By the way.. you have a very jaded opinion about my profession.. it sounds like you have had bad experiences ( many have ) but.. dont use a broad brush to condemn ALL teachers and schools.

You write like many students I have come across over the yrs, invariably taught by people who were mis informed ,and passed on their dubious info. to others.

And, if you are are as competant as you would have me believe.. then just correct the ensuing problems ...

I think you missed my point.. Thats EXACTLY what I do..the statement was ANY ladies can FOLLOW anything danced .. my response was to imply , no they cannot.

I agree with Terence, women can not follow anything danced. Women have to know their steps. Why would we learn to dance? It would far easier to sit on the sidelines until the man has learned to lead, as well as all his steps. Then just step up, let the man do all the work and dance with little or no effort on our part. There is a great deal of emphasis on leading and following at our studio. We do not rely on routines. I don't have much problem following anymore. I think the problem is that women worry about it too much. I know I did. Just get out there, keep your feet moving to the beat and react without thinking. You'll go the wrong way once in awhile but who cares?

I found a book that addresses this topic: Much Ado About Ballroom Dancing by Levinson, Ronnen. There's a free review of this book at http://outdancing.com/Ballroom/. Anybody has read this book? Any comments?

This appears to be an expansion of the article that has been floating around on the internet for a while which was designed to help musicians decide what to play for a ballroom dance. It has been expanded to include some information on dance techniques. There is some good information there but it seems to leave out other things that I think are important, and a couple of things seem really off-the-wall and I have no idea of what they are talking about.

The best way to learn lead and follow is with one-on-one instruction which you can get from any good instructor. Contrary to what PivotingFool thinks, you can't learn it by trial and error. If you do that you will probably find that what you come up with works only for the one person you developed it with and not with anyone else. Also you can't really learn this from group classes. There are too many people in those classes for the instructor to be able to correct everyone's mistakes. The instructor may mention some things that you need to do, but if you have no prior knowledge it is not likely that it will mean much to you. I think this is also the source of PivotingFools opinion that lead-and-follow is not taught in ballroom, because there isn't much of that taught in a group class. His experience seems to be limited to ballroom group classes and round dance. Those group classes are basically for learning a new step pattern. You are supposed to already know the most of the technique before taking those classes. If you have a good foundation in technique, then you can effectively use all the information presented in those classes. It is also impossible to learn this from a book. Books are good source of reference but you really can't learn to dance from them.

The problem with the classes, private or group, is that they are fixed time, and usually with partners who already know the sequence. I feel like we are just holding on to each other, not really leading or following especially in latin. There is stronger lead and follow when in social environment, but I cannot be calling my instructor all the time when something feels wrong (I do it sometimes when I really cannot figure things out and it bugs me too much). Therefore, I'm looking into resources outside of studio, as supplement and maybe reminder of what I learned. I'm getting Alex Moore's Ballroom Dancing. Any other books or resources that you would recommend?

I learned most of my basic dances under pressure. I was trying to pick up the steps and patterns as quickly as I could, in order to take an "intermediate" class with my leader friend.

I thought I was "cheating" by merely following his movement.

Today, ten years later, he wryly avers that my following skills are a direct result of his deliberately rushed teaching. I, luckily, can dance with anyone who leads, and have a great time. When I am paired with someone who only "does his part" without leading me, I feel quite lost but can usually keep up.

When I go dancing, I often pair with a man whose wife memorizes all the patterns they learn together. When we dance together, he tells me what a pleasure it is to be able to change at will what he is doing, either for the creativity or due to floor constraints, without hearing "That's not how we learned it!"

I recently took classes where the instructors taught amalgamations to get you all the way around the floor. I did poorly when having to remember my part, but had no problems when following the men in my class. I would much rather be lead and be ultra-present in the moment than calculating what pattern my partner had in mind. I dance socially, both American and International, smooth and rhythm, and do not compete.

Jean,

To be fair, we are talking about two different things.

A social dancer must learn to lead or follow.

However, a competitive sport dancer is dancing for a judge. These folks must do a routine, and by memorizing their own part, they can put on a better show.

Most good social dancers could not win many competitions, and most good competitive dancers can not navagate a crowded social dance floor.

I give the competitors great respect for what they do. The difference is that they do not give anyone else any respect for what others do.

If you are not doing it their way, you are doing it wrong.

Some of us want to learn how to converse with our partner with good leads. (And good following.)

Others wish to compete. Still others have various reasons for dancing. (Things like exercising ones mind, (and or body),-- or maybe just having something to do with their spouses.

Personally, I think every dance form helps promote every other dance form.

Others think there is only room for their dance form.


Michael

pivotingfool
you wrote:
"and most good competitive dancers can not navagate a crowded social dance floor."
I guess you haven't actually seen any really good competitive couples on a crowded social floor. I've seen plenty of them over the years - and they are beautiful to watch on a crowded social floor, and no, they don't do their so-called "competition routines" on the social floor; they improvise as space and music dictates.
But, perhaps you just live in area where the really good competitive dancers show up.

Clary,

When you change, "Most good", to "Really Good", you do change the equasion.

I agree that many, "Really Good competitive dancers", might be able to navigate a crowded dance floor.

The added "Very", changes the word "Good", to "Outstanding".

However, if you have not also seen some instructors/coachs who run over anyone who happens to get in the way of them doing their amalgamations, you must not be looking very hard.

Most of the competitors I have seen seldom get all the way around the room. They either stop, and go back to where they started, or they stop and fight about who was wrong. (That is if htey do not stop to glare at a new dancer who had the nerve to be in their way.)

I still say that a good social dancer is far better at leading a woman around a crowded dance floor. (Than a good competitor.)

P. F.

PS You also changed the word, "most" to "any". That also changes the meaning of the sentence.