If you want to dispute the issue, you should respond to that, proudly as Quickstep, not keep trying to sneak your tired old arguments in again under a new username.
no subject Posted by Serendipidy 7/6/2007 3:43:00 PM
I would still like to know who instructed you to not get your quicks in the Foxtrot right on the black dot of the crotchet. (Getting the quick right on the black dot.Those words spoken by Pat Thompson 75th Blackpool tapes) Where you also taught the same in the Tango and the Quickstep, or is this all your own idea. Instead of giving me a string of numbers to look up, just write here what is there. Or is that too dificult. If I were you I would quite before you make a bigger fool of yourself than you are already doing. Deliberately dancing off the beat. What next. I finaly looked at the message you refered to. It has absolutely nothing to do with getting the quick on the beat. I stand by this. Get the quicks on the beats and the slowes will look after themselves. As Len Scriverner said. You can be off the slows. But only a fool would be off the quicks.
This is an argument from way back when some guy reckons that it is not necessary to dance any quicks in the Foxtrot right on the beat. Can we imagine a Feather Step where the couple or not on those two quicks. Or the same on the six quicks on a Reverse Weave. What! Are we supposed to dance inbetween the beats of music.
"This is an argument from way back when some guy reckons that it is not necessary to dance any quicks in the Foxtrot right on the beat. Can we imagine a Feather Step where the couple or not on those two quicks. Or the same on the six quicks on a Reverse Weave. What! Are we supposed to dance inbetween the beats of music."
This is a tired misconception from way back, resurrected after 5 years by some guy who apparently continues to deny the universal fact that real dancers do not in fact put their second quick on any beat. Either he has not been watching actual dancers, or he has been unable to see through his assumption to perceive the actual facts of what those dancers are doing.
The reality is that foxtrot is not a dance with the goal of stepping on beats. Instead, it is a dance with the goal of moving the body with the character of the music.
When we match the body speed to the music speed, we find (either in ourselves, or in carefully measuring the performance of any respected dancers) that the intervals between steps required by the music mean that at most one step of a SQQ pattern can fall on a beat.
Traditionally, that is the first quick landing on the 3rd beat.
Trying to force either the slow, or the second quick, to also land on a beat would break the proper intervals of the steps, removing the essential character of the dance known as foxtrot from the movement of the body.
If you are obsessed with landing your feet on beats, best to avoid the foxtrot.
The foxtrot has rise and fall not as much as the waltz of cause. We gather body speed on the fall so the body is moving faster going into a variation and slows at the end of the rise . In foxtrot this change of body speed is not so obvious as we dance through the rise to get that smooth movement. So the slow in foxtrot is faster than the quicks and that's why we don't dance right on the beat. With a nice peace of lyrical music we can extend the ending of feathers hovers and feather finishes, but we can't do that if we don't have enough body speed on the downswing. Cheers Dave
Foxtrot. Feather Step. Rise at the end of step 1. Up on 2 and 3. lower at the end of 3. Now analyse that.. not putting anything in it that is not there. We are at our full height on 2 and 3 lowering verticly at the end of step 3 with the moving left leg coming into a neutral position. Which is often called a balance position. And we then compress,,, ( Alex Moore uses the word relax ),,, the knee so that we can drive the next step into a Reverse movement. Dont ignore the Inroduction Section of the Technique book. If we are to lower at the end of the third step which gives us two heights to be at on the one beat we had better arrive on that fourth beat on the dot and not be late otherwise we will be chasing the music
"Foxtrot. Feather Step. Rise at the end of step 1. Up on 2 and 3. lower at the end of 3."
This simplified formal description leaves out a lot of geometrically obvious reality. For the specific properties it covers it is accurate, but anyone who tries to execute it without understanding the key aspects which the wording does not attempt to address, goes fatally wrong. This is why you must study with a skilled teacher, and not try to learn to dance from a book!
"Now analyse that.. not putting anything in it that is not there."
You are in fact reading in plenty that is not there, for example the following grossly mistaken claim:
"We are at our full height on 2 and 3"
No. In fact, your height continuously changes as your feet close, pass, and re-divide.
One would better hope not!
Approximately vertical lowering is seen in the foot-closure waltz figures, but not in the foxtrot's passing figures which gently taper the lowering as the movement continues.
Spend some time watching actual dancers, and you will discover that these theories bear no relation to how the foxtrot is done. They are inventions of pure misunderstanding. A book, especially one that you misread, will not teach you this dance - you must study in person with those who actually know it.
