[Tango-L] Followers' voices

[TangoDC.com]

Hi all,

I'd like to step us out of this (now) circular discussion about 
dialogues vs. choruses (etc.) and point us in the how-to direction again.

It seems clear that most of us agree on the following points:
   (a) Followers have to follow, not backlead, disrupt the lead, or 
rudely "refuse" invitations
   (b) Followers have (or ought to have) a more-than-passive voice in 
the dance
   (c) Leaders do (or should) create opportunities for the follower to 
be creative
   (d) Leader and follower should ideally move as one

We've seen a few examples (from Trini and others) of how followers 
"renegotiate" or modify the lead when problems arise. We might call this 
"tango self-defense," and it's a worthwhile topic for both leaders and 
followers to explore.

But let's explore it another time.

The question I'm curious about now, and which the recent discussion has 
been leading to, is this: How can followers participate more actively in 
the dance? No one has disputed the statement that leaders learn to 
listen more easily than followers learn to speak, so I think it's 
important to spend a little time on the matter. It might help some of 
the dancers here to advance their skills, and it can certainly help many 
of the teachers explain _how_ the tango (successfully) becomes more than 
a one-way street.

Here's what I've discovered so far...

Followers can "insert" their own steps when the leader leaves space for 
it, but this can be very disruptive. Not only is the follower stepping 
without a lead to, but she's interpreting the "space" provided by the 
leader as an invitation to autonomy. Leaders can get frustrated by such 
things, because both navigational problems and musical problems can 
arise (esp. if the leader was deliberately leading a pause).

It _might not_ be such a problem, depending on the leader's mood (or 
intentions) and the music; but it _can_ be a problem.

If I'm dancing to the bass-pulse in Di Sarli's "Corazon," for instance, 
and leading my partner to dance to the violin solo; and if I lead her to 
pause when the violin pauses, but she steps to the bass-pulse instead; 
the result could be either:
   (a) me disappointed in the failure of my structural idea
   (b) me pleased at the change of my idea into something else
Now, the structural idea might not become apparent to my follower until 
she hits the pause, so there's no reason to say it's a faulty lead. And 
depending on how badly I want to create that part of the dance (with or 
without premeditation), I could have either of the two reactions 
described above. Also, if her "inserted" idea isn't stellar, I'd likely 
be disappointed.

Since there's a 50% chance (let's say) that one half of the couple will 
be disappointed, I'd like to conclude that such kinds of following 
(interpreting "space" as space to improvise) are rather imperfect. Not 
outlawed, naturally-- we don't expect every dance to be perfect-- but 
not the best possible decision, all things considered.

There are, of course, differences in leading a pause and leading 
free-space moments for the follower, but I think a follower has to know 
you pretty well to read the difference. But that's almost another topic. 
I find that the type of creative following described above occurs when 
the follower wants to be creative, or can't help but interpret the music 
a certain way, or needs to raise her voice in the dance, whatever the 
motive may be. This isn't a matter of expertise, really; it's a matter 
of feeling stifled, and reacting to it by reflex, which I can sympathize 
with on the most basic level of my being.

There is, however, a kind of interactive following that, I've noticed, 
doesn't interfere with the lead, and doesn't break the connection, but 
actually strengthens it. It's also continuous, and provides the follower 
a constant voice in the dance. I mean the collection, the last part of 
any step (which can also influence the beginning of the next). This I 
consider the follower's main creative resource.

Every step I lead is something like a text, which my partner interprets. 
She sharpens and clarifies my meaning. If I lead a slow step, for 
instance, my partner can collect just as slowly, even more slowly, or 
slightly faster than the step began. Likewise for a fast step, or an 
even step. They're all "agreements" with the lead, and they have a 
greater presence, a more responsive voice, than mere passive following. 
These slight variations can be felt clearly by the leader; and if he's 
truly improvising the dance, he'll take his future direction thence. 
Analytically: The follower's collection (what she does) determines when 
she's fully over her axis (what he feels) and ready to move again.

In my experience, this doesn't create "autonomous stepping" by the 
follower. It actually makes the dance more viscous, more fluid, and more 
rhythmically varied. It is also easy for the leader to override the 
follower's decision if he needs to navigate, or wants to propose a 
different musical idea. (E.g., if she collects fast, signaling that 
she's ready to step, and he wants to continue moving slowly, he can (a) 
turn her on her axis while he finishes, or (b) lead her to step again 
while he completes his single step, resolving things by ending up with 
both partners slightly apilado or off-axis.) (If this sounds sloppy to 
some of you, I admit that it does happen all the time by accident; yet I 
contend that if we make it happen on purpose, we clean it up quite a lot 
in the process.)

I've tried the following exercise, in lessons and practice session, to 
develop this type of interaction via the collection. I have my partner 
backlead for an entire song, to get her thinking creatively, and to 
demonstrate how rough and uncertain the connection thereby becomes. Then 
I instruct her to follow me, but to collect however she wishes-- but not 
to surprise me: to communicate with me. The result is always (so far, 
anyway) a dance in which I never relinquish the lead, but in which my 
partner is almost completely in charge of musicality. The connection is 
deeper than usual as well, no matter how often we change embraces (if we 
do at all).

In any event, followers can use the collection to influence the dance 
without being disruptive. They can signal to their leader to speed up or 
slow down, whether in passages or (I dare say) per step. I'm not saying 
it's easy, but it happens, and it makes the dance feel great, so long as 
the follower's not a motormouth about it, and can stick to the decisions 
she makes. (When first playing with this technique, some followers find 
themselves changing their mind a little too much, and don't communicate 
as clearly as they might. As they learn to use it, of course, this 
disappears.)

Now, before anyone objects to this as being overly subtle, or for 
certain styles only, or whatever, I'd like to submit that it *already* 
happens all the time, whether or not the follower is doing it with any 
intention. We usually attribute it to body type: certain people are 
taller, or heavier, or tinier, or whatever, and leaders feel their 
bodies move in different ways, and adjust their dance accordingly. (Good 
ones do, anyway; even good beginners.) We also attribute it to 
personality, since some followers are more playful or like a greater 
variety of speeds, while some are more ponderous and indulgent with 
their movements, and so forth.

But because-- however-- big women can feel sprightly in the dance, while 
petite ones can feel massive, I think body type and actual personality 
may have little to do with one's physical dance persona. Many women are 
probably collecting "creatively" without realizing it. Becoming more 
aware of its effect can allow a follower to dance a greater number of 
styles (whether we call this the embrace or the musical style, e.g., 
vals, candombe, Tanturi, D'Arienzo), and also to vary her movements 
within a particular style more colorfully.

In any case, I think learning this type of interactive following is what 
propels a dancer from an intermediate to an advanced stage, or from the 
advanced stage out of (the need for) group classes entirely. It's the 
sort of thing that awakens you to your own mind. It begins to create 
dramatic content in the dance. It's the type of skill that gives you a 
sense of freedom-within-form, which is, in every art, what sends an 
apprentice forwards with the beginnings of an original personality.

To sum up, with a great clearing of the throat: Followers can express 
themselves in the dance by more consciously closing their legs around 
their partner's (ahem) lead.

This is another way of saying that the humorous adage about tango 
dancing-- that the man opens the lady's legs, and she closes them-- can 
be taken from the whorehouse stoop, tidied up, and presented on the 
Official Podium (stoop) of learning.

Any thoughts? I'd be particularly interested in hearing of other ways in 
which followers can add to the dance without subtracting from the lead, 
since what I describe is only one means to that end.

With rafters awash in the flames of possibility,

Jake Spatz
Washington, DC