I have done a dissertation on another site, but it will give me something to do that hopefully will be informative.
The site that was quoted (salsa-merengue.co.uk), was excellent from a historical perspective, but didn't really answer the more fundamental question of "dance" developement through the musical form.
The author, being a musician, took a different tack. I have responded to his piece, and will add my comments to him, after posting a more dance oriented slant.
The dance that is so pervasive "todo mundo" (world wide) and which all know as Salsa, came about through a very circuitive route. Everyone knows the term that is loosely attached as Afro/Cuban. It speaks more to the original rhythms of the dance, rather than the dance its self. (sweavo is your man on this !)
If one were to go back only as far as the thirties, the perception of Cuban dancing, as portrayed in movies, was the Bolero (todays ballroom dance was based upon that structure, more later on that). But let us look at the word Son - it has a double meaning - as a form of dance, and a musical form (it actually means "pleasing to the ear"). The son rhythm, along with the bolero interpretation, became a different form, structurally, from the established square form of Rhumba (this name became a catch all phrase for all of the latin dances). Out of this Danzon became the dance of choice, when faster rhythms were played. The fast rhumbas became known as Guarachas. And incase it is not known, most of these forms were danced in closed position (and still are by many cubans).
The term "Mambo", came to the public's attention in 1940, when Pérez Prado(
wikipedia), introduced it to the american public. Here is where the major change musically and structurely, in dance took place.
The danzon, which was essentially a square dance was changed to have a forward and back direction by taking the side step in Danzon to the left and a small step back with the right. I think you can see what was starting to develop. [Ed: Not really!] The name for the new format - Systemo Cubano
This was brought about by a change in the time signature from 2/4 to 4/4. This firmly placed the break on the 2nd beat of the bar. The amount of steps being used was very minimal, and is still the same with many of the older cubanos.
Enter the Arthur Murray (
wikipedia studio chain. Never missing an opportunity to advance his business, Arthur immediately consulted the most knowledgeable people he could find, to establish a format (which is stll in place today!!). In fact, the Murray studios still have mambo AND salsa by side on their step list (yes, there is a difference). This new dance craze in the fifties was highlighted by the many live t.v. shows the studios did on primetime. Suddenly, everyone wanted to dance Mambo! The Arthur Murray studios did more for the genre than anyone could begin to imagine.
I cannot begin to tell you the number of movie stars and personalities that showed up in the L/A [Ed: Latin American?] dance schools.
The status quo remained until the 1970s when a whole new approach arrived - the major approach to the current trends started to take place.
There are so many musicians that influenced the "new" sound, that I will not even begin to list them. Suffice to say, that the NY jazz musicians, as well as the established latin performers, made a directional change on their approach musically. Where one would regularly hear the sound of Charanga and Pachanga by many well known artists, the brass seemed to take charge, completely. Not that this was not already in place with Puente and the like. Machito always had the big sound, but also was very jazz influenced, from day one. The days of the sextet and quintets, were dwindling and the likes of La Playa and La Plata, seemed to get pushed into the background.
What we should examine, is how these changes affected the dance scene.
If you look at some of the clips available on YouTube from the 50/60s, I think one of the things you will notice is the way people dressed. No matter weeknight or weekend - dress to impress! One of my former coaches drilled this into me. People don't know how you feel when they see you dance - they only know how you look! - call it window dressing.
The only style at the time that seemed to be universal (dance, not personal) was obviously predominantly Cuban.
The current LA style is very close to that format - Lots of open breaks, cross body leads, etc. Shines were also very big, not too flashy, but more interpretive.
The music of the period seemed to dictate (like it always does) the content . Many of the moves, came out of the established ballroom schools, who had embelished the basic format beyond recognition (many latinos still feel that "their" culture has been Americanised).
I believe the main difference that evolved between the original style and todays trends, is the advent of breaking on 1 and/or 3. There's a kind of an irony somewhat here - oddly enough, some of the older Cubans always broke on 1. My guess, is that when they changed from Danzon, square form, stepping side left on 1 closing on 2 (quick-quick) to Systemo Cubano they used the 1 as a back break.
Now lets look at the construction of Bolero. This would seem to evidence a far more clearer path, to the directional movements of Mambo.
