in my understanding for the style. It will certainly look much better to adapt your styling to match the one from your partner but it's not decisive to influence the connection that you've got. Even with different styles, you can in my opinion, achieve a strong emotional connection between you and your partner.

Flujo said:
At the moment I'm feeling that the stronger connections come from enjoying simple interactions with each other and through enjoying the dynamics of the dance. If I feel no pressure to throw in moves and make things exciting (loud, noticeable, challenging) in the technical sense then it is a LOT easier to build the dance up. You understand what I mean? Hmm, this isn't really a stylistic thing is it? If there is that pressure then the connection is more likely to break down as I try to throw everything at my partner without the skill to do it as perfectly as humanly possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, but then I have to ask, where does the pressure come from? Is it coming from your partner as she's communicating that she feels bored, is it your interpretation of her behaviour that she might feel bored or are you purely putting the pressure on yourself to up the ante? But certainly this isn't a stylistically thing and rather influencing your emotions and the emotional connection.

And again I'll agree with you that too much pressure can introduce cracks into the connection, but there's also the chance for your partner to help you ease the pressure that you're feeling. A simple smile is not only the shortest connection between two people, but also can show you and/or your partner that you enjoy whatever is just happening and that you can feel relaxed.

Flujo said:
There is one follower in particular who I have a really strong connection with as she seems to be really receptive to the basics, is great with eye contact and with subtly communicating her likes and dislikes. I'd probably die if I found out she was just being polite and actually hates dancing with me, hehe.
Click to expand...

I don't think so, because while it's easy to fake a smile, it's much more difficult to fake the smile that your eyes transmit if you're really enjoying something. Also if she regularly accept your request to dance with a smile, then she's certainly enjoying it. :)

Flujo said:
With her the connection isn't about 'if I lead this right then she will follow'. It's about 'if I hold her in this way then she'll respond differently'. The connection is a lot deeper. Some followers seem to have a certain sensitivity about them that is really, really nice to be able to experience. It's like you can whisper to them and they hear you perfectly clearly. That's the best way I can think of putting it.
Click to expand...

Word, man!

Flujo said:
That's pretty much where the pickiness is coming from Chris. If I know that a dance will be just a bunch of moves then I'm more likely not to ask these days because right now I'm dancing purely for enjoyment and am not in a place where it is about perfecting skills.
Click to expand...

True, but you only know that after you danced at least twice with such a person to see if there's not way to build a connection and introduce her to more emotional dances. If she's really just into dancing with a bunch of moves, then I can understand your pickiness in some way. But if there's a chance to break the ice and have a dance with more then just moves, I would give it a try. Remember, if you try, you can win, but if you don't, you've directly lost.

Flujo said:
Have you found that partners who ooze femininity are a lot easier to connect with in that respect? And what do you mean by 'treat your partner like a woman' - would you mind expanding on that? I (ed: know) what you mean but wouldn't mind knowing for sure. ;)
Click to expand...

Hm, your question is a good one, but I'm having a bit of trouble to really answer it. I haven't yet payed much attention to the relation between femininity in my dance partner and the connection that I can build. But I'll try to keep an eye on it and maybe we'll revisit in some other thread.

So I'll rather answer your second question. When I talk about treating your partner as woman, then it first means that she's not a guinea pig to try all your latest and/or most complicated moves whether they fit the music and even more important whether she can follow them at all. It also means that at first after having asked for a dance, you'll start out slow to build up a connection with her before you switch gears. Also this means that you pay full attention to her and not try to flirt with the lady in the couple next to you, even when you got the hot's for her. Most woman and dance partners that I met, enjoy the feeling of having your full attention and being made special for the songs that you share together. Or would you ask a lady out to have dinner with her, but then go some chips stall where your friends hang out and make offensive comments about woman and your last girlfriend? No, you would rather bring her some flowers, take her to a good restaurant, have a table for two and have some nice food together with a friendly chat in between. So why stop treating your partner like a women once you enter a social or a club?

Joy in Motion said:
When you find a partner who does both, oh my goodness! But if have to choose between a leader who knows how to spin and do fancy and a leader who knows how to give me connection and musicality, take a wild guess as to which one I will enjoy more.
Click to expand...

Now, when do you intend to visit Europe and especially Germany? :) ;)

P.S.: And again this post got longer then intended. :(
 
UnlikelySalsero said:
And to put it all into perspective: Emotion is dramatically enhanced by contrast.
Click to expand...

This is a very important general concept and can even be applied to a single moment: quite often less looks more.

Last summer Edie TSF gave a musicality class Abel Pena. What stick to my mind most was a small detail that was not planned, but was very eye-opening to me. At some point Abel hit a break with his head only. Then someone asked whether he could do something more "more" (I can't remember exactly, but probably hitting the break with some footwork additionally). Then Abel said "Of course" and demonstrated it, but actually it did not look right at all. He immediately recognized it and also explained: adding footwork made the hit more diffuse and it lost focus and contrast.
 
bas said:
Although rationally I know it isn't necessarily true there is a part of me that is scared my partner will be bored if I don't throw everything at her. Anybody figure out how to get over that?
Click to expand...

Well, there are not just a few women who want a bunch of moves and spins and could care less about the connection and musicality stuff. So they add to the problem because leaders then legitimately wonder whether they should give them what they want. But not all of us are like that. I think you get to a point where you just make a choice as to what your priorities are. Yes, half of the dance is about them so definitely keep your moves in there assuming you can lead them well. But you may decide to just dance the way you want to and let them decide whether they enjoy it or not. If they seem bored and aren't satisfied unless you are going a mile a minute with them, then you shouldn't feel bad about dancing with them less often. And maybe they will start wondering what they are missing. A lot won't, but some dancers do start to get it more as they progress from the intermediate level (where they are finally feeling in the zone with the complicated stuff and like to revel in it for a bit) to a more mature and advanced level. Not to say that moves go away at this point but just that they no longer become the be-all-end-all but rather an avenue through which to explore the music and the partnership.
 
Flujo and Unlikely Salsero certainly do have a way with words, don't they?

I love the comments from several of you about contrast and building. That is exactly right. If that's what makes music exciting, doesn't it stand to reason that it is what makes the dance exciting as well?

Chrisk, I actually lived in Germany when I was little and am hoping (fingers crossed) to make it back to see some friends this summer. If not then, I will definitely be there next year when I will be taking a trip across Europe. Lots of dancing planned; I hope to dance with many of you guys!
 
Thanks for that post, Don. It actually kind of reminds me of what an old friend of mine told me about when I was a beginner and couldn't really understand how to apply it. He said it's good to kind of "change speeds" over the course of the dance to provide contrast. At the time I was like :confused: because even in retrospect I don't think he explained it all that well, but I think he was referring to what you just explained. That's something I've always kept in mind and something I always try to do now that I can.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top