Topic: Just to cause a bit of a stir

[JT]

Found this on a US dance website - I won't say which one - if I don't name names I presume I can't get into trouble - but thought I stick it on here to see what the reaction was!!


Leroc
The French form of the dance, where there is NO footwork, so it's very easy. These make up for that by doing very complex 6/8 beat moves with the arms. Looks very good for a while, but is mechanical, and contains little expression.


I presume whoever wrote this has never danced Leroc!

[Lou]

No footwork?! That'd be Ceroc^TM, then. 

But isn't the whole point of LeRoc that it's supposed to be easy? Well, easier than Ballroom, etc, to learn.

And, you must admit, there are some pretty cool "mechanical" dancers about. 

[JT]

AAAGGGHHH!  I've just filled one of these out and went to post and it timed out on me!! (not a gripe john as I know it was my own fault - been logged in for over 300 mins! - must get that changed)

Anyway - the basic gist of my post was:

Good point Lou - I think the attraction with Leroc is that it's easier, whether because you're only trying to learn one dance or the lack of emphasis on footwork, but it probably means that more people stick with it even if they think they have two left feet!  Also, there is always the opportunity of taking it a lot further (e.g. aerials and other workshops) if you want.

[John Gimber: Webmaster]

If you get a time-out message, click the back button on your browser and you should return to your original message, with the text intact.  Copy it, log in again, and then paste your message in.

Another option - when you log in, there is a checkbox to say "log in forever" which leaves you logged in, so next time you return to the forum you're already sorted without having to type anything in.

That may help with your timeouts.

Give it a go and let me know how it goes!

As for the "no footwork" thing, it may be that LeRoc in that area is very different to LeRoc in this area.  Around here we are very technical in the approach to LeRoc, but that's because we choose to be, not because of any franchise^TM restrictions on how we teach.

Might be fun to get an exchange session going, with a busload of us going over there, or a busload of them coming over here for a few Bristol classes! 

John.

[philsmove]

Found this on a US dance website

Don?t believe every thing you read on web

[John Gimber: Webmaster]

Don?t believe every thing you read on web

So young, so cynical... (sigh)

[Nick M]

Leroc
The French form of the dance, where there is NO footwork, so it's very easy. These make up for that by doing very complex 6/8 beat moves with the arms. Looks very good for a while, but is mechanical, and contains little expression.

I agree that the footwork is minimal (compared to Lindy, WCS, Charleston, and even R&R), but there's a bit of a leap between "minimal footwork" and "little expression"

[DavidB]

Leroc
The French form of the dance, where there is NO footwork, so it's very easy. These make up for that by doing very complex 6/8 beat moves with the arms. Looks very good for a while, but is mechanical, and contains little expression.

I've seen quite a few descriptions of Modern Jive similar to this one, and I can understand what they are saying, and why.

The only slightly controversial points in this description are 'mechanical' and 'little expression'. (I will conveniently forget about the footwork comment   )

MJ is a simplified dance. It removes a lot of the complexity in other dances, and as a result is very popular. If you ask a group of dancers to step back, the ballroom dancer will ask "what foot", the WCS dancer will ask "how quick", and the MJ dancer will step back and ask "what's next".

But this is a double-edged sword. The 'complexity' isn't there just for the sake of it. It makes the dance look and feel better. So if you get an experienced dancer from another style looking at MJ, they will see a lot of people who don't really know how to do what they are doing. They just repeat the series of steps they have been taught, and it can look mechanical.

They don't see this lack of knowledge in their own dance - simply because the people who didn't want to learn how to do it properly stopped going!

The "little expression" quote I would agree with. Even though there has been a huge improvement in the last couple of years, you still *see* very little musical interpretation, and almost nothing beyond hitting the breaks. Just because you feel something in the music, and do something in response doesn't mean that anyone else noticed. Some other dance styles are a lot more extroverted, almost forcing you to notice the musicality.

I presume whoever wrote this has never danced Leroc!

This is an interesting point. In my opinion Modern Jive feels a lot better than it looks. I don't get any more pleasure out of dancing a good WCS or Foxtrot than I do out of a good MJ dance. But I would far rather watch WCS or Ballroom than Modern Jive.


Of course there are some exceptionally good MJ dancers who absolutely do not look mechanical, and can interpret the music with all the expression in the world. But they are the exception, not the rule. MJ is very bottom heavy - there are a huge number of beginner/intermediate dancers, and very few advanced dancers. Other styles might have more advanced dancers, but pay for it with fewer beginners.

