(please do read the previous blog post beofre reading this - https://bsharpblues.weebly.com/bswing-blog/march-22nd-2019)
4. Actual Partnerwork I was fumbling for a title for this last point. I originally wanted to call it "real vs fake social dancing" but i felt that it was a bit too misleading. This is complicated so let's take it apart and see what all of this means. In the old days, the men led the dance and the women followed the dance. Sing danced a lot with Frankie in the 90s and tells me that his lead was "very strong and very clear". I think the terms have different meanings from what i would use in class today, but one thing is for sure - Frankie took efforts to lead his partners as best as he could. In today's modern global Lindy Hop scene, there is a lot of ...(for lack of a better word) pseudo-partnerwork. Pseudo means - pretended, not real, so pseudo partnerwork means - dancing that looks like it is really partnerwork but IS NOT. You may ask - as long as they are dancing together it is partnerwork right?? And i would have to agree with you, but also remind you that partnerwork in Lindy Hop terms (or even social dancing terms) is very different from partnerwork in ballet or hip hop, or other types of dances. In Lindy hop (and other social dances as well), partnerwork is predicated on LEAD & FOLLOW, a connection & communication between the 2 partners who are dancing together. I would go so far as to say that this connection & communication, is what is unique about social dancing in general, as opposed to a choreographed ballet (pas de deux) or 2 modern dancers dancing together. The major difference is generally that it is choreographed, whereas in social dancing, it is improvised. So here, i am going to define partnerwork in Lindy Hop as GENUINE and AUTHENTIC, if there is really 1. Lead and follow (each person in the partnership takes on a specific role and stays with that role & generally does not take upon the scope of the other role in the partnership) 2. (some form of physical) Connection between the 2 partners 3. (some form of) Non-verbal communication between the 2 partners For Social Lindy Hop to be Genuine and Authentic, i would add 1. Improvisation as one of the criteria, and we have discussed improvisation in the previous blog post already. Already, we can see that partnerwork in ballet or hip hop doesn't meet the same criteria, because there is no specific lead and follow. In a proper lead and follow scenario, one person initiates the movement or step, and the other executes the movement or step as signaled. There is no simultaneous execution of movements or steps because, like when one is driving a car, only one person has the wheel and the pedals, not both of them. A lot of times in these other dances, moves are executed simulatenously in tandem by both partners. Let's jump to our modern global Lindy Hop scene and discuss the types of dancing possible. B4 we move on, it is useful to understand that these scenarios i am describing run on a scale from MORE TO LESS. a) Partnerwork steps --- Solo Jazz steps b) Improvised partnerwork steps and sequences --- choreographed partnerwork steps and sequences c) Lead & follow that is loaded with communication and signals --- lead & follow which is spacious or empty Let's take scenario a). So here, clearly, when there is MORE partnerwork steps than solo jazz steps (if u think of a % like at least 60% partnerwork steps vs 40% solo jazz), then the dance runs closer to "REAL" (actual) partnerwork. We do have a dancer here in Singapore, who loves to dance solo jazz but with a partner. The way this person dances is very unique (no judgement here on this from me - i am purely describing the way this person dances) - in that the dance ends up being mainly solo jazz steps while either being in the typical open position, or the closed position. There is a lot of improvisation on the solo jazz aspect while holding hands or in close hold, but very little traditional partnerwork steps in that one partner (the lead) is giving signals to the other partner (the follow) what is to be done. As solo jazz variations are generally not "leadable", there is no way for the follow to do exactly what this leader is doing. For this particular dancer -the % scale would run roughly between 70 to 90% solo jazz and 30 to 10% lead and follow communication. I have no issue with this dancer wanting to dance like this, i just find that when it reaches this place of 70 to 80% solo jazz - it does not constitute actual partner dancing based on the definitions above, and so i would not call it "partnerwork" even though the positions being used, are the actual positions we use for partnered dancing in Lindy Hop. Globally speaking, I do see a trend towards greater and greater expression of solo jazz in partnered Lindy Hop. My take on this is very clear - I do not want to call doing solo jazz while holding hands or being connected to another person - PARTNERWORK. I feel that this would be a mislabeling of the term, since historically, partnerwork always involved the above criteria as i have mentioned. I think it is fair to say that there is a scale but a 50/50 ratio is the most i would give before i would call it something like - solo jazz while holding hands. While breakaways were present in the past, the moment the partners got back together, it would be lead & follow all the way till the next breakaway. Solo jazz was generally reserved for breakaways (a generalization but true) and the men really wanted to be dancing with the ladies in those days (the 30s and 40s). In competitions as well, i find there is no clear cut ruling on the matter of how much solo jazz is too much, and it seems that as long as the partners are holding hands or connected it is considered "partnerwork". My opinion on this is that it is a bias against dancers who actually lead and follow their partnerwork. I find that doing solo jazz while holding hands or in a partner position to be very much easier than actually leading and following. It would not be fair to equate the required mechanics of leading and following a swingout (for