Could anyone suggest any ideas as to why the drag hesitation (as standardised) DOESN'T have basic waltz rise and fall ?

According to both Howard and Moore, there is rise (at the end of step 2) and fall (end of step 3). I'm not sure what you mean by "basic" rise and fall, though.

What confused me about this figure when I first learned it is the fact that the footwork for the first step (LF) is HT but there is no rise. Howard specifically indicates that the dancer should remain "down" on step 1.

I suppose that foot rise on the first step could possibly fool the lady into thinking that the man is leading a Reverse Turn or even a Double Reverse Spin.



jj

I would say that it is down to the twofold character of the "drag" and the "hesitation". There are only two weight changes over three beats, and when I lead the figure, I make a RF movement very similar to that of a heel pull (ie inside edge of foot), and bring the body weight over the flat foot as I drag in the LF, only rising at the end of 2 ready to lead (usually) a back lock.

If I rose at the e/o 1, as in a normal reverse turn, I dan't think that my partner could discern the lead correctly, and the drag & hesitate movement would falter.

"Could anyone suggest any ideas as to why the drag hesitation (as standardised) DOESN'T have basic waltz rise and fall ?"

Because it does not have the usual swinging body action. Instead, you step into place while down, and then "drag" closed with moderate rise.

The footwork is HT because the second step is toe. If the second step where HT, only then would the first step be H(implicitly flat) as seen occurring for example with the three step.

"The footwork is HT because the second step is toe."

It would be just as logical to say that the second step is a toe because the first step is HT.

jj

"It would be just as logical to say that the second step is a toe because the first step is HT."

Perhaps, but if the leader has a goal, it's probably the character of the figure late in the second step and during the third - what he causes the partnership to do in the first step is simply what is needed to enable the later achievement of that goal.

"It would be just as logical to say that the second step is a toe because the first step is HT."

The second step is a toe because it is a step to the side. This is usually sufficient to require a toe but certainly when reaching around on the outside of a turn. Trying to do that with a heel would look very ugly.

The figure uses a late but abrupt rise to allow the rotational energy to be dissipated and to achieve the hesitation effect. This of course also acts as a lead to the lady to ensure she does not dance a normal reverse turn or double reverse spin.

"The second step is a toe because it is a step to the side."

This is an interesting idea.

Given the lack of usual full-body swing,
it may actually be that this step is more substantially sideways earlier in its action than step 2 of a reverse turn would be - instead of swinging forwards towards the foot and turning it qualify as sidways only as you arrive, this less swinging step may actually be placed as a sideways action.

A point of interest is there is no Sway, so there is no Swing.
This step the Drag Hesitation is often used in Sequence Dancing.

polished. there is no sway on a weave in waltz time, but there is still swing.


but, the role of sway and the causal links between swing and sway is an interesting subject and something i would be keen to hear more about