How do you describe the difference in the "rise & fall" in American FoxTrot (box rhythm - SQQ, or Hover) as compared to the rise and fall in American Waltz.
The best people to ask about this one are actually international dancers, since the situation is exactly the same between Int'l Foxtrot and Waltz. However, I will take a stab at it here.
Foxtrot has a more linear and elongated quality than Waltz. Imagine for a second a string, which is situated in the shape of a sine wave (Waltz rise & fall). Now imaging pulling gently on the ends of the string. While the sine wave gets longer, it also gets shorter. It now represents Foxtrot rise & fall.
This is somewhat abstract, but it's the best representation I've heard so far.
In more concrete terms, (yet also more confusing to many beginners), leg and body swing help you to go in just about any direction you need to go, including forward, back, side, up, or around. In Waltz, I use it to take me primarily in an upward direction, while in Foxtrot I use it to take me outward (ie forward, back, or laterally). This does not mean that there is no rise in Foxtrot, nor does it mean that you wanna pop straight up in Waltz. But it does give you an idea of where you want to place the emphasis, in order to get the right character.
Oh, I just got one more idea. But I may hear back from some people on
it. (1) Stand with your feet flat, weight over middle- to back of foot:
TANGO.
(2) Shift weight forward slightly and rise ever so slightly: VIE. WALTZ
(3) Rise higher, about half way to 3/4 up on balls of feet: FOXTROT
(4) Rise almost all the way (as high as you comfortably go): WALTZ
(5) Hop up off the ground completely: QUICKSTEP.
This last example is an idea I've used as an illustration only.
Cute illustration, but not entirely accurate. And of course, #5 is a joke.
[Jonathan Atkinson waltz123@aol.com ]
From: argtango@aol.com (ARGTANGO)
Regarding Ballet vs. Ballroom, may I chime in with 2 cents worth?
I have been doing ballroom dance since I learned as a child (1959), and there is no doubt a higher degree of physical demands on those who are serious about ballet, rather than ballroom...............
HOWEVER.........my experience in trying to teach ballroom to ballet-trained dancers is that they are some of more difficult people to train in ballroom (speaking solely of women, that is).
The MAJOR problem here is getting women to balance, and advance on the HEEL, rather than the ball of the foot. REAL ballroom is advanced on the heel TO the ball (Latin is basically opposite, and is more "ballet-friendly" in my opinion). I hear women pleading that HIGH HEELS are the culprit, and that accounts for the "ball" lead in advance.........The same women walk on the dance floor on their heels, dance on the balls, and leave the dance floor on their heels.........amusing, eh? I've been in this game for a LONG time, and always train my students in sound basic techniques, though the 2 major problems have always been: 1) Forward advance on the HEEL, and 2) Forward partner LEADS, regardless of gender (forward woman leads the motion, whilst the male controls line, of course).
Back to the main issue, it is in this department that I find the ballet women to have an extremely difficult time adapting to ballroom.
More problems occur with lining their "center" to the male partner, a notoriously difficult practice for those coming from ballet, where matching body line is totally different.
Love to hear everyone's opinion..........stop by my web page as well, when time permits....... http://expage.com/page/tangomaven
Frank Tyrell
From: Tina Price
Well I'm just the opposite of Frank, I danced BALLET from the age of 5, (1959), to the ripe old age of 26 and I'd have to agree with him whole heartedly here.
I haven't done that MUCH ballroom dancing but what I have done, I have experienced the natural tendency to want to step forward toe first, as you've described above, and the idea of aligning my center to a partners center was totally foreign to me. I was used to dancing alone so I didn't know anything about counter balancing my balance in relationship to my partners while FACING him. I say while facing him because most of the ballet training for partnering, called Adagio work, is done in relationship to your partner while he's BEHIND you. (if you're the female) , or in the case of lift work we'd be relating our weight to each other in a completly different way, but not especially or specifically while FACING each other while holding hands.
Ballet dancers are tremendous dancers/athletes. But not all dance forms translate well to ALL other dance forms. Some things WILL transition over, and some things WON'T and then there's somethings that are completly new.
From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist)
Conna Condon posts, in part:
My female dance teacher had been dancing with the San Francisco Ballet up until 6 months prior to my starting. That year she and her partner came in 6th place in California Star Ball (L.A. Thanksgiving)
...she had ballroom danced less than a year in her entire life. She simply transferred her ballet skills to ballroom.
Or perhaps more accurately, transferred her dancer's muscular build and learned the skills quickly?