example), with 2 people holding hands and doing footwork variations for 1 eight, or executing a choreographed jazz break together for 1 eight. A complex lead and follow or partnerwork sequence, would require even more effort on the part of the partners involved than 2 partners holding hands and doing variations of solo jazz in various positions for 4 eights or so. Here, i think we have to give credit and respect where it is due - simply because lead and follow partnerwork does take more effort than "partner solo jazz" - no matter how much fancy the "partner solo jazz" is and how much more visually appealing it looks. Literally, solo jazz while holding hands is an individual dance for 2 reasons - 1. there is no possible way to communicate complex rhythmic variations to the partner to follow exactly, hence it is more or less individual improvisation and the partners can just do their own thing... (like how hard is that...) 2. if it is done together, it is more likely than not CHOREOGRAPHED and executed simultaneously, and not a lead and follow signal - and both of these scenarios are easier in terms of effort and difficulty than actual, improvised partnerwork dancing. I ask my readers to be discerning and aware of what is happening when you watch any performance or competition. Not everything is equal and not everything takes equal effort to put together. A routine heavy on solo jazz choreography, even if its very fast and very fancy, is still easier than an equivalent partnerwork routine done at the same speed or complexity. Scenario b). We mentioned a little bit about this in the previous blog post but here is the place to elaborate. In the modern global Lindy Hop scene, the norm is couples who teach and perform together exclusively. As they have been working together for a long time, these couples usually develop their own techniques and understandings which are unique to them and not to others. It would not be false to say that not all of the material that they use as leaders or followers could be applied on a general scale to dance with social dancers all over the world globally. That in itself is fine - the couples deserve the right to use whatever technique they want for their workshops and classes and performances. The issue is more that there is no awareness that this is so - many social dancers take class expecting these steps to be usable for social dancing when they are not really. Once again, i ask dancers to be aware and discerning about what they are learning in class. Just because a step looks cool and fantastic, doesn't mean it's gonna be applicable on the social dance floor, and also just because it was taught by so-and-so famous instructor, that it's gonna be applicable on the social dance floor when u try it with another social dancer. One of the reasons why this is important to bring up, is because it compromises certain situations in social dancing because of the familiarity. This was the case in certain American Lindy Hop competitions in the 2007 to 2011 period. The organizers and judges somehow realized that couples who were dancing with each other on a regular basis produced more stellar looking luck of the draw dances - but it was due to the partners' familiarity with each other that this could happen, not because they were excellent social dancers. Hence a ruling came into place which required that there be a certain amount of time that these teachers or dancers were not teaching and dancing together b4 they be allowed to be paired with each other for luck of the draw contests. Dancers beware, not all luck of the draw contests really feature genuine, authentic social dancing and partnerwork. When i am looking at a luck of the draw contest - i am looking out for 3 things 1. communication between the 2 partners (how well they communicate as they dance, missed cues, steps did not work out) 2. % of solo jazz to % of lead & follow partnerwork (if there is an emphasis on solo jazz then i do not consider them good partner dancers) 3. Whether the 2 partners have taught and performed together b4 and have a history working together. (once they have, it is hard to tell whether they are actually social dancing or it's coming from their long history of working together with each other - in a Strictly or Choreographed division, this issue would not really crop up, but in a luck of the draw division, this then renders the whole point of social dancing/improvisation - MEANINGLESS) Once again, it's an issue of giving respect or credit where credit is due - for example, I love Skye and Frida very much, but they do use a great deal of workshop material in their dancing, so on the scale of social dancing and improvisation, it falls somewhere in the middle. I'm not going to give them credit for improvising on the spot when they are executing chunks of workshop material or choreographed material at least 50% of the time they are "social dancing"- i would not call that (improvised) social dancing. I'm not saying anything about their ability to social dance at the high end of the improvisation scale. Both of them have excellent track records as social dancers, and they CAN social dance on the high end of the improvisation scale. I'm just saying, when they are dancing at a workshop or at a competition sometimes, they are not "really" social dancing the way we think they are, with a high level of lead & follow or improvisation, and dancers who watch these videos of them dancing, should be aware of that fact, and not blindly assume that just because they are executing partnered steps, that it is of the same degree and difficulty as the steps being danced on the high end of the social dancing/improvisation scale. I would just like that credit and recognition be given to dancers who are doing their dancing on the more improvisational/lead &follow end of the spectrum, because i think that this is harder and takes more effort than executing choreographed or preplanned sequences, and dancers do not seem to be aware of this issue, but it is really important!! If we are not careful about this, pseudo partnerwork would then be misconstrued as