[TANGO-L] Still not about Neverending Ochos

[Carlos Lima <amilsolrac @YAHOO.COM>]

Prompted by the phrase 'I thought that the standard mantra was "The man
indicates - the lady leads - the man follows"' in a posting by Laurie Moseley
not long ago, some vaguely related comments.

Yes, it is some kind of standard mantra, but in my opinion it oughtn't to be.
Again, results of introspection, no universality claims implied.

I believe the leader (traditionally the man) leads; best if in a
non-dictatorial way---but that is a higher level of achievement for the
couple. I believe the follower follows; best if her following is not
mechanical, and her participation in the shaping of the dance is strong---but
that is a higher level of achievement for the couple. I apologize for such
un-exciting ideas. I tend towards the pedestrian.

Whoever does the leading does not normally do so by indication. Leading is
not much at all about signaling, coded messages, or the like. It is also not
discrete, one lead at a time, but rather a continuous, uninterrupted,
process. The leader leads by guiding the joint movement of the couple in a
continuous manner; often doing some of her moving himself; most often being
the main mover (rather more than 50% of the energy), as well as the mainstay.

I am not talking about ethereal feelings here, not philosophizing, not
engaging in pedagogical metaphor: I am talking about what my introspection
tells me is going on in the earthy world of matter and of the senses.

Here's a thought experiment. An actual experiment, really, and food for
thought, I hope. It starts with the couple ready for a woman's traba (cross).
The man is now going to lead the couple v-e-r-y-y...s-l-o-w-l-y-y (I mean,
really very slowly) so that the woman, standing on, say, her right foot,
crosses her left in front s-l-o-w-l-y and changes weight s-l-o-w-l-y onto it.
The whole thing can take easily 10 or 20 seconds. For those who believe in
the follower leading and the leader following: what should my indication/s
be? What should her lead/s be? How should I follow?

Perhaps the leading and following really happen continuously and
simultaneously. That's a thought. Perhaps that is what really happens when I
am doing this sort of thing.

Can I make sense of the "he invites, indicates, etc; she leads; he follows"
thing? Metaphorically, and perhaps misleadingly, I can. I mean, sort of. The
couple are standing, parallel system, feet together. The leader (say, a man)
wants to start moving forward, leading the woman back. He brings the frame,
and everything more or less directly attached to it, forward. He adjusts his
axis (and, more importantly, the woman's) in the direction his nose is
pointing. Hey, he is SignalinG, he is InvitinG! At some point the woman is
reaching towards the limit of her supporting base, so she starts extending
her leg back. Hey, she is LeadinG! (Meaning in this case simply that she is
"going first"). Of course he better FolloW right after, or he will be left
behind. There you got it: he proposes, she leads, he follows.

After this the man will, say, move steadily forward, maintaining proper
connection. This is what simpleton me does for a lead. And I stop when I want
the couple to stop.

I could now try, for my benefit or that of some unfortunate neophyte, to
describe this very simple process in terms of a sequence of infinitesimal
"man's invitation / woman's lead / man's follow" triplets. I think the result
would be like that genius clock that found out it could calculate how many
tick-tocks it was likely to have to make in its useful life span. So it did.
In the thousands of millions. It was so overwhelmed by the enormity of the
task that it could not bring itself to make even one more tick ... ever
again. The average-intelligence clock in the next room kept on ticking ...

I think this reverse logic of lead and follow is one of these overly clever
things that are invented in the tango world, a fertile ground for inventions
(great inventions, too). I have even found people swearing by the mantra, and
trying (for a very short while ...) to put it into practice. In this one case
I danced with the believer, and I could not for all the tea in China have her
step together with me in an elementary walk.

In my simpleton ways the leader leads by assuming a principal role in guiding
the movement of the couple; which he does primarily through the attitude and
movements of his upper torso (everything between neck and waist, plus
possibly tummy, if he's got one); movements which are produced by his ...
power train. He is always leading, even when there is (practically) no
movement in the couple. (Shshsh, he is leading a PausE.)

The follower follows by sensing the very subtle guidance pressures (not coded
cues!) created by the lead, and moving and reshaping her body to relieve
them, as her body recognises "vocabulary" being led, as a result of prior
exposure to it. Constantly, continuously. (I sound almost like a competition
ballroom type writing about THEIR lead-follow, don't I? It is malicious. It
is on purpose.)

So there is no first-then; there is no he-this-she-that. It is nothing like
telegraphic communication. The technique of leading and following gets
refined over weeks and years of practice, and subtle little dialogues like
the one needed to get going on a walk from a stop are learned, mostly
unconsciously. It is worth being made aware of some of them. Like the one
just mentioned: it really helps beginning leaders learn the ropes.

In addition, there is plenty of following by the man in tango. From
recovering from a "mistake" to attaining that total understanding of bodies
that blurs the distinction between leader and follower. And yes, many leads
do have the flavour of invitations. Yes, the man has often to wait for the
woman to do this or that, or start moving. The description of particular
situations as invitation plus reversed lead-follow does make some sort of
sense here and there: basically, when the leader is "initiating something";
but I think one can do rather better without it.

Anyway, the foregoing is not what the mantra says, as usually interpreted,
which is: as a general principle of how "la marca" works. In this sense,the
mantra is basically imaginative nonsense. To me, of course.

Cheers,



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003
http://search.yahoo.com/top2003