Warren Dew
From: waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123)
Tina the ex-ballerina (cute) writes:
>> Some lucky girls have natural turnout while the rest of us are stretching, stretching, stretching those inner leg muscles to get those hips to turnout for "better turnout". Tina the ex-ballerina <<
Not that I'm any authority on the whole ballet thing, but don't you really mean, "strengthening, strengthening, strengthening"? It is my understanding that one can have great flexibility, but to hold the turnout requires quite a bit of strength in the right places. (c:
>> Turnout is still very much a part of the essential postitioning and training of Ballet Dancers. <<
Absoulutely. Ballet dancers still strive for that perfect 180. However, Warren may have been referring to Modern dance or some other modified version of ballet. His exact words were, "Modern stage dancers".... Warren?
>> All the steps in a ballet repertoire evolve around correct placement, which a part of your placement is having good turnout. <<
Tehnically, especially from a non-ballet dancer's point of view, good placement does not require turnout. All the parts can be perfectly lined up, and you can have your feet totally parallel. But even in ballroom, you get much more dynamic and solidly grounded movements when you use opposition in muscle groups within your own body. Turnout is one of the best examples of this kind of muscle opposition... and I use it every time I do a chaine or pencil turn.
Of course, I'm not referring to closed-position body contact stuff here. Opposition in this type of dancing usually occurs between the body weight of the two partners, not so much within one's own body.
jonathan atkinson
From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist)
Jonathan Atkinson posts, in part:
Absoulutely. Ballet dancers still strive for that perfect 180. However, Warren may have been referring to Modern dance or some other modified version of ballet. His exact words were, "Modern stage dancers".... Warren?
That's what I meant - 'modern' as in 'what Isadora Duncan did'. I use the term 'modern stage' to differentiate it from 'modern ballroom dance' - international style. Both forms of 'modern' seem to be differentiated from their predecessors by the same change in technique - a reduction in the amount of foot turnout.
Regarding turnout, I tend to agree with Tina Price that it is mostly stretching, rather than strength, that is involved. In fact, my new ballroom partner and I are doing these stretches as we can't currently get the full 135 degrees of turnout that's needed for certain ballroom figures (such as the basic natural turn in waltz).
The arched back is an independent issue, not related to turnout. I have seen some photographs of ballerinas with arched backs and assumed what they were doing was desired. I am willing to accept that in fact, it was incorrect - there are certainly some fairly highly ranked ballroom dancers who incorrectly arch their backs.
Warren Dew
From: waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123)
Warren posts:
>> Regarding turnout, I tend to agree with Tina Price that it is mostly stretching, rather than strength, that is involved. In fact, my new ballroom partner and I are doing these stretches as we can't currently get the full 135 degrees of turnout that's needed for certain ballroom figures (such as the basic natural turn in waltz). <<
The turnout we use for ballroom is quite a bit different than ballet turnout. I assume the turnout you're referring to is that which is used during the inside of a turn, such as Man's 5 of a Natural. This type of turnout is only partially a result of the upper thighs... but not much more than you would naturally be able to produce from that area.
There are other forces at work here. CBM can account for up to 1/8 of the turn. Additional turnout can occur in the feet & ankles, and in very small amounts at the knees (although my ballet teacher would freak if I admitted this to her). Also, one may not truly be "pointing to DC" on 5. At least, not until the weight has begun to transfer to the RF, at which point the body is at least facing center, the LF now beginning to "think" about moving inward. So even in a Viennese Natural with 1/2 turn, you will probably realistically never need to exceed 90, which is about the natural limit of an average body.
Ballet dancers strive to turn their feet not 1 degree farther than their hips... claiming that doing so is bad for you. Supposedly the angle of the ballet dancer's feet is completely a result of the upper-thighs, beginning at the ball & socket joint at the hip. To do this requires a great deal of strength and muscle usage, specifically the abductors, adductors, and to some degree the gluteus.
I'm not sure about any of this ballet stuff, of course. I only took it for a couple of years, to help my ballroom. I think I'll print this thread out and show it to my old teacher, to see what she has to say. In the meantime, maybe some other ballet dancers/teachers may care to comment.
Sincerely, Jonathan Atkinson
From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist)
Jonathan Atkinson posts, in part:
The turnout we use for ballroom is quite a bit different than ballet turnout.
Well, different in that weight isn't taken on both feet at the same time, and in that we are moving across the floor from foot to foot - but then, those are the basic differences between ballroom and most other forms of dancing.
I assume the turnout you're referring to is that which is used during the inside of a turn, such as Man's 5 of a Natural.
Yes. Or more importantly, on the lady's step 2; most men don't do the back half of a natural turn much - typically using a spin turn, instead - but the ladies are doing step 2 all the time. It was when working on the lady's part with my new partner (new as in no previous ballroom experience) that I decided I needed work on this.
This type of turnout is only partially a result of the upper thighs... but not much more than you would naturally be able to produce from that area.
The amount that is 'natural' is different for different people. I agree that most people can get fairly close to 135 degrees - or more specifically, most people can get more than 90 degrees.
