[Tango-L] Studying Latin

[Jeff Gaynor]

Listeros,

I've been watching the ins and outs of this list for a little while and 
am a novice, but there seems to be something that a lot of folks are 
missing. An anecdote will help set the stage.

A buddy of mine was getting his Ph. D. in Medieval Studies and applied 
then was accepted for studying Latin in the Vatican with a certain 
Brother Reginald. Brother Reginald had (and hopefully still has) the 
distinction of being about the only person fluent in Latin alive. He is 
the one who used to proofread the Pope's encyclicals, for instance. So, 
my buddy is in class with a variety of clergy and a few other scholars 
and they begin with Brother Reginald asking what they know about grammar 
and in particular, verbs. The class dutifully spews forth conjugations, 
exceptions, rules of thumb &c., &c., and it is clear with each 
revelation that the good Brother is hearing anything but what he wants. 
Finally in total exasperation he looks at them and says "any wino in 
Rome could speak Latin, why are you making it so hard?!" He then 
proceeds to give a small handful of rules and in about 10 minutes my 
friend recounts that every question he ever had about verbs was 
answered. [No I don't speak Latin so I don't know what he did.]

The point here is that no matter how technical the dance is, what the 
embrace is or steps are, it remains something that has to be done real 
time by people who are not "experts". Tango was, as I understand it, 
done by common folk and was later adopted by the upper classes. 
Effectively I think that they just move to the music within certain 
stylistic constraints.   Various styles are adaptations of movement for 
specific purposes and tastes, that is all. You can pretty much find 
someone in BA who does your variation of tango and all that means is 
that it is as authentic as the next guy's. The trick is how to teach 
some system of movement. Teachers tend to teach what they do (as they 
should since it just makes the most sense to them). I suggest the 
following approach from my other endeavors: Each teacher is showing you 
how they grappled with the issues and resolved them for themselves -- 
that's where the gold is. As such the benefit of study is not just 
steps/figures what have you, but how to approach adapting the dance for 
you. A great teacher would be one who could emulate other experts (not 
parody) and explain why she/he does it that way.

Most of the recent arguments so far I have seen strike me as people who 
are stuck on the plateau between having learned it to more than 
technical proficiency and are on the verge of customizing it. It works 
so well for them they don't see why everyone doesn't just do it their 
way. This is no reason for a flame war and while I understand the 
enthusiasm, there is no reason to choke up people's email queues with 
this, is there? I've been doing various sports for years and I'm quite 
sure I can do stuff that would make most of you burst into flames. I 
also realize there was a heck of a lot of hard work that went into it 
and it is my prerogative to do it that way. Denigrating you for being 
unable to follow my lead would be manifestly unfair now, wouldn't it? 
You all pretty much agree, but -- and this is crucial -- you'd shrug it 
off because you have no ego investment there. In the case of tango 
people seem to identify with it so closely that any discussion is seen 
as an ad hominem attack and is answered in kind. Tsk, tsk, tsk. 
Practicing something for years makes it natural and intuitively obvious. 
Accept that other people have practiced other things to this level and 
therefore have a slightly different set of what is natural.

Since there is a great deal of technical complexity involved (close 
embrace and open embrace are different dances, at least from a 
mechanical perspective), this is yet another area people can have a 
shouting match without resolving anything. From my perspective as a 
beginner, I want to get one approach down (CE these days) before trying 
for another. This does not mean I am a fanatic or am being willfully 
mislead but the Evil Close Embrace Cadre (ECEC), but I'm just stumbling 
along as best I can. Do not ascribe to malice what is easier ascribed to 
haplessness.

Oh, don't forget what Churchill said: A person who can neither change 
the topic nor his mind is a fanatic.

Cheers,

Jeff