[Tango-L] styles/labelling

[Joe Grohens]

Alexis wrote:

 > We should stop pigeon-holing everything we come across. Categories  
are
 > useful to discuss things, but let's stop pretending they're Platonic
 > universals.

Agreed. And some categories are useful in one situation (e.g.,  
marketing) and not another (e.g., learning).

The names we have for tango styles are arbitrary, they are not  
mutually exclusive, they reflect social associations more than they  
do anything structural in the dance, and they are, above all, just  
labels. They are labels that can bring attention to certain features  
and differences, and can help us see  similarities. But these labels  
can also blind people to what is there in the dance.

"Oh - they are dancing tango nuevo - I like/don't like that..."

"Oh - they are dancing milonguero style - that's for me...."

I sometimes think people don't even see the dancing--they just see a  
style - lately one of two possible varieties.

The idea of styles can blind people to what's in the dance.

The idea of dancing a style can prevent learners from understanding  
what tango is.

Affiliating to one style or another makes people dwell on which style  
is better than the other, and why, rather than discovering what each  
style can teach the other.

Stylistic categories can be beneficial or harmful. In the last two or  
three years I think the discourse surrounding styles has become  
almost totally negative and counterproductive.

The map is not the territory.

Joe Grohens