[Tango-L] Changes of direction

[David]

My understanding of the so called "Change of Direction" in it's original and simplest form, was a way of going from a back ocho step directly to a front ocho step, as well as the other way around.  Typically from a Back ocho, one might do things like another back ocho, a side step (molinette), or a boleo.  Similiarly, from a fromt ocho, the typical next steps are another front ocho, a side step, a boleo, or even a parada.  Going from a front ocho step directly to a back ocho, would be an example of the change (as is a back ocho directly to a front ocho step).

David

---- tango-l-request at mit.edu wrote: 
> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:32:35 +1200 (New Zealand Standard Time)
> From: "Melroy" <melroyr at xtra.co.nz>
> Subject: [Tango-L] Mel re: Changes of direction.
> To: <Tango-L at mit.edu>
> Message-ID: <48643523.000033.02964 at OEM-COMPUTER>
> Content-Type: Text/Plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> Yes Chris I'm you are right. 
> The term 'change of direction' is just a term that has been applied to moves
> involving a change of direction (Funny that), not one particular step. 
> 
> The example I described comes from the teaching of Gustavo Naveira and also
> Fabian Salas, and probably others influenced by them but I don't know them
> (I think Chico also uses this term for the same type of move). Of course
> they have many variations of this, but always it is the couple changing
> together. I guess others may use the term in other ways.
> 
> I'm not even sure if the example I use came from them directly
> (Naveira/Salas). I did work on a lot of these 'changes' some years ago, but
> this one is more something that has worked its way into my social dance
> without really thinking about it. But if I do think about it and describe it
>  I use this term.
> 
> Placing it at a level is another story altogether!
> 
> Funny, I didn't think my post got through to Tango-L as I didn't see it come
> back to me, and no one responded to it. That has happened before, maybe my
> post wasn't that interesting? Oh well.
> 
> Thanks, Mel (nz).