There are other forces at work here. CBM can account for up to 1/8 of the turn.
I don't see this, unless you are turning the toe in on the back step (lady's step 1 of the waltz natural turn). If there's a certain amount of turn out between the feet, a hip rotation can reduce the turnout of one foot only by increasing that of the other. Toeing in reduces the potential power of the swing, since one can no longer roll through the whole length of the foot from toe to heel if it doesn't lie along the direction of travel.
Additional turnout can occur in the feet & ankles, and in very small amounts at the knees (although my ballet teacher would freak if I admitted this to her).
While turnout can occur at the ankles, I find that the better my feet are lined up with my knees, the better I can use all my leg muscles. Noticeable turnout at the ankles can also be unattractive.
I agree with your ballet teacher about the knees. Knees are hinge joints, designed for rotation about only one axis, and they aren't that well designed at that. Misusing them for turnout is only asking for trouble.
Also, one may not truly be "pointing to DC" on 5. At least, not until the weight has begun to transfer to the RF, at which point the body is at least facing center, the LF now beginning to "think" about moving inward.
That's the instant I'm talking about - at mid stride, when the weight is transferring from the left heel to the right toe. The body turn can decrease the turnout of the right foot, but only by increasing the turnout of the left - the total is still 135 degrees.
So even in a Viennese Natural with 1/2 turn, you will probably realistically never need to exceed 90, which is about the natural limit of an average body.
Actually, I'd agree that less turnout is required for viennese waltz - the left foot can step back with some turn in or curve on step 4 (step 1 for the lady). One doesn't need to roll through the full length of the foot, since the total travel will be limited by the partner on the forward half of the turn - with 1/2 turn, the difference between the distances travelled by the two partners is greater.
Ballet dancers strive to turn their feet not 1 degree farther than their hips... claiming that doing so is bad for you.
I guess I agree with the ballet dancers on this one.
Supposedly the angle of the ballet dancer's feet is completely a result of the upper-thighs, beginning at the ball & socket joint at the hip. To do this requires a great deal of strength and muscle usage, specifically the abductors, adductors, and to some degree the gluteus.
Sure. But it also requires longer inner thigh muscles than most people have, which means stretching.
Warren J. Dew
From: "Margaret E. Hayes"
On Mon, 22 Sep 1997, Psychohist wrote:
> Jonathan Atkinson posts, in part: > > The turnout we use for ballroom is quite a bit > different than ballet turnout. > > Well, different in that weight isn't taken on both feet at the same time, > and in that we are moving across the floor from foot to foot - but then, > those are the basic differences between ballroom and most other forms of > dancing. If turnout were *only* a static position in ballet, and one merely stood w/ the legs turned out the above statement might be true. However, ALL dance forms move across the floor and transfer weight from one foot to the other all the time. All good dancers in any form will use turnout in varying degrees to create the best possible movement sequences. In whatever style, turnout MUST occur from the hip, w/ the muscles surrounding that joint both stretched to allow the maximum rotation and strengthened to support/hold/maintain the position required by the particular form. Turning out from the ankles or worse, from the knees, will lead to nothing but trouble, producing at the very least sore muscles and creating the potential for very serious injury. This is especiallly true for the knee joint which, as noted in another post, is a hinge joint allowing for flexion and extension. Any rotation which occurs is incidental and MUST NOT be encouraged/developed. While the ankle joint does allow for rotation, working only that joint for turnout w/o support from the hip will again lead to problems in the knee joint. Any teacher in any dance style who makes statements such as "rotate the feet", "turn out the feet", "rotate the knees'(yes I have heard this one), or any other similar statment is plainly and simply WRONG!
> Additional turnout can occur in the feet & ankles, > and in very small amounts at the knees (although my > ballet teacher would freak if I admitted this to her). See abive statement.
> While turnout can occur at the ankles, I find that the better my feet are > lined up with my knees, the better I can use all my leg muscles. > Noticeable turnout at the ankles can also be unattractive. Many dance teachers use some version of the statement"knees over toes" to encourage this kind of support. By creating this alignment, the large bones of the leg are used to support the body(along w/ proper muscle usage). This allows for a very stable base from which the next movement, whatever it is can be easily accomplished. Any action which causes/requires/results in weight being born on the inside of the knee &/or ankle will be far less stable, look awkward, will be generally unstable, and make movement to the next step not only unattractive but potentially dangerous.
> I agree with your ballet teacher about the knees. Knees are hinge joints, > designed for rotation about only one axis, and they aren't that well > designed at that. Misusing them for turnout is only asking for trouble. Absolutely!!!!!!