It commences 'side left' and 'back right' (the box movement in mambo) on a slow, quick, quick rhythm - breaking on 3 (this could explain why Puerto Rico break on 3?). So, even the change from the square to the open box movement, was not the first to be danced in that form, it think it fair to say, that it was the first, to that type of music. (Bolero being painfully slow.)
The content of todays Salsa is one of the major differences in the way we express the rhythm. The latinos (old school) call it the trash and flash brigade! Or as they would say - "No alma y corazon" (no soul and heart).
Here is a pecularity that still exists between the old mambo and todays salsa. One step, defines it for me. The crossover break (new yorker). For some unknown reason Puerto Ricans never use it on both sides. I have a theory (its as good as any!): the left hand being the dominant hand in all rhythm, gives a feeling of more control to the beginner.
Having said that, one should realise that the average Latinos repertoire is very limited, and would never consider letting go of the ladies right hand.
There are also several variations which did not make the transition from Mambo to Salsa. One main difference is the closed hold. Today it is danced by many as a modified ballroom hold that bares little resemblance to a "cuban" hold. Something else that did not seem to "travel" well - names. The names of well established moves were (for some unknown reason) discarded and replaced (the ballroom world are major culprits at this).
Looking at the styles on this side of the pond (the UK), as opposed to the states, the main differences are probably as much cultural as they are content. For those of you who have visited an authentic Latino club, (where all the announcements are in Spanish) the difference is like night and day.
Heres a good analogy. The English dominated the ballroom world for over 60 years. Why? They "invented" the dances that are still being done being today. Now transpose that advantage to the latino culture - of course they are going to excel - they are raised on the music from the day they are born and have the venues to develop their styles. Oddly enough, if you were to ask the average latino in a club the name of the singer being played, they would not , in many cases, know! Additionally, if you were to disect the patrons in a latino club into the ones who danced salsa and the ones who did not, you may be surprised how many did not know. Merengue is still very, very dominant, and has a large following.
Before I forget - a point I had raised to the author of the article, was his reference to a major dance society. I said in my response (I am a member of same society) that he was on a very dangerous path. Why? All one has to do, is look at what the ballroom world did with Rhumba, Tango and Cha. Each one was completely and irrevocably changed in the publics eyes, forever. On the upside of dance schools, they do educate the general public to a good standard of instruction.
The current International style Rhumba was adapted from Bolero (why oh why did they change it?!). Now - Guajira - this became cha cha. (see what I mean ?) Incidentally Guajira was adapted from the old "triple" mambo - another forerunner of cha cha.
I think it becomes abundantly clear, why the latinos have no trust in anything we implement into their culture. Their constant cry - NO standardisation.
I agree - to a point [in standardisation]. I firmly believe, that there should be a set basic format, from which all future variations emanate. Thats pretty much in place right now - the main problem? Name identification. One cannot and should not legislate style or personal content, however the slippery slope is always waiting. The danger? If one changes the music and content to a point that it totally departs from its original format, is it the same dance?
I hope this gives a not too muddled picture of the genre we all feel so passionate about.
Lets go back to our original concept. It was duly noted that the new "system", had commenced breaking first backwards (right) then being changed to side left and back right. In todays market, there are several approaches - you decide your own preference based upon authenticity or like.
- The chain schools ( states ) commence side left on one back right on two.
- Some English schools teach - side right one (prep), break forward on two. This ties in with Rhumba and Cha in the U.K. Others teach breaking forward on one with the left foot, no preparation step.
- Many Puerto Ricans start - side right, and break foward on one, tapping on the second beat of the bar, and some break forward on one or three, without any prep step.
- Many of the "old " school teachers broke forward on two - no prep step.
This brings into question the "Call and Response" theory, which dictates that the man commences back right on the first bar (on one or two) and forward on the second bar. The chain schools, by teaching its method, complies with the original concept.
I think its important to note - if you are a beginner, place your early learning on developing your leading/ following skills, and whenever possible musicality and style.
Do NOT get obsessed, with too much content. Your foundation work will help you build a better platform for additional material as you develop those skills.
One last note of interest - many Colombians and Dominicans, start Bachata and Merengue on their right foot in place on 1, and side left on 2.
