[Tango-L] Some thoughts on connection

[HBBOOGIE1@aol.com]

Gordon excellent analogy I agree with you  100%
David

In a message dated 11/15/2010 4:06:10 A.M. Pacific Standard  Time, 
gerlebacher at fsu.edu writes:
I believe there is a point where one over  analyzes vocabulary: lead, 
mark, follow, etc.

In my opinion (having  done ballroom and argentine tango), I find that 
both dances have lead and  follow, but the technique for execution is 
different. In essence, if a man  stands still, with no muscle action of 
any kind, the woman should be  standing still as well, except, perhaps 
for some foot decoration, which the  man can choose, or not, to accompany 
in some form.

Any action by the  man whose consequence is the lady taking a step 
(rotational, forward, back,  etc.) is a lead. I have had a teacher 
talking about marking without leading.  But it is all the same. If the m 
an moves forward, and the lady moves back,  that was a lead. Any 
additional marks from the muscles, hip, pressure, etc.  are also leads. 
The only thing that changes is their intensity, how obvious  they are. 
This is true in ballroom and in Tango.

Regarding lead and  follow: yes, the man invites, and the woman follows, 
and the man then  follows the lady, initiating the next lead. That is 
oversimplified of  course. In reality, the end of one step is the 
beginning of the next step.  They are both led and followed. What one 
perceives as simultaneous could be  one behind the other, as long as the 
time separation between the two is  sufficiently low. The best female 
tango dancers respond to indications from  the leader "almost" 
instantaneously. Just as light does not go from point A  to point B 
instantaneously, but very fast, the same is true for the woman  
responding to the man's indication.

Gordon



On 11/15/10 2:51 AM, Jack Dylan wrote:
>> From:  Pat Petronio petronio at adam.com.au
>> "Leading"&  "following"  can create a different mindset to "inviting"&
>>  "responding",>
> I'm uncomfortable with both of these terminologies.  'Leading and 
following'
> seems
>
> to imply that there's a  concious lead by the man, which the lady 
recognises and
> then follows.  But, in reality, both happen simultaneously and, with 
correct
> technique,  
> are built-in to the dance. The man 'Inviting' seems to imply that the  
lady then
> has a
>
> choice to either accept or decline,  which, surely, isn't the case.
>
> The simplest example is the walk.  It seems that I merely walk forward, 
with my
> initial
>
>  movement coming from the torso and the lady walks backward with her  
initial
> movement
>
> coming from her foot. But I don't feel  any leading or inviting - we're 
simply
> walking together
>
>  and, if I stop the movement of my torso, the lady stops the movement of 
her  foot
> and waits
>
> for whatever comes next. Or am I being  too simplistic?
>
> A teacher once told me that there is no lead and  follow; the man dances 
his
> dance and
>
> the lady  accompanies him with her dance. This is assuming both know how 
to
>  dance.
>
> Jack
>
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Tango-L mailing  list
> Tango-L at mit.edu
>  http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l

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