--- On Wed, 11/19/08, Myk Dowling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was replying to Anton's comments, not Mario's.
> Anton was expressing a desire for some potent authority to define Tango and
> make it easier to assess.
I didn't read that in Anton's statement, but I did read a reflection of what I
do see happening. That people are too willing to have an "anything goes"
philosophy about tango without really thinking through the implications.
Inexperience? Laziness? Excuses?
Tango is a dance that anyone can hang up a shingle and call himself/herself a
teacher. There's no qualifying exam or regulations. So it depends on the
voices that are heard to help define what it is. I think that too often the
voices that are supportive of new things in tango, such as nuevo, are misused.
Others take the support of nuevo to mean "anything goes". But the best of the
nuevo practitioners would not advocate that. In fact, they look for the same
qualities that traditionalists look for, too. Elegance, connection, musicality.
Trini de Pittsburgh
_______________________________________________
Tango-L mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