> Ballet dancers strive to turn their feet not 1 degree > farther than their hips... claiming that doing so is bad > for you. > > I guess I agree with the ballet dancers on this one. > > Supposedly the angle of the ballet dancer's feet is > completely a result of the upper-thighs, beginning > at the ball & socket joint at the hip. To do this > requires a great deal of strength and muscle usage, > specifically the abductors, adductors, and to > some degree the gluteus. The angle of turnout in any dance form should be the result of action in the hip joint. The adductors which control movement inward toward the center of the body also work to turn the leg inward-not what you want in turnout. The abductors, which control movements away from the medial(middle/center)line of the body and the gluteals(there are actually three different sets-maximus, medius and minimus) are responsible for creating/supporting turnout.
Maggi
From: waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123)
Jonathan Atkinson writes: >> >> The turnout we use for ballroom is quite a bit >> different than ballet turnout. >>
Warren Dew replies: Well, different in that weight isn't taken on both feet at the same time, and in that we are moving across the floor from foot to foot - but then, those are the basic differences between ballroom and most other forms of dancing.
Maggi Hayes replies: If turnout were *only* a static position in ballet, and one merely stood w/ the legs turned out the above statement might be true. However, ALL dance forms move across the floor and transfer weight from one foot to the other all the time. All good dancers in any form will use turnout in varying degrees to create the best possible movement sequences. In whatever style, turnout MUST occur from the hip, w/ the muscles surrounding that joint both stretched to allow the maximum rotation and strengthened to support/hold/maintain the position required by the particular form. Turning out from the ankles or worse, from the knees, will lead to nothing but trouble, producing at the very least sore muscles and creating the potential for very serious injury.
Melissa Winogrand replies: Hi there! Let me first say that you are not reading Jonathan Atkinson right now, you are reading his partner, Melissa Winogrand. I was trained in ballet on and off since the age of seven at Stanley Holden Dance Center, and I have been competing in the smooth style of ballroom dancing for almost three years now. As such, I am probably more qualified than most to compare the two styles.
A couple of thoughts: For the most part I agree with Maggi, but the point that everyone seems to be forgeting is that ballroom dancing is done with the feet parallel 99% of the time. The turned-out postion which started this whole discussion, (namely steps 4-6 of the natural turn,) is midway between two parallel positions, and therefore only a fraction of a second is spent turned-out.
In ballet, one strives for perfect and correct turnout constantly, whether standing on one foot, both feet, or moving from foot to foot. The hip rotators are always engaged.
In ballroom, except when hitting a line, the object is to have one's feet pointing the same direction as one's center. The difficulty arises when one is turning. When turning while moving forward, the solution is to swivel one's standing foot so that both feet remain parallel and aligned with one's center. When turning while moving backward this is impractical, so once one has stepped back with CBM, one leaves that foot as it has landed, but continues to turn through the knees and hips. It is important to note that at this point weight is transfering to the other foot, which is pointing to the new alignment, and that the center is almost caught up with this new foot. Furthermore, as one moves away from the first step, the weight rolls to the inside edge of the ball of the foot, which is pulled in as the adductors draw the legs together, PARALLEL! The hip rotator muscles are engaged so briefly that I had failed to notice them until this dicussion came up.
In the case of Warren Dew, my guess is that he is so concerned with turnout because he hasn't started turning his center soon enough.
Any turnout which happens in the smooth ballroom dances is incidental.
--- Melissa Winogrand
Subject: Re: Ballroom turnout / Ballet turnout From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist) Date: 1997/09/24 Message-ID: <19970924175000.NAA03319@ladder01.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
Melissa Winogrand makes some cogent observations about the ephemeral nature of turnout in ballroom, and comments, in part:
In the case of Warren Dew, my guess is that he is so concerned with turnout because he hasn't started turning his center soon enough.
First, Melissay, welcome! Always nice to see another person interested in discussing technique.
Actually, I'm not all that concerned about turnout - as I've pointed out, the gentleman doesn't do back halves of natural turns in slow waltz all that much. It's more that I'm always interested in discussing any technical issues having to do with ballroom dance.
With regard to your specific observation, I think we may have a difference of opinion as to how far and how early the center should actually turn. You, or at least Jon, seem to feel that the center (and thus the feet) should have turned somewhat before taking the backwards step with the left foot, leaving the foot in a 'turned in' position relative to the book alignment. I like to take the turn more gradually, over the full three beats of the bar, and prefer to have the left foot land in the book alignment. This doesn't mean, by the way, that I haven't started the turn yet - just that I started in an underturned position from the previous bar.
Though with your amount of ballet experience, you might not notice the turnout at all because it doesn't come anywhere close to your limits.
