[Tango-L] tango history and schizophrenia

[Ecsedy Áron]

> Aron, that is your assumption only. A little more research into tango history 
> will say otherwise. I think he was being ironic...or should have been. I 
> doubt very seriously that El Chino, Petroleo, Virulazo or any of those older 
> masters learned much from Gustavo Naveira and others like him. If anything, it is 
> the exact opposite. Many of these older dancers were at least as inventive and 
> acrobatic when they were young, but have distilled their movements into 
> simpler elegant figures that are much more difficult than they appear. Don't confuse 
> pyrotechnics for quality and refinement.
>   
Which El Chino are we talking about? (we have a few) Maybe I 
misunderstood the reference.

As for Petroleo and Virulazo, it is obvious they didn't learn from 
Naveira. But it is almost natural that they did copy other dancers from 
their own era. Maybe just single moves, maybe more, even if they claim 
to be self taught.

Nevertheless, at the end of the day, the only thing that counts is how 
well you dance. It does not really matter how did you get there.

> Part of the reason so-called "nuevo tango" came about was because many of the 
> then younger dancers like Naveira had rejected the tango of their parent's 
> generation for rock music. They had considered it old fashioned and outdated and 
> it had practically disappeared from their world.   But when the tango craze 
> was re-ignited around 1984-85, chiefly by Miguel Zotto (who had always admired 
> and emulated those same old masters), they decide to capitalize on the 
> new-found interest. But they had no roots in the tradition and instead interpreted it 
> with the new "rock" sensibility, and were affected by non-tango influences 
> and the music of Piazzolla, who openly admitted that he was more interested in 
> tango's relationship to jazz and classical music and was not interested in 
> carrying on the dance tradition. 
>   
That is your assumption. According to the nuevo advocates this wasn't 
their goal. Nuevo was mostly just a "brand name" to distunguish 
themselves from milongueros teaching their own (meaning: their own 
private) form of tango with no experience or talent for _teaching_ (in 
general), while they tried to give their students a system that 
(supposedly) leads said students to dance tango as those great dancers 
do. (knowing how to dance, and making others dance like you are two 
entirely different ballgame - really if one is a ballgame, the other is 
skating) The old milongueros with their independence, their being part 
of the time when tango was still mainstream are an interesting 
phenomenon, but their teaching skills are not always up to par and tango 
is NOT mainstream anymore, so there is little to none possibility for 
anyone (in Argentina or elsewhere) to approach tango as they did. Times 
have changed, people have changed and the lifestyle changed. The only 
possibilities left is to copy how it was done historically or innovate. 
A few years ago this was still an ongoing debate. Today, the tides seem 
to change in favour of innovation. I've seen quite a few milongueros 
(not the very old ones, but around 40-50) in BsAs using, and some 
"traditional" teachers - who shun nuevo - teaching a few (even if not 
many) "modern" moves (single axis turns, volcadas etc.). Fashion 
dictates and fashion changes. Traditional or not people will learn these 
new "fashionable" moves. So there you go: it was not something you did 
on your own. Teachers are only to give you a direction, but it is YOU 
who will teach it to your brain and body. If you ommit the teacher, you 
can still learn or even innovate. If you innovate people might want to 
immitate, because they also want to do those "cool moves". And there you 
go Mr. Naveira the Second...

Cheers,
Aron

-- 
Ecsedy Áron
***********
Aron ECSEDY

Tel: +36 20 66-24-071

http://www.milonga.hu/
http://www.holgyvalasz.hu/