[Tango-L] When lead-and-follow seems to disappear

[Alexis Cousein]

TangoDC.com wrote:
> Chris, UK wrote:
>> Jake wrote:
>>   
>>> That is what my (now infamous) "Prologue to an Aesthetics" was about. Anyone with a semester's worth of experience in actual aesthetics (whether from the artistic or the philosophical angle) will recognize...
>>>     
>> Damn, that must have the semester I skipped off to dance...
>>   
> Evidently.
> 
> [Chris, UK] >> When the guy keeps his upper body static relative to 
> hers, and she to his, thence the union. Within that union, the lead is 
> just kinesthetic gesture, only the suggestion to move... as one.
> 
> Look, the dance in close embrace, with a vocabulary limited to walking, 
> ochos, and giros, is more or less an affair of such symmetry, or union. 

But even an open embrace requires such a union - be it a more
adaptable one. And yes, if modifying that open embrace (by leaving the
follower more/less room or changing the relative angle of the
partners) is "leading by arms", then obviously that does exist.

We could never go from open to close embrace or vice versa
within a single dance either, if the frame was to be set in
concrete.

But that's not what Chris was objecting to. Chris is objecting
to leading by hands that are autonomous puppet string pullers,
and try to move the follower by their own accord.

-- 
Alexis Cousein                                al at sgi.com
Solutions Architect/Senior Systems Engineer   SGI
--
Bad grammar makes me [sic].