On a snobbier venue for internet discussion on dancing, there's always some twitty little nattering about how the competitive dancers are so loathe to go lower themselves and dance among the pleibian social dancers and whatnot- the arguments go on and on and ON... I have my opinions, you have yours, and that's NOT the point of this thread.

The point IS that there seems to be a misconception about what defines a social dancer, be it on my part, or these other people's. Whichever, I'm just curious to have it clarified somehow.

I always felt a competitive dancer... well... competed, and a social dancer... didn't, or maybe didn't *always* - preferred to just dance at charity events, dances, parties, socials, and anywhere Dave Hamilton wasn't sporting the absolute most DASHING pinstripe suit with his fab little see-through clipboard around the edge of the floor.

I've always called myself a social dancer. I've never competed.

I have one regular partner and dance almost exclusively with him. The exceptions would be my coach, one very pretty fellow that we're not-really-teaching-but-kinda-unofficially, and another of the same ilk.

When I see these discussions on social dancing, it seems that the "social dancers" go to these events with the purpose of "being social"- mixing, interdancing, etc. with everyone, so that got me to thinking...

Am I a social dancer if I don't "socialize" and interdance, just sticking to my "partners"? I don't compete, so I can't be considered a competitive dancer.

My partner and I don't go to dance events with the intent of dancing with other people (not that we discourage it). We're a partnership, we dance with each other, and if we get asked by others or dance with students, that's ok, if not, that's ok, too. So long as we're dancing, we're happy.

Again, we don't compete, but people always come up and say (people who know who we are and what we do) "Oh, well- we're not like you guys, we're just social dancers"... um- what *does* that make us, then? We practice technique and syllabus as religiously as competitive dancers, and even attend comps to study, we're always trying to better ourselves through private lessons, practice, etc. so the social dancers that say this to us assume that we're 'different'. It's just very odd, and I feel like an in-between or a hybrid.

Hmm, a new label could be a-social non-competer. Maybe there's a pill for that.

What dances do you do?

It's easier to say what social dancing ISN'T, than to define it adequately.

We would mostly agree that social dancing is not competitive dance sport (but that some competitors dance socially too). Equally, it is not professional dancing for the entertainment of others.

I would say that social dancing is that undertaken in the company of others, primarily for the pleasure of the dancers themselves - so it is a participatory, rather than a spectator activity.

The standard varies widely - but that is true of all sorts of human activities - and I have often observed that competitive dancers are rarely "at ease" on the social floor, where they seem sometimes unable to adapt their dancing (which might be termed selfish) into something that will not interfere with or obstruct the progression of others around the floor.

A social dancer with good manners will always be happy to dance with almost anyone present at a function, regardless of their dancing ability, and should be able to take genuine pleasure from the company of another dancer, if only for just one dance.

On a crowded floor, it may be frustrating to have to limit yourself to very simple basic figures, danced very compactly with little (and sometimes no, progression), but a social dancer adapts himself and his partner to the situation, and aspires to be a model of good floorcraft, and makes the best of sometimes difficult conditions.

We are a cheerful lot, for the most part, and don't hiss and whinge when we can't show off our flashiest amalgamations. We are untroubled by missing the odd heel lead, or dancing a phrase or two out of rhythmn - no one is watching, and we have nothing to prove.

There are among our number a significant number of people, who are obviously having a lovely time, but who can't dance a step. They shuffle around in all sorts of odd directions, and their tango looks exactly the same as their jive - they don't care - and as long as they do not completely dominate the floor - neither do we.

For the most part, unless conditions are absolutely terrible (and that's seldom, if ever), a dancing event is what the dancers make it. If one chooses to hate the band, the floor, the people around them, they won't have a good time. If they enjoy the puzzle their brain makes out of navigating the floor, adjusting to a fluctuating tempo, and seeing how close to the edge of the floor we can get, it's actually really fun. I don't think we've ever come out of a place and said "Boy, that really SUCKED", unless a LOT of unexpected cigarette smoke was involved.