[Tango-L] R-E-S-P-E-C-T

[Myk Dowling]

David Thorn wrote:
> It appears to me that both "traditional tango" and "social tango" are often used as code to mean 'close embrace all the time tango'.
> 
So what term can we use to refer to the tango that is not "nuevo tango"? 
That's what I was using "Traditional tango" for.

> Such use would seem to ignore the fact that, as has been oft noted in this list, the nuevo style of tango actually contains no "new" movements!  All modern tango movement can be found, or its roots found, in the dance of years past.  So perhaps nuevo is actually quite traditional and perhaps it is insulting to those who dance "modern tango" to be told that they are not dancing with respect for the traditions of tango.

The nuevo style must have _some_ difference, or we wouldn't be able to 
call it a distinct style. If it contains no new movements, then the 
difference would seem (in my observation) to be in the dancers' 
alignment relative to their partners' chests. Does anyone actually want 
to _discuss_ this?

> Finally, I'll mention the lead.  A good modern tango dancer nearly always leads with his chest, his core and his heart.  If my partner is to my side, I still lead with my heart and my core.  I don't ever shove her with my arms.  The arms are merely the extension of my core and provide the instantaneous connection between my heart and hers.  Yes, I do use my arms, my wrists, my fingers, but the lead is from my core.  The rest just adds nuance.  Again, it is both insulting and inaccurate to say that modern tango, when danced well, is not led with the heart and the chest.

You cannot lead an underarm turn without using your arms. (Surely that 
is obvious?) The motion and the intent still comes from the chest, but 
to claim that that's what "chest leading" means is to rob the term of 
any effective meaning. All leading comes from the chest (and the 
"heart", if you insist, but I'm really just talking about the basics) 
from one perspective. But in some dances, the arms play a greater role 
than others. It's simple fact. To guide your partner to move to your 
side (relative to your chest) and back in front can't be done just with 
the chest.

How this observation can be considered to be insulting, is what baffles 
me. I say "here is a difference I can see". And in response, I get 
people saying I'm being insulting.

What insult?

Why is perceived _difference_ an insult?

Myk
in Canberra