real partnerwork and luck of the draw competitions would begin to lose their meaningfulness, since luck of the draw contests are meant to test/benchmark, social dancing, lead & follow connection & communication and improvisation. We also need to be aware as dancers, what really is difficult and what is not - so as to give credit and respect to the correct things and not to the illusion of things. We also need to understand that there is a scale and it means that one end of the scale is easier than the other end so we have to be discerning to know which end is which and not blindy assume that steps or sequences executed while holding hands or in typical partnerwork positions are all equally difficult and all fall under "partnerwork". Scenario c). This is difficult to explain as it is rather technical in nature. Certain leaders (like myself for example) lead in a way where the lead could be called - spacious or empty. It comes about from a certain way of using the frame and structure, as well as a great deal of relaxation especially in the arms. This means that there is an ability to control the amount of information and signals being given to the follow, such that, just like in regular communication, the basis of understanding is that - If the leading is more empty, it is a less complex/complicated step, or a basic or neutral step. If the leading is full of information then it is going to be a complex or complicated step or sequence as the leader needs to process and send the information in rapid chunks to the follow in order for the step to be executed without issues. Here we are talking about improvisation, and not a preplanned or choreographed sequence which the follow is already aware of and has been worked out and practised prior to social dancing. Here the follow is unaware of the sequence of steps and has to dutifully follow the information as it is given by the leader in order to execute the complex step of pattern. Just like in verbal communication, if you have to say a lot on an issue in order to explain it clearly, it is considered more complex/complicated. If you do not have to say a lot and it can be explained clearly, then it is considered less complex. So here, the scale would be - If the dance generally consists of steps where the leading is spacious or empty, it would be easier. The steps would be called simple or uncomplicated. If the dance generally consists of steps full of signals and information, then it would be a complicated or complex dance. Linking this to effort and skill, it is obvious that when it veers towards complex/complicated, it takes more effort and more skill. Bringing it back to social dancing and improvisation, if the social dance was more full of steps with more complexity then it would be more difficult than a choreographed routine of equal complexity simply because of the factor of the improvisation. I would also like to mention here - that is why some leaders are easier to follow and some leaders are harder to follow. It depends very much on the complexity of their leading and the steps that they choose for their social dancing. When the leading is full of information, followers sometimes feel that they have not a moment to breathe or switch off as the leading information comes fast and furious at them for them to execute. Following the logic here, it means that followers who can follow complex steps are more skillful than follows who cannot. This is also important to say here - I am not saying a that a complex or complicated dance is necessarily a better dance, i'm just saying it takes more effort and skill to execute, and we give credit for the effort and skill. Just like in cooking, a dish could be really complex and have many ingredients and take many steps to prepare, but even after all of that, one might not like the taste of the dish. But that doesn't negate the effort and skill required to prepare the dish. Whether or not one likes the dish, has no bearing on the effort or skill required to make it. That's the recognition i am asking dancers to become more aware of. If we look at the scenario closely, we see that in many cases, many instances, we value the skill and effort it takes to do something. Why do we not apply this to our dance as well? Why do we not apply this discerning perspective to our social dancing as well? We apply it to food, we apply it to products, we apply it to services, but we do not readily apply it to dance. We scrutinize products and services for best value, best quality, best materials or ingredients, and we recognize these qualities by paying according for them - we are happy to pay for perceived quality or skills, but here, we do not readily recognize what is actually difficult or skillful in dancing, and we are easily misled by fancy and aesthetic looking performances and routines with lots of solo jazz and footwork over more difficult and requiring-more-skill partnerwork and improvised dancing. Why is that? I think it's time to be educated on this so we can be clear on what we are dancing, and that ultimately bodes well for our dance in general, as the dancers globally become more discerning and more aware of what really needs to be understood. I hope this blog post has brought to light the complexities of improvised dancing, especially in the area of partnerwork, and brought to your attention that not all partnerwork is the same or equal in terms of skills or effort required. I hope it has allowed you to see a bigger perspective on the use of solo jazz within partnerwork, or the use of choreographed sequences in partnerwork. All these things have their place in our dance. It is just important to understand where. It is also important to be discerning about the different ways of dancing partnerwork in that some ways inherently require more skill and effort than others, or are more difficult and complex than others. This way we can give credit where credit is due, and not lump everything under the same umbrella. Should you have questions, come and speak to me when you see. Till the next time. Comments are closed.
|
Archives
February 2019
Categories
All
|