Warren J. Dew Former Eastern Regional Amateur Smooth Champion
Subject: Re: Ballroom turnout / Ballet turnout From: marshall@astro.umd.edu (James Marshall) Date: 1997/09/24 Message-ID: <60bpdl$n8b$1@hecate.umd.edu> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
In article <19970924175000.NAA03319@ladder01.news.aol.com> psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist) writes: >Actually, I'm not all that concerned about turnout - as I've pointed out, >the gentleman doesn't do back halves of natural turns in slow waltz all >that much.
I do back halves of naturals all the time when I dance waltz. I'm guessing that your statement is refering to advanced levels of dancing which I assume gives you lots of other choices of moves to do following the first half of the natural turn. As a beginner, about all I do to follow the first half of the natural turn is the back half of the natural, the spin turn, and an occassional outside change (still working on that one though). A little off the original topic, but I wanted to comment on it anyway.
-- ** Ballroom Dancing ** -- James Marshall BAM! Oo Foxtrot, Waltz, Swing, Cha Cha, marshall@astro.umd.edu " ' Rumba, Samba, Tango and more! http://www.astro.umd.edu/~marshall |\\ "We're dancers, we're used to close contact." (Often heard on BAM outings.)
Subject: Re: Ballroom turnout / Ballet turnout From: waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123) Date: 1997/09/25 Message-ID: <19970925023201.WAA12587@ladder01.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
James Marshall:
>> I do back halves of naturals all the time when I dance waltz. I'm guessing that your statement is refering to advanced levels of dancing which I assume gives you lots of other choices of moves to do following the first half of the natural turn. As a beginner, about all I do to follow the first half of the natural turn is the back half of the natural, the spin turn, and an occassional outside change (still working on that one though). A little off the original topic, but I wanted to comment on it anyway. <<
Even in advanced dancing, there are lots of examples of swing used on step 4 of the natural: - 456 Natural (ok, not very often) - Running Finish - Syncopated Hairpin - step 4 of Tipple Chasse - Open Natural
There are more, but you get the idea. --J
Subject: Re: Ballroom turnout / Ballet turnout From: marshall@astro.umd.edu (James Marshall) Date: 1997/09/25 Message-ID: <60dvlm$doj$1@hecate.umd.edu> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
In article <19970925023201.WAA12587@ladder01.news.aol.com> waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123) writes: >James Marshall: > >>> I do back halves of naturals all the time when I dance waltz. I'm >guessing that your statement is refering to advanced levels of dancing >which I assume gives you lots of other choices of moves to do following the >first half of the natural turn. As a beginner, about all I do to follow >the first half of the natural turn is the back half of the natural, the >spin turn, and an occassional outside change (still working on that one >though). A little off the original topic, but I wanted to comment on it >anyway. << > >Even in advanced dancing, there are lots of examples of swing used on step >4 of the natural: >- 456 Natural (ok, not very often) >- Running Finish >- Syncopated Hairpin >- step 4 of Tipple Chasse >- Open Natural > >There are more, but you get the idea.
You've basically helped make my point. :) I wasn't talking about the actual technique of the step(s), which is why I said my post was a little off the original topic. I was posting in reference to the statement that the back half of the natural isn't used much. As a beginner I have few choices of moves to follow the first half of a natural turn, so I end up doing the back half of the natural quite often. As your post points out, at a more advanced level there are at least 4 other options you can take after the first half of a natural turn (probably more and that's in addition to the ones I mentioned doing at beginner level). Maybe my previous post was a little unclear on this, but I meant that not doing the back half of the natural must be something that happens much more frequently in advanced levels of dancing where you have more options of moves. At a beginner level with more limited move options, the back half of the natural is used more often, at least in my case, but probably in general as well.
-- ** Ballroom Dancing ** -- James Marshall BAM! Oo Foxtrot, Waltz, Swing, Cha Cha, marshall@astro.umd.edu " ' Rumba, Samba, Tango and more! http://www.astro.umd.edu/~marshall |\\ "We're dancers, we're used to close contact." (Often heard on BAM outings.)
Subject: Re: Ballroom turnout / Ballet turnout From: waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123) Date: 1997/09/24 Message-ID: <19970924111601.HAA19963@ladder02.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
Margaret Hayes writes:
>> All good dancers in any form will use >> turnout in varying degrees to create the >> best possible movement sequences.
>> In whatever style, turnout MUST occur >> from the hip...
>> Turning out from the ankles or worse, from >> the knees, will lead to nothing but trouble...
And finally, my favorite:
>> Any teacher in any dance style who makes >> statements such as "rotate the feet", "turn out >> the feet", "rotate the knees', or any other similar >> statment is plainly and simply WRONG!
Be careful of blanket statements such as these, Maggi. Anybody who claims that something is absolutely and definitively wrong without exception, is plainly and simply WRONG!