"And "we " all know ,what Scrivener said, about R and F on a Feather!"
Yes, the issue has long been recognized.
What the technique books describe is primarily the foot rise.
When you add in the effect of the legs closing and re-opening, there becomes another components of rise which is visually apparent, but one that is not addressed by the technique books.
As the legs close together, the height of the body increases, and as they divide again it decreases. This is not only the geometric reality, it contributes a lot to making the dance flow smoothly.
In the era when the technique books were written, movement was small enough that things like this were easy to overlook. But as movement has grown over the many decades since then, it becomes impossible to ignore the difference between the simple model of the text, and the far more involved and artistically pleasing reality of masterful execution.
To be blunt, someone who cannot see this trend of OVERALL rise and fall by watching a skillfully executed feather step from the side is someone who has not yet developed the visual perception necessary to have a meaningful conversation about dance technique. All you have to do is trace their path of their head with your finger - gently upwards until the feet pass at the end of two, gently downwards thereafter.
Dancing well requires not only understanding the aspects of dance discussed in the books, but also the many things which were considered too subtle to address there, but can no longer be ignored with today's scale of movement. This is why one must study with live teachers, and not simply sit at home with a book.
ANY Prof. who has earned his dance "stripes" thru many years of study, and training , with the best of the best, knows that the "book " was never anything more than a tool, for taking exams.
Theoretical exercises ,have been around much longer ,than the text books that now exist . I could quote several variations of Frame/Hold all used by world class champions.. which begs the question.. which one is correct ? .
And again , I quote Srivener.. " There is no such thing as absolute technique ".. the reasoning ?,,,, Circumstance, does change standardised theory, in some cases .
So Chris, your perception is just that.. " Your " perception .
Anonymous.As the legs close to togther, the height of the body increases and so on. Dont you think it is the use of the feet and ankles plus the knees are the reason we rise and fall. I believe the amount of loss of height over a step which is about as wide as an average door frame is minimal. Coming from a T. to a T.H. now thats a different story. But coming from both heels on the floor to a heel where the toe lowers imediately( Page 10 ). I cant see it. When you say. All we have to do is trace the path of their head with your finger. Dont tell me all we have to do is walk to get the correct rise and fall. I think you should be looking down to the knees a below. That is where the differences in height are taking place. The head just happens to be on top. This discussion reminds me of the Samba to some extent. Where as the straightening of the feet and the bending of the knees keep the head at a constant height so it doesn`t pop up and down.
Quickstep- "surely the teacher doesn't call out the open telemark as 3-4,1,2..."
Of course he/she does!
The simple fact is that it depends on what level student we are teaching. At the lowest beginner level, we avoid figures and timing which might confuse the uninitiated, but at a slightly higher level, introducing the notion that the "slow" is often danced on the 3-4 is a must. As you should be made aware, both the Natural turn and Change of Direction are danced with three slows and are often followed by a feather step. The technique book is correct on this point and it is obvious that the following feather is danced "slow" on 3-4, as soon as a student can handle that. As a practical matter, teachers often add an extra "slow" to the Natural Turn so that the beginner-beginner can continue on the same timing.
But it isn't just "3-slow" figures. When teaching a silver level student, the Natural Telemark is a key, and most useful, figure, -and it is danced S,Q,Q,Q,Q, which also results in the following figure's LF "slow" being on 3-4. After the "magic 30" is mastered by my Bronze Student, I would replace the Natural Turn/Impetus/Reverse Turn with a Natural Telemark followed by an Open Telemark and Feather Ending. This would then be followed with the three step,- and all of this would be danced with the "slow" on 3-4. Replacing the three step with a COD or following the three step with another Natural Turn or Natural Telemark returns the student to familiar territory.
You need to stop watching, (or at least trying to emulate), high level pros. They often break the "rules" to good effect. John Wood would often commence his Foxtrot with a Change of Direction started on 3-4 (DW) to give the competitors he was about to defeat a head start. Then he would dance a simple sequence on conventional time for maybe 5 bars- just to show he could do that. He would then dance an impetus turn and end with a feather finish danced with a slow as the (RF) last step and proceed to dance his next sequence QQS - 2,3,4-1 - yes - as in Rumba. Every judge knew it was "off-time" but he (and his all-time great partner Ann Lewis) made it beautiful, and the judges made him world champion.
*You* can't do that. And neither can I.
Get yourself a qualified ISTD teacher. And if your teacher ever tells you you can't dance a "slow" in Foxtrot on 3-4, GET ANOTHER TEACHER !!