[Tango-L] Direction: Theorem #1

[Jeff Gaynor]

Christopher L. Everett wrote:

>People, this is what Labanotation is for.
>  
>
Maybe. (look at http://user.uni-frankfurt.de/~griesbec/LABANE.HTML) 
Labanotation is simply too imposing and generic. Again, you can try to 
notate everything and get a system that is so cumbersome and has such a 
high learning curve that it is of little practical use. Think of music 
notation (I'm a Musician and can say this). Most of what is there is not 
written down but relies on transmission plus "good taste". Efforts to 
write down everything  just don't work, leading to something so 
monstrous only the author knows or cares what was meant. The trade-off 
is a notation specific to tango that can be written quickly with 
relatively good transmission at the expense of some exactness. Of 
course, no two dimensional notation is really going to be adequate so my 
philosophical perspective is that you've lost the battle for exactness 
before you've begun. Something like Labanotation is of chiefly 
theoretical interest. I guess the acid test is to do what they do with 
music: can you grab a piece of notation and sight-read how to do it? 
Maybe if you are one fo teh inventors of Labanotation you can pull that 
off, but a 5 - 10 year apprenticeship getting fluent in the notation is 
hardly going to help you remember that groovy movement you came up with 
at the milonga last week.

I realize this is my perspective and my bent on such things. I have seen 
a lot of notations in my professional careers (Mathematician and 
Musician) and have watched most of them fail. The ones that succeed 
balance ease of notation with context.

Cheers,

Jeff

>Christopher
>_______________________________________________
>Tango-L mailing list
>Tango-L at mit.edu
>http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
>
>
>  
>