[Tango-L] Definition of Axis (was: On Axis, Off Axis)

[Evan Wallace]

In reading these responses, it has become clear to me that a large part of
the problem is in our imprecise use of the words “balance” and “axis.” This
is not merely a semantic argument--there is a huge conceptual difference
between the two terms, and it has lead to a great deal of muddled teaching.
My purpose in this posting is to suggest a precise use for the concept of
"axis," using principles and nomenclature from physics. I apologize in
advance for the length. 

First of all, an "axis" is not a property of an object in the same way that
mass or color or shape is. An axis is an imaginary construct used to
describe the space in which objects reside. Axes (plural of axis) may be
assigned freely to aid in the physical analysis of objects and their
movement through space. 

For example, when discussing the rotation of the Earth, it is convenient to
assign an axis that is an imaginary straight line through the Earth’s poles,
about which it rotates, and which moves along with the Earth as travels
through space. The Earth really doesn’t "have" an axis; it is an imaginary
construct of the space in which the Earth resides. Assigning this axis to
the Earth, however, provides a convenient frame of reference in which to
analyze its rotation, and it is convenient to colloquially call this the
"Earth’s axis." In physics, we call these types of coordinate axes "body
coordinates," because they stay assigned to the body in a consistent way as
the body moves through space.

All objects, including dancers, can be assigned one or more axes about which
their rotation can be described. Indeed, all objects can be assigned three
mutually perpendicular axes about which three independent types of rotation
can be described. (In sailing and aeronautics, these are often referred to
as yaw, pitch, and roll.) Again, these axes are not unique, nor are they
properties of the body. They can be assigned in any number of ways, some
more convenient than others, to provide a frame of reference in which to
analyze a body’s rotation. 

In the case of a dancer, the most common type of rotation (unless, perhaps,
you work for Cirque de Soleil) is that which takes place around an imaginary
line through the long dimension of the body, as in a pirouette. A convenient
choice of axis with which to analyze this motion is the axis which extends
through the ball of the pivoting foot up through the dancer’s body and out
through the top of the head. So, one often hears people refer to this as
"the dancer’s axis."

But this axis is not a property of the dancer. It is not something that the
dancer "has," in the same way that a dancer has a particular weight, or
posture, or hair color. It is a transitory construct that aids in the
analysis of the dancer’s rotation at the moment the dancer is rotating. One
can talk about the axis of rotation of a ballet dancer doing a double
pirouette in the air, a Tango dancer pivoting during an ocho, or a break
dancer doing one of the those wild spins where they are upside down tucked
in sort of a fetal position (how do they do that!). But there is nothing
about the word axis that necessarily implies anything about posture,
verticality, connection, balance, or even consistency of shape or frame.
Indeed, during rotations, the shape of the dancer’s body may change
dramatically: think of an ice skater doing one of those incredible spins
where they start in a sitting position crouched forward and end up standing
and bending backwards. 

So it makes no sense to talk about "being on your axis," or even to talk
about axis, when there is no rotation involved. Michael Figart made a
similar point.

I think that when teachers say "dancers need to be on their own axis," they
actually mean a mélange of several different concepts, something like this:
"You need to be on your own balance (this is debatable, by the way, but that
is for another discussion), and you will find this easier if the shape of
your body stays consistent, firm yet relaxed, with an upright posture that
is vertical or close to vertical." 

Now, if you are on your own balance, with consistent shape and upright
posture, it is indeed easier to rotate or to be led in a rotation, as Igor
Polk also pointed out. It can be very difficult to rotate when off balance,
as any follow who has ever been yanked off her balance in the middle of
pivoting during an ocho will attest, or as any lead can attest who as ever
tried to lead a limp, bendy follow through an ocho. So, you could argue that
it is correct to say, as a form of shorthand, that "dancers need to be on
their own axis during rotations." 

Yet even this more limited concept is not always true. In a colgata, both
dancers are very much off of their individual balance, yet both are pivoting
quite nicely around individual axes of rotation, which correspond roughly to
the centerline of their bodies, and which are very much tilted from the
vertical; and the couple is very much in balance and rotating quite nicely
about a yet another axis that is vertical and extends through the shared
pivot point, roughly where their two supporting feet are trying to share the
same piece of real estate. 

So, I think we need to be very careful about the use of the word "axis,"
because most of the time that it is uttered in a class, it is utterly
meaningless. The same argument can be made with the term "energy," which is
used all the time in dancing in ways that are so vague as to be, at best,
completely useless, or, at worst, misleading. I will argue that we should
drop all uses of the word axis except as it pertains specifically to
describing the rotation of dancers in the act of rotating or pivoting. 

I want to come back to the concept of balance or lack thereof (both
individual and shared), and connection (strong vs. weak, tension vs.
compression), in a later post.

Evan Wallace
Seattle, WA
evan at tangoing.com 
www.tangoing.com