Not-boring stage tango!

Here's a thing. The performance beginning at 13 minutes in this video is the very first time I've ever seen [professional] tango escenario (stage tango or tango-ballet) done as though it were being done sincerely as expressive dance, rather than just an athletic display or pose-fest. Her dress is designed to place the action in time; they make bold use of a simple prop to tell a touching story; it corresponds with the lyrics; they even act. The dancing mostly serves it. Acting is so much better when you've got something to say. The embed should start from 13:00.


They are couple number 546, Juan Pablo Bulich and Rocio Garcia Liedo.

They didn't win; they placed second. The winning performance comes at 11:19 in section 3, by Camila Alegre and Ezequiel Jesus Lopez. I think this one is also better than the others. I watched it without feeling bored, because it's another coherent performance with the dancing appearing to serve a sincerely-held idea that corresponds with the music, as opposed to a mess of conventional tropes serving as excuses for poses. It didn't grab me as much as the one above, but it might be better technique-wise. The second embed shows the winning performance from 1:15, with the presentations before that.


All the others are much of a muchness, to me, give or take some business with clothing, and I don't have any reason to suggest you watch them, except in order to find out if you agree or not. You can find all the relevant videos at the bottom of this playlist or at Aires de Milonga.

Strictly Come Dancing and the Tango World Championship

This post is here to clear up some mysteries about Argentine Tango on Strictly Come Dancing. It's going to be pretty long and it is VERY old news, that is, several years. [Update - I've just been forwarded a press release for "The Last Tango" dated 24th April 2015 repeating the claim "Vincent Simone and Flavia Cacace - World Champions", so maybe not such old news after all.]

So, the mysteries. I have started from the premise that I am seeing, not a wickedness or an incompetence to be criticised, but a mystery to be explained.

If you're an SCD viewer and not particularly into tango, you may want to refer to Argentine Tango for TV Viewers. If you haven't got time, then just take it as read it's a ballroom show, and that's a totally seperate, unrelated community and practice to what I talk about on this blog.

The mysteries, in essence, are:

1.Why is it that when the Argentine Tango comes along, the celebrities usually look like perfectly decent beginners (and the men tend to look better than the women), but the professionals look awkward, stiff, effortful and disconnected? Sometimes, with good choreographies, this doesn't happen - but usually it does.
2. Why do the judges and commentators sometimes give technique advice for tango that appears to  contradict what we normally do in tango?
3. What exactly were Vincent and Flavia "World Champions" of?

It turns out, after some research, that the answer to each of these things explains the others, in reverse order. So I'll start with number 3.

What exactly were Vincent and Flavia "World Champions" of?

Here is the un-forgettable Bruce Forsyth, in an episode broadcast on 9th December 2007. At twelve seconds in, he says:

"Please welcome the two-times World Argentine Tango Show Champions, our very own Vincent and Flavia!"

Vincent Simone and Flavia Cacace are a dance teaching and performance partnership who appeared on SCD for a few years. There is currently no such claim on their official site, but there is something like it on the website of their stage show, http://www.dancetildawnonstage.com/staff/:

Titles include: UK Professional Ten Dance champions 2002–2006; UK Professional Showdance champions 2003–2006; UK Argentine Tango champions 2006 (first time competition has ever been held); World Argentine Tango Show champions 2005/2006; UK Ballroom champions for several years; World and European Ten Dance and Showdance finalists 2002–2006. 2006 saw their move away from competitions, and from the fourth series onwards, into recurring roles on BBC’s Strictly Come Dancing.

The UK part is clear. In 2006 there was a UK feeder competition for the Tango World Championship or Mundial de Tango, held at Negracha Tango Club.  According to friends and acquaintances who were there, there were very few entrants, and not of a high standard. Vincent and Flavia did a professional job, treated the event with respect, and won. No similar event was organised again until 2014 (see mega-footnote 1).

The "World Champions" part is the mystifying one. It sounds like the next level up of the same competition; but that's not true.

 This is the performance that won the Escenario ("Stage", or "Show") category of that same tango word championship ("Mundial de Tango") in Buenos Aires in 2005. The couple were German Cornejo and María de los Angeles Trabichet, of Argentina. German Cornejo, incidentally, is the choreographer of the current Tango Fire show at the Peacock, which I reviewed here.