It so happens that ballroom dancers of the smooth variety prefer parallel foot positioning on the whole. Very often, the legs (and consequently the feet) will turn to a different angle than the body, although still parallel to each other. This is sort of like having one leg turned in and the other turned out. We use this type of positioning for very specific reasons, but mainly because it helps us to acheive the strongest possible movements that we strive for. It also requires the occasional usage of the inside edges of the feet, with a knee turned inward. It sounds ugly, but it's what we do. And it works.
Latin style ballroom is different, and this one will make you especially sick. In this style, the feet turn out but the knees turn in. You heard me right. We actually WANT to be on the inside edges of our feet. It's how we get the notorious latin hip motion.
Not that I want you to injure yourself, but try this out just once. Take a first position, with "moderate" turnout... roughly 90 (45 per foot). Feet flat. Bend one knee only, while holding the other one straight. Bend it as far as your body will allow, but remember: the opposing leg must remain straight. The feet must remain flat. Oh, and the upper body can't shift at all. Now straighten both legs again and do the same thing with the other side. Continue alternating, making sure to always straighten one before bending the next, with the upper body being completely unaffected.
The first time you do this exercise, do it the way you're used to: knees bending over the toes, all turned out equally. Now pay attention to your hips: what are they doing? My guess is that they're shifting slightly side to side.
Now try it "our" way: when you bend the knee, veer it inward so that it's really bending forward at 0 degrees while the foot is still at 45. You'll notice that in order to do this, you must roll your foot to the inside edge. At the same time, keep the other leg straight. No... better yet, PRESS the straight leg back. Now what do you notice about the hips?
If you did everything I described, you would have found that the combination of the feet being turned out, knees bending inward, feet rolling to inside edge, and straight leg pressing back actually cause the hips to rotate or "twist" AROUND the spine, and to a much greater degree. Did you hurt yourself? Didn't think so.
Turnout in the latin style involves not only rotation and supanation of the ankles, but rotaion of that infamous knee joint that y'all are claiming can do no rotation. Weak movement? Weak positions? ...It's all in the eye of the beholder, m'lady.
You might also find it interesting that a relatively small percentage of ballroom dancers, latin or smooth, experience major injuries or wear... especially compared with ballet dancers. In fact, the majority of the injuries that we do sustain don't come from causing damage to our own bodies -- we get 'em mostly from collisions, or sometimes from being whacked by a careless partner! Also, our professional performing careers tend to last much longer, sometimes into our forties and in a few rare cases, fifties.
...Not bad for a gang that swears by the inside edges of our feet! (c: Sincerely, Jonathan Atkinson
Subject: Ballet Turnout vs. Ballroom Turnout From: waltz123@aol.com (Waltz123) Date: 1997/09/23 Message-ID: <19970923094001.FAA06703@ladder01.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
Warren Dew: ...most men don't do the back half of a natural turn much...
Jonathan Atkinson: Maybe not in Waltz, but certainly in Viennese. And in slow Waltz, of course, men use all sorts of variation of the 456 of the Reverse i.e. Left Cross Turn, Double Cross, Tumble Turn, etc. Men may not have as many of these instances as the lady, but there is certainly no shortage of them, either.
Warren Dew: The amount that is 'natural' is different for different people. I agree that most people can get fairly close to 135 degrees - or more specifically, most people can get more than 90 degrees.
Jonathan Atkinson: Definitely... everybody is different. So for the skae of argument, we give or take 5 or 6 degrees. The bulk of the bell curve falls within this range. You say the average person is 135 at the hips, and I say you've got to be kidding! I'm saying this because when I turnout from the upper-thighs, keeping my feet in line with this angle, I achieve about 90 (assuming also that I'm of fairly average flexibility... trust me... I'm not stiff). Yes, I too can go to about 135, but only if I involve the feet.
The fact that you beleive that the average is 135 (give or take) tells me that your turnout is occurring from places other than the hip/thigh joint alone, which proves my point exactly... ballroom turnout can and does occur in more than just the hips.
Warren Dew: While turnout can occur at the ankles, I find that the better my feet are lined up with my knees, the better I can use all my leg muscles. Noticeable turnout at the ankles can also be unattractive.
Jonathan Atkinson: Of course. But how often is modest turnout in the ankles really noticeable? I guess if the ankles were turned out and the legs were not, then it might be. But let's face it... you and I are debating over the issue of 45 degrees (the difference between 90 and 135). I still say that a good part of the extra 45 degrees IS coming from your ankles, and you're not noticing it.
Really... turnout your feet to 135 and take a close look at your upper thighs, near the hips. Is the angle really the same? If you had started ballet at the age of 5, then I might beleive you.... (c:
BTW, I am in complete agreement with you that turnout at the hips helps the leg muscles do their thing. It also helps you pick up your center, which is great for balance and posture, not to mention sharp, crisp, tangy spins. This is why ballet dancers adore it so.
Warren Dew: That's the instant I'm talking about - at mid stride, when the weight is transferring from the left heel to the right toe. The body turn can decrease the turnout of the right foot, but only by increasing the turnout of the left - the total is still 135 degrees.
Jonathan Atkinson: Actually, the weight doesn't transfer from left heel to right toe on 5, but from left ball to right ball (even if the left heel is very close to the floor). Even more accurately, the inside edge of the left ball. This is important to understand because it's implying that the left knee is veering inward at the beginning of weight transferrence to the new foot. When the knee "veers inward" (as the British put it) like this, it helps rotate the hip almost to DC, so that there's relatively little turnout happening in the right leg. As for the left leg, yes, there's turnout. But again, taking into account the other factors (CBM, etc.), and as a little added bonus, the fact that you're now on the inside edge of the LF, the turnout at the hips is, at this point in the movement, nothing really to speak of.
To be perfectly honest with you, I feel that the greatest degree of turnout happens immediately PRIOR to the weight change, when the right foot is simply "pointing". But even here, I'm gonna attribute at least some of it to CBM and foot turnout.
Warren Dew: I guess I agree with the ballet dancers on this one. [That turning the feet out more than the hips is bad for you].
Jonathan Atkinson: It's not that cut and dry. Feet can naturally turnout a little bit. I don't know exactly how much... 15 degrees each, maybe. Whatever. The fact is, taking advantage of this is not bad, nor is it unattractive. Even ballet dancers do it as they warmup... it's called "foot circles". What's bad is forcing the ankle or the knee joint to stretch beyond their limits. After all, you can't stretch a joint. At least, not in a good way.
Warren Dew: But it [turnout at the hips] also requires longer inner thigh muscles than most people have, which means stretching.
Jonathan Atkinson: Misunderstanding. I never said it doesn't involve stretching (although I admit that I wasn't very clear). What I meant to say was, "It ALSO involves strengthening". You can have great turnout if the related muscles are limber enough, but you can't hold it unless they are strong enough.
Wow, my brain is tired. I think I'll go do some foot circles and than hit the hay. Nice debating with you, as always. Sincerely, Jonathan Atkinson
Subject: Re: Ballet Turnout vs. Ballroom Turnout From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist) Date: 1997/09/23 Message-ID: <19970923151301.LAA22952@ladder02.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
Jonathan Atkinson posts, in part:
You say the average person is 135 at the hips, and I say you've got to be kidding! I'm saying this because when I turnout from the upper-thighs, keeping my feet in line with this angle, I achieve about 90 (assuming also that I'm of fairly average flexibility... trust me... I'm not stiff). Yes, I too can go to about 135, but only if I involve the feet.
Actually, I think I was considering 90 degrees to be 'close to' 135 degrees - 'only' 1 eighth of a turn, rather than 45 whole degrees!
The fact that you beleive that the average is 135 (give or take) tells me that your turnout is occurring from places other than the hip/thigh joint alone, which proves my point exactly... ballroom turnout can and does occur in more than just the hips.
Um, no - I just checked, and with turnout from the hips only, I can get my thighs to point outward at an angle of about 130 degrees, with the feet pointing in the same direction. But I agree this is more than an average person.
I also agree that in the natural turn I'm currently getting the remaining five degrees from the ankles. That's why I'm doing those stretches, so I won't have to use turnout at the ankles any more.
Now, I actually agree that a small amount of turnout at the ankles can look okay. However, I find that the closer I can keep my ankles to acting like hinge joints, the more power I can get out of my feet. So I'm trying to train myself not to use any turnout at the ankle.
Actually, the weight doesn't transfer from left heel to right toe on 5, but from left ball to right ball (even if the left heel is very close to the floor). Even more accurately, the inside edge of the left ball.
Do you push out of the right foot on the back half of a slow waltz natural? The action you describe implies that you would push out of the inside edge of the ball of the foot, basically a sideways push. To me, this hurts even to think about.
I feel that I can get much more power by pushing out of the heel. I'm pushing backwards, relative to the angle of the knee, rather than sideways, and that allows me to use the large muscles along the front of the left leg. I also get an extra inch or two of distance by keeping the foot aligned with the leg.
And the book footwork is TH, not THT.
I do agree that the weight transfers to the ball of the right foot before it rolls forward to the toes.
Nice to have an actual discussion of dance technique - even the ballet dancers are participating!
Warren Dew
In a post in the Olympics thread, Culurienk9 makes some comments regarding the difficulty level of ballet. I have some thoughts of my own:
Interesting opinion. Sounds like one that comes from extensive ballet and limited ballroom background. Although it can easily be argued that ballet may be more physically damanding than ballroom in certain respects, you seem to be implying that ballet is somehow more difficult. Allow me to set you straight, if I may.
>> In order to dance ballet (in any form approaching "real" dancing), you must start at a very young age: girls by say 8 years and boys (since they don't need to do pointe work) by around 16 years. Beyond that, unless the dancer has significant experience in something like gymnastics, it's virtually impossible for the body to physically meet the requirements of ballet. <<
"In order to start ballet, one should start at an early age". Intersetingly enough, this axiom applies to just about any skill. As a general rule, the best ballroom dancers also start at around 7 or 8. There are exceptions to this rule... then again, there are also exceptions in ballet.
The ballet dancer must physically "mold" his or her body, musculature, and bone structure in a certain way. The later in life one tries to do this, the less likely they will be to succeed. The ballroom dancer has a body which is closer to the natural human form. So the requirement to start early for the purpose of molding the body is not necessary, but starting early to learn the skills is.
>> The fact that ballroom lessons can be begun as an adult and that adult can go on to a professional level tells you something. <<
Yeah... it tells me that what is called "Professional" in America is absolutely embarrassing. I mean, my mom could take one ballet class tomorrow, and then call herself a professional. That doesn't mean that she actually IS one.
Anyone who expects to get anywhere as a professional competitive ballroom or latin dancer is subject to the same level of standards as anyone who expects to get anywhere as a professional ballet dancer in a company. You gotta start early, you gotta work your butt off for hours daily, and you gotta do it for a loooooong time to get good.
>> In addition, ballroom can be started or continued by senior citizens. Hardly the case with ballet. <<
I took a ballet class level 5-6 a few years back that had an 88-year old lady in it. The fact is, a person can enjoy any style of dance as a hobby, starting at any point in their life. This doesn;t mean that they'll be any good. I HOPE you're not implying that a person who starts ballroom dancing as a senior citizen has any hope of having a professional competitive career!
My conclusion: Having had extensive exposure to both styles, I have no problem with the idea that ballet is more physically demanding than ballroom. It's the implication that it requires more skill that makes me laugh. Skill and physical strength are not the same thing. If they were, then it would take alot more skill to be a drummer than to be a pianist.
Sincerely, Jonathan Atkinson (pianist)
Subject: Re: Ballet vs Ballroom From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist) Date: 1997/10/22 Message-ID: <19971022155801.LAA23896@ladder02.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
Jonathan Atkinson posts, in part:
The ballet dancer must physically "mold" his or her body, musculature, and bone structure in a certain way. The later in life one tries to do this, the less likely they will be to succeed. The ballroom dancer has a body which is closer to the natural human form. So the requirement to start early for the purpose of molding the body is not necessary ...
Actually, there's quite a bit of body molding going on in ballroom, too - and it's different for Standard than for Latin. The Standard dancers preferentially build calves (also true for ballet), while the Latin dancers preferentially build thighs.
My belief is that dancers start early - the prevailing European opinion in ballroom seems to be you'd better have started by age 4 or you'll never get anywhere - because it takes a long time to build muscle just by dancing. If you are willing to do brute force strength training, you can do it much faster, and successfully start much later.
Having had extensive exposure to both styles, I have no problem with the idea that ballet is more physically demanding than ballroom.
Can you elaborate? My experience is that ballet dancers are not stronger than ballroom dancers of comparable dedication and experience.
Warren Dew
Subject: Re: Ballet vs Ballroom From: psychohist@aol.com (Psychohist) Date: 1997/10/23 Message-ID: <19971023141200.KAA20404@ladder02.news.aol.com> Newsgroups: rec.arts.dance [More Headers]
Conna Condon posts, in part:
My female dance teacher had been dancing with the San Francisco Ballet up until 6 months prior to my starting. That year she and her partner came in 6th place in California Star Ball (L.A. Thanksgiving)
...she had ballroom danced less than a year in her entire life. She simply transferred her ballet skills to ballroom.
Or perhaps more accurately, transferred her dancer's muscular build and learned the skills quickly?
Warren Dew
Last modified on: 2000, Wednesday April 12.
This file is part of the FAQ list for the newsgroup rec.arts.dance. The FAQ list is being maintained by Victor Eijkhout (victor at eijkhout dot net, talk about vanity), who appreciates being sent additions or corrections on the material in this collection. Copyright 1994/5/6/7/8/9/2000 lies with the maintainer and the contributors of various parts.
Listen up: Victor did not write most of this stuff; he just collected it. So don't send him any dance questions.
You may link to this page and make copies for private use in any form, but reproduction in any means, including book or CDROM, is not allowed without permission from the copyright holder. When linking, the page may not be displayed in a frame: use the full window, or open a new one.
It goes without saying that the maintainer of this FAQ takes no responsibility for any inaccuracies in the information presented here or for any use or abuse of this information. The maintainer is neither a doctor nor a lawyer.