Re: Brave New World
- From: "Bob Wheatley" <xmaster.dancer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 20:01:13 -0500
<avid_dancer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1146400876.571164.56780@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Bob Wheatley wrote:
Leads are not constant.
They are only leads when they are leads.
Depends on your definition of terms. In my book,
lead+follow is always on-going while two people
are partner dancing, even in free spins, because
they must constantly pay attention to each
other, to stay "partnered." >
Nonsense.
Lead a right free spin in Cha and your follower will spin 4&1 and break
forward 2.
Lead a right free spin in WCS and your follower will spin 3&4 and anchor
5&6.
It is called "supposition of pattern".
You are no more "leading" your follower in free spins than you are someone
else's. She knows what dance she is doing executes her appropriate footwork.
Each dance has it's own and when you are not connected to her she is simply
doing what she has been "trained" to do.
Except of course Ron and his partners who use their psychic skills to
determine appropriate footwork and rhythm. :>)
At times, the lead+ follow goes to visual. >
Agreed.
It's signalling, which is the moment-to-moment
exchange of (necessary) information that's not
constant. To me, the choice (or lack of
awareness/ability in making the choice) of what
is signalled as part of the lead/follow is a major
part of what makes a good verses mediocre
partner(ing) dancer.
This paragraph seems to argue with your first.
Is a lead constant or not in "your book"?
Bob Wheatley
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Brave New World
- From: avid_dancer
- Re: Brave New World
- From: Ron N.
- Re: Brave New World
- Prev by Date: Special Air Discounts For Jack & Jill O'Rama
- Next by Date: Re: Hustle music
- Previous by thread: Special Air Discounts For Jack & Jill O'Rama
- Next by thread: Re: Brave New World
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
