Jack you gave a perfect explanation of lead and follow. this is the lead:..."The simplest example is the walk. It seems that I merely walk forward, with my initial movement coming from the torso" this is the follow......"and the lady walks backward with her initial movement" Brilliant
In a message dated 11/14/2010 11:52:11 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes: > From: Pat Petronio [email protected] > "Leading" & "following" can create a different mindset to "inviting" & >"responding", > I'm uncomfortable with both of these terminologies. 'Leading and following' seems to imply that there's a concious lead by the man, which the lady recognises and then follows. But, in reality, both happen simultaneously and, with correct technique, are built-in to the dance. The man 'Inviting' seems to imply that the lady then has a choice to either accept or decline, which, surely, isn't the case. The simplest example is the walk. It seems that I merely walk forward, with my initial movement coming from the torso and the lady walks backward with her initial movement coming from her foot. But I don't feel any leading or inviting - we're simply walking together and, if I stop the movement of my torso, the lady stops the movement of her foot and waits for whatever comes next. Or am I being too simplistic? A teacher once told me that there is no lead and follow; the man dances his dance and the lady accompanies him with her dance. This is assuming both know how to dance. Jack _______________________________________________ Tango-L mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l _______________________________________________ Tango-L mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/tango-l