WHich would you rather have?

David

[Lou]

The "little expression" quote I would agree with. Even though there has been a huge improvement in the last couple of years, you still *see* very little musical interpretation, and almost nothing beyond hitting the breaks. Just because you feel something in the music, and do something in response doesn't mean that anyone else noticed. Some other dance styles are a lot more extroverted, almost forcing you to notice the musicality.

Ahhh, but David, there's a lot of people around these parts who don't actually want to see the "musicality" side of it. I hear comments about a number of dancers - those who, imho, actually more obviously dance to the music - that they don't do "LeRoc" any more.

[philsmove]

This is an interesting point. In my opinion Modern Jive feels a lot better than it looks. I don't get any more pleasure out of dancing a good WCS or Foxtrot than I do out of a good MJ dance. But I would far rather watch WCS or Ballroom than Modern Jive.

Before MJ I could not dance at all, not even bop (and yes I admit some may say I still can?t)

But I only dance my own and my partner?s pleasure
 
So I?m not too bothered how I look

[Justine]

I agree with you phil 100% its for pleasure, i enjoy dancing leroc i may even look like a bag of spuds but i dont care as i am enjoying myself and i love to dance. As for your dancing phil i think you are great,you look good and you enjoy yourself. Good on you phil 

[Frodo]

Of course there are some exceptionally good MJ dancers who absolutely do not look mechanical, and can interpret the music with all the expression in the world. But they are the exception, not the rule. MJ is very bottom heavy - there are a huge number of beginner/intermediate dancers, and very few advanced dancers. Other styles might have more advanced dancers, but pay for it with fewer beginners.

WHich would you rather have?

That's a difficult one.

I guess you need a few advanced dancers so:

- everyone (including foreigners from other styles and muggles) gets an appreciation of how potentially good a dance can look
- provide a critical mass for a progression path.

but not too many so the dance becomes intimidating to the non-advanced, or the direction is set to suit primarily advanced dancers.

Maybe putting the advanced dancers on TV might do the job.

I agree with you phil 100% its for pleasure, i enjoy dancing leroc i may even look like a bag of spuds but i dont care as i am enjoying myself and i love to dance. As for your dancing phil i think you are great,you look good and you enjoy yourself. Good on you phil

Dancers that look good AND are clearly enjoy themselves can be a such an inspiration. 

....
But I only dance my own and my partner?s pleasure
 
So I?m not too bothered how I look

There was a time I would have said the exactly the same.

However dancing recently with ladies who have learned beautiful styling it did kindof increase my dancing pleasure. 

Also while I've not given looking good much importance I'm more aware than I was that looking good may be of greater importance to the lady

[Elaine]

The "little expression" quote I would agree with. Even though there has been a huge
This is an interesting point. In my opinion Modern Jive feels a lot better than it looks. I don't get any more pleasure out of dancing a good WCS or Foxtrot than I do out of a good MJ dance. But I would far rather watch WCS or Ballroom than Modern Jive.

I would certainly agree with you David on the WCS front.  The video clips that I have seen of Jordan for instance are just amazing!  Latin Ballroom would generally hold my attention to a greater level than MJ, although I am not sure about the Foxtrot! (No await comments from Andy!  )

Lou made the point that some people around here 'don't actually want to see the "musicality" side of it' - is this just a local thing I wonder, or do you encounter it in other areas?


Elaine

[ClaireLSt]

DavidB says:

MJ is very bottom heavy - there are a huge number of beginner/intermediate dancers, and very few advanced dancers. Other styles might have more advanced dancers, but pay for it with fewer beginners.

Which would you rather have?

Well, isn't it nice to have both?  
I prefer Lindy for many reasons, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy Leroc anymore and really had fun at the last couple of dances I came along to!    Not sure if I did 'Leroc' though, but managed to follow in a muddling through kinda way  And it's nice to just dance and not have to think too much about footwork etc.

I think, it all depends how much effort you want/can put in and whether you actually prefer more (technical?)complexity?  But blimey, all this talk about 'wanting to look good' is quite unnerving... don't you just want to have a great dance and who cares who's watching?? 

[Graham W]

..I agree there could be more expression... , something I am planning to improve on this year.. ;-)

G