In 2006 it was won by a Colombian couple, Carlos Alberto Paredes and Diana Giraldo Rivera. I can't find video of the performance, but there is plenty of video of them doing later demonstrations. Here's a tango-nuevo one, the style I think they look most at home in.

Neither of those couples, obviously, is Vincent and Flavia.

The Tango World Championship, or Campeonato Mundial de Baile de Tango, has been held in Buenos Aires annually since 2003. It has two categories, Salon (which means ballroom, that is, improvised dancing suitable, at least in theory, for a sufficiently roomy social dance floor) and Escenario (which means stage, that is, choreography suitable for the stage). It's very well known. I should clarify that not everyone who dances tango is particularly crazy about either the concept or the contents. Competition isn't much of a thing in tango communities; and a lot of excellent dancers, maybe the majority, maybe even a large majority, are uninterested in the Mundial or the styles of dancing that it promotes. However, it gets entrants from all over the world who dance extremely well in those styles. Most people who dance tango have heard of it at least once. It's definitely the only tango competition of which that is true. It's difficult to win, it's definitely prestigious in a certain way, and people get substantial career benefits as teachers and performers from doing well in it.

Although the official website of the championship is unhelpful, Wikipedia has a convenient listing of the winners from 2003, when it was first held. The first few years have had  to be compiled from newspaper reports, so I included those links above.Vincent and Flavia have definitely never won it in any year. So what was Brucie on about?

The obvious path is to email Vincent and Flavia at the address given on their website, and politely ask what competition it was that they won. So I did that. I got the following reply:

Hi Flavia

Can you help me with the answer to this one, or shall I ignore it? G X X 

This is what your web site used to say

2002-2006 UK Professional Ten Dance Champions,

2003-2006 UK Professional Show Dance Champions,

2006 UK Argentine Tango Show Champions,

2005/6 World Argentine Tango Show Champions,

2002-2006 World and European Ten Dance and Showdance Finalists

(Highlighting mine). This was actually rather helpful, as otherwise I wouldn't have been sure that they'd ever made any such claim themselves. Since it seemed needless to pursue an unwelcome correspondence, when I'd stopped laughing, I did a bit more asking around, with the help of a few friends.

The extremely careful and detailed stats website Ultimate Strictly has the following rather different information:

Negracha club UK Argentine Tango Champions, 2006 IDO World Argentine Tango Finalists, 2005/2006 (3rd place overall - winners, Show Tango section)

Aha! Ultimate Strictly to the rescue. So we're talking about an Argentine Tango championship created by one of the many general dance competition organisations, in this case the International Dance Organisation, IDO. They organise loads of  competitions, for all sorts of dances, and they classify Argentine Tango along with Salsa, Merengue, and West Coast Swing, under the "Special Couple Dances Department".

The IDO's website says this:

"Special Couple Dances department

Some of these dances are traditional favorites all over the world. Salsa and Argentine Tango have probably some of the largest dance communities in the world today."

My compliments to the writer. I might have done the same if I'd been paid to write copy for the website. It allows the reader to infer, if they wish, that this competition has a connection with that large dance community, without in any way saying so. Nicely done.

The IDO's website only has results since 2008. So I emailed them, and they were extremely helpful, just as I would have expected from a professional ballroom dance organisation. The Vice-President, Klaus Höllbacher, said that no official results were available for years before 2008, but he was able to confirm the following from his personal notes:

They have danced for the UK in Seefeld, Austria:
European Championship Tango Argentino 2005 = 4th Place
World Championship Tango Argentino 2006 = 3rd Place

Unfortunately, no detail was available on the 'tango-show' section, if any. So, to summarise:

• It looks as though they were, in 2006, placed first in an the "Show Tango" subcategory of an Argentine Tango category of a multi-category competition organised by IDO. They placed third overall. The IDO office was unable to confirm the Show Tango part, as they have not retained detailed records from that year, but there is still such a category, so this is surely correct.
• The IDO competition does claim to be a "World Championship". It  is certainly not the one that people have heard of, as far as tango is concerned, but it is called a world championship by the people who do it.
• They were in 2005 placed 4th in the IDO European Championship.  I don't understand the "2005/6" thing, but my best guess is that it  refers to some progression from IDO European to IDO World Championships, not a "two-time" anything.
• They did once enter the UK section of what would normally be referred to as the "Tango World Championship", on that night at Negracha in 2006, where they won.

I looked for video of the IDO competition, to get an idea of it, and I found this of the "Vals" final in 2012, and this of the "Milonga" semi-final. I would describe the milonga as awkward, hurried, disconnected, stiff and clumsy flailing in the general direction of the music; some of the vals is better, and looks like you might see from some long-term students in the intermediate class at a tango-salon kind of place in London. I am less inclined to criticise the samples of show-tango from 2012; I think the first one of those is sweet, sincere, technically nice, and more meaningful, musical, and engaging than tango-shows normally allow themselves to be. As for the second, although it doesn't look quite like what you'd see in Tango Fire, I've certainly seen far worse from people who ought to know better. It's interesting to see two such different approaches. Sadly, the first couple don't seem to have been placed. But they're dancing more like Mundial-style tango-salon, so I can understand that.

It seems only fair to mention at this point that I haven't seen Dance Till Dawn, but I'd expect it to be better than Tango Fire. Tango stage shows tend to be technically accomplished but unimaginative,  and shows that use a variety of dance styles do a better job of being entertaining.

As for the original claim in the video - the "two-times" part is an reasonable reading of the "2005/6" thing, but it appears to be wrong. It would be equally understandable for the viewer to assume that "World Argentine Tango Show Champions" referred to the Mundial, if they were aware that it existed. But mistaken. However, I think that most Strictly viewers who were into ballroom dance would be more likely never to have heard of the Mundial, and to correctly understand it as referring to something like the IDO competition. In their case, the only misunderstanding would be the assumption that it was world-class tango, which in my opinion is also very mistaken. But they might well not make any such assumption at all.  The general public might assume that world championships in dance are the same kind of thing as world championships in sport - but that's probably not a safe assumption for any kind of dance, least of all those that have real social communities.

2. Why do the judges and commentators give such surprising technique advice?

Short version: If you want to win a ballroom dancing competition that has AT as an event, like the IDO one we discovered above, all the advice given on Strictly is probably pretty good. Just don't expect anyone at a milonga to think you dance well.

Long version about how it's a bad idea to "kick! from the knee!", as advised on an ITT episode in December - edited out: if you want some better advice, Oscar Casas explains it briefly at 00:42 here. To me, the difference is huge and explains the huge difference in how everything looks; but I also think you have to know what the tango way looks and feels like, and you have to try both methods in the context of dancing as a connected couple, to appreciate what the difference is and why it matters.

On the same show, I thought following was explained completely wrong, but talking to ex-ballroom-professionals revealed that the explanation made sense from that point of view, given the changes they have to make to adapt to tango. So this also depends where you start from and what you are trying to achieve.

As for arguments about the embrace, tango people argue about that all the time anyway.

3. Why do the celebs look like perfectly decent beginners, but the pros tend to look just stiff?

The pros are generally ballroom pros who have carefully adapted their dance in way that would do well under the rules and description of Argentine Tango for the IDO competition (page 81 in the PDF). Tango dancers - social and professional - use a range of rather different techniques which it would take far too much time for a ballroom pro to learn, and which the videos suggest wouldn't benefit you in that sort of competition.

The celebs haven't been through this training, so they look like beginners who are trying to lead and follow, which normally looks fine. And the reason why the men look better than the women is that they mostly aren't being told to "kick from the knees", or indeed kick at all, and they also aren't attempting to do anything that physically can't work. Both the beginner women and the professionals are usually trying to do things that only look good if you've got a specific, very relaxed technique that just isn't there. Doing what Oscar says at 00:42, and having it work, physically takes more than a week's or a month's practice.

It's certainly possible to do a good job of Argentine Tango coming from a ballroom/latin background, especially with the right partner, but I would expect it to be quite a lot of effort.

As for the question of why nobody sorted this out before, I think the answer is that nobody cares. It's taken me bloody ages, and I think these interactions, confusions and relationships are actually  interesting.

____________________________________________________
1. The attempt to hold a UK competition was not repeated, as far as I know, until a different organisation had another go at the franchise in 2014, billing it as a "European Championship" and accepting entries from various countries, which is a whole other story. I watched the first round, and got a lot more entertainment for my £20 than I expected. There were thirteen couples, generally of a low to reasonable standard, but there was, again, one professional couple who turned up and treated the event with a great deal more respect than it deserved - for their own reasons which became clear afterwards and had to do with qualification for the actual European Championship in Turin. They were disqualified on the second night after (a) spectators had concluded they could not lose, because they really were genuinely rather good and (b) the representative from Buenos Aires pointed out that they were, in fact, not eligible to enter in the London section under the London organisers' agreement with Buenos Aires, despite the fact that the organisers had taken their (steep) entrance fee and confirmed in writing that they were, as well as so claiming in the list of eligible countries on their website (of course I have screenshots). The excuse given was that Valentin was "from the wrong part of Russia". The only sensible response to which was, "What?" followed by a lot of bemused but exciting speculation as to what could possibly really have happened, how many pissed-off Russians the tango world can handle, and how this made any sense when Russia is so hard-to-miss that even random rocks from space can find it all the time. Generally, it was the worst-organised sporting event I have ever had the privilege to see. Obviously, it was always going to start an hour late. But if you have the job of announcing the competitors' names, which are in several languages you don't know, this is what you do: you ask each of them beforehand to pronounce their own name for you two or three times, try it, get them to correct you, then write down what you said, phonetically, next to the name on your list. Then you concentrate and read it out. You do not stand there and insult the efforts of the competitors and the intelligence of the audience by foolishly simpering a mangled mess of names as you glorify your own cluelessness. And if you're going to run a sporting event certified by a governing body, you make sure you publish, and use, and stick to, a correct version of the rules. I am really not crazy about the Mundial, the dancing is boring at best, but I was embarrased at how the competitors had been treated in my country. Regardless of standard, they'd stood up and put themselves out there, and they deserved better. I was, though, happy with the result in the Escenario section, as the winner after the disqualification was in fact the performance I most enjoyed of the three total entries. It was somewhat well executed, and thoroughly sincere. I've never seen happier legs in my life. If you want to enjoy next year's edition, good luck.

This epic footnote is in memory of Terry Pratchett.

Thirteen Tango Terms for Beginners

I have a very dear friend who wants to learn to dance tango. She will, or should, encounter some concepts to do with basic technique. But sometimes in the social complexity of classes, these ideas get lost, or disconnected from any explanation of what they mean. And these are the kinds of things you need to get working well so that you can dance easily and happily with other people, and express yourself and find your own dance without hurting yourself or anyone else. You need this information to solve whatever problems you are having, and not waste time.

So, I've collected them here for her. I've ended up putting them in alphabetical order, because they all go together, so it makes at least as much sense as anything else. I'm not going to tell you how to achieve them; you should get someone who can already do this stuff and can see you, dance with you, and give you feedback, to help you with that.

Axis

Axis means that your partner can easily find a vertical line through your body about which it is possible for you to turn without going off balance. Like the axis of the Earth. To show yourself what it means, stand with both feet on the ground but your weight on just one of them, the other leg relaxed, and get someone to twirl you around on the spot. A good 'axis' means it is easy to do this and you don't fall over. If you stick one hip out to the side and make your axis curved, you'll find it's much harder. But the line is flexible and springy, like bamboo, not rigid.

Axis is equally important for leading and following. The line is what gives the follower neutral, accurate, racing-car steering, without understeer or oversteer or pulling to one side. It makes the leader easy to follow accurately.

Connection

Connection means, for example, that if you are led to step directly into the leader, you will do so. If half a step is led and then stopped, you will follow it half way, and stop. If you are standing with your feet apart and some weight on each one, you will stay there until led to bring them together and put the weight on one of them - and you will pass through all the percentages in-between. Connection means you can be led to change weight from foot to foot, one toe at a time. It means you follow what's actually led. Sometimes that won't be what was intended, and that's fine. Connection is a really good thing. Some people say it's the essence of tango. It means that your attention is continuously with your partner and not with (for example) spectators. One of the biggest challenges for the more experienced follower is managing to avoid learning rules, habits, technical work-arounds, and catalogues of stereotypical movements that cut off other options and destroy the ability to follow what's actually led, especially anything new or unexpected.

Connection mainly comes up in relation to following, but it goes both ways - the leader needs to be listening to the follower's body too. It means paying attention to what your partner is actually doing in the moment, and being open to it, not stuck in your own mental catalogue. And all the other techniques mentioned here go towards making that possible and successful.

Dissociation

Dissociation means the ability to point your bottom (back or front) towards the direction of travel while still keeping your torso towards, and connected to, your partner. That means the ability and willingness to twist in the middle whenever you need to do so, just as much as necessary.

Dissociation is equally important for leader and follower. It gives you accurate steering and freedom of movement.

Embrