SwingOrama Forum

SwingOrama Forum: Lindy Hop: Leadable vs. Non-leadable: Leading techniques

By HopMichael on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 - 01:04 pm: Edit

Oh, Tammy! I've been thinking about the same thing also for the past few months!

I've always wondered why it's so much harder to lead a beginner versus a more experienced follow. Here are some of my thoughts on the type of leads and how follows follow those leads:

1. Physical lead: Most social leads are by physical contact. A tuck turn depends on the subtle "shove" given by the lead to get the follow to tuck and turn. So, the follow can usually "get it" after a few times.

2. Visual lead: This type is leadable as long as the follow is paying attention to what the lead is doing. Examples would be Charleston kick variations (like stomps, high kicks, drags, etc). That's at least one reason to look at your partner!

Another example would be breakaways on Boogie Backs or Shorty George's.

3. Frame lead: Here the lead is communicated through the frame of the follow. This communication through frame is what creates connection between the dancers even through intricate moves. A great extreme example would be the body lead of Balboa. B/c of the closeness of the dance, the follow should feel the lead through her entire body (especially that little pause). Otherwise, a loose or nonexistent connection throws off timing for both partners

4. Traditional lead [or "that's the way it's always done" lead]: These leads are learned in basic classes and for some reason have become such common parlance that they are performed as natural sequences. An example would be the mini-dip. There is a physical lead of bringing the follow down and passing by her. But the subsequent pop up and snap is too quick to be visual. Instead the lead relies on the follow knowing that that is the traditional way of ending the move.

5. Rhythmic/momentum lead: I think this lead type is definitely for more skilled lead-following techniques. Lindy is usually danced to footwork patterns of (for follows) R-L R-L-R / L-R L-R-L. As a lead, one can take advantage of this knowledge and pick points to use her rhythm and momentum to accentuate a move. If she's committing weight to her right foot, it's unwise to lead her into something that requires her to spin on her left foot.

There is a delicate balance here between the follow's marching to her own drummer and her submission to the lead's direction. Great follows know how to strike that balance. Sometimes when I dance, I get the image of my follow as a spinning top: by a gentle tap I can send it off flying in one direction and by a gentle second tap I can send it careening somewhere else; all the time the top keeps its own energy but is guided by small external forces.

One example would be the push out in a tandem (shadow) charleston. The lead has to push on her shoulder blade at the right beat for her to pivot; otherwise, she falls down!

The Hollywood/LA/DC style whip is perhaps another example of choosing the right time to deliver the pivot. By applying a small force at exactly the right time, the lead can change the follow's momentum dramatically with minimal amount of tension/arm-wrestling/forcefulness.

The dance exercise of switching roles between lead and follow helps the dancer become aware of his/her partner's footwork rhythm and momentum.

===

So back to the issue of "leadable" vs "not leadable" Physical leads should be clear (if a bit forceful at first) to the follow. Visual leads rely on quick observation and fast mimicry. Frame leads require good frame and connection. Traditional leads entail dancing enough to observe the custom. Finally, rhythmic/momentum leads depend on knowing the follow's footwork rhythm and momentum.

I'd love to hear what follows have to say/add/mock about this....

--HopMichael

BTW, this was in response to Tammy's post for which I can't seem to add to her thread. Sorry about the division of topic

By Charlie Yi on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Good stuff, Michael.

Here are my takes on the types of leads you've listed.

1. Physical leads:
In my opinion these are the most reliable leads. Especially if dancing with a beginner. Personally I don't like using a lead that I can't use on a beginner. Granted it makes my lead a bit more dominant, and probably a lot harder for follows to improvise in. But I've found the more experienced follows learn to play or improvise within the boundaries of a lead. After all, if the follow just plain ignores a lead, it's no longer a partner dance. It's two individuals doing their own thing holding hands.

2. Visual Leads:
I'd have to say that these are one of the most unreliable leads. Granted a follow/lead should pay attention to what their partner is doing, a visual lead can leave a follow asking "What do you want me to do?" Now a lot of experienced follows I know work these types of leads very
well. But what is a more inexperienced dancer to do? It makes them feel like they're not doing something right, when in actuality they are doing it correctly. Since you didn't really lead anything they shouldn't do anything either! Anticipation and back-leading kills a dance for me, personally.

3 & 5. Frame Leads & Mommentum Leads:
I think these should really be subsets of physical leads. If you know what the actual physical consequences of your contact with the follows are, then you can definitely use them to your advantage by applying finesse versus muscle to get a follow through a move.

4. Traditional Leads:
I think this should be renamed "Implied/Assumption Leads." Because you are basically working from the premise that the follow knows what you're thinking. Or are recalling the same shared classes/instruction you may have taken together. This lead is the most unreliable of all. And pretty much useless unless you're dancing with a regular partner or a psychic. And completely useless with beginners.

Now I know there are a lot of people that emphasize relinquishing the control and playing off of your follows. But that is the perrogative of the leader. If he wants to give the follow an opportunity to do something on her own, I still believe he should still define some kind of boundary. If they (leads) don't they either surrender their lead and become pretty much useless because their not fulfilling their role in a partner dance, and in the case of less experienced follows; you basically are leaving them hanging out to dry.

When dancing socially (especially with people I haven't danced with before), I start with a very concrete lead and relax control gradually through the dance to the point which I think a follow wants.

Now there are times when a strong lead is crucial and that is when the music gets fast! Blinding fast 250 BPM+!! Try using visual or assumed leads in that situation and you'll find out the hard way why you're having so much trouble dancing fast. Now this doesn't mean start yanking girls' arms out and squeezing the life out of their hands. It just means you have to provide a lot more guidance, control, and preparation. You have to remember that theoretically the follow is always slightly behind the lead. Because they should be waiting for you to tell them what to do next. Which means they have to play catch-up, and if the music is fast; it's practically a gurantee that they're not going to keep up and feel like it's their fault (although it is the lead's fault entirely in this case). The easiest way to see when girls aren't following is when they get ahead of me on a move, or assume that I'm going some place that I'm not, and in some circumstances they decide that they want to play while I'm trying to get them prepared for something. It's a "lead & follow dance" IMHO, and not a "Can we do this? & If I feel like it" dance. Without lead and follow, you have what they do at "booty-call night" at Moose McGilicudy's on Dollar Drink nights.

By Swiveler on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 - 02:06 pm: Edit

Cool, thanks for posting. I like your ideas. I will have to think about them a bit longer to assess if I fully agree, but they sound reasonable.

(I don't know why it wouldn't let you post????)

By HopMichael on Tuesday, November 16, 1999 - 02:47 pm: Edit

Charlie, I knew I'd draw your response to this thread! Thanks for your commments and insights.

I grant that frame & rhythm/momentum leads could be considered subsets of physical leads; after all, it is a physical dance. I just wanted to show some of the differences that I perceive within the physical leads and draw them out.

You've also raised an interesting issue about the reaction time of follows. I'm sure you already know that the lead rarely starts exactly on the beat, but more often than not starts a few milliseconds before to give the follow "heads-up" on what's coming up. It's that build-up/acceleration and then realization right on the beat that sets apart a clear lead.

In a way I've always pitied follows b/c often they are just reacting. With that said, I do envy follows that can execute a counter-follow move/footwork that complements both the lead move and the music. The metaphor I have in my head is the lead starts the sentence but the follow finishes it. Remember Mad Libs? Well, the follow can change the entire tone of the move with her completion of the move. So in one sense, the follow cannot dictate the direction of the dance, but she sure as heck can pick the destination!

This, of course, leads directly into the issue of whether a follow can "lead" the dance...

By Jane Hance on Wednesday, November 17, 1999 - 10:51 am: Edit

Hi guys. I agree with everything your saying. You know I love dancing with you Michael. I haven't had the pleasure yet with you, Charli (you didn't dance with me for my birthday dance last week at the Firehouse party!). I'll ask you next time I see you out. As a follow, here's my take on this:
1. I like a very solid (but NOT rough!!!), well defined lead. That's what makes it possible for me to relax and dance. I'm not left guessing. Actually, I won't usually guess. If there is no specific lead I will usually just do what the music tells me to do untill the lead decides to be specific.
2. As a follow, I try to keep my feet under my body, my frame relaxed but solid, my connection clean, and eye contact with the lead. This ensures that I don't miss very many leads. It also allows me, on occasion, the ability to say to the lead through my connection and body language "hey, look at me, I'm going to do something here. Pay attention!". As a lead, changing your body language and/or connection tells the follow the same thing, "pay attention here! I'm changing this up now".
3. Reaction time: if a lead is clean with the correct timing and prep, a good, experienced follow can do almost anything!
4. Swingouts, tucks, turns/spins allow an experienced follow plenty of opportunity to be creative without disrupting the lead.
5. A good part of how a follow responds, especially to fast music, is her quick, subconscious recognition of the lead. Let's say you're going to lead a tuck and you plan to do something fancy with it, start early and be very clear, or you will get a regular (but probably screwed up) tuck.
6. Be forgiving with your leads. Sometimes we follows get caught up in our interpretation of the music for a measure or 2, or just plain screw something up! Just hang out with us for a bit. We'll be right back with you. It happens. Adapt. Michael, you are soooooo good at this! Thanks.

See you guys out dancing!
Jane H

PLEASE VISIT THE NEW SWINGORAMA FORUM
GO TO SWINGORAMA.COM FOR MORE INFORMATION

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page | Delete Conversation | Close Conversation | Move Conversation

			This is a private posting area. A valid username and password combination is required to post messages to this discussion.
Username:
Password:

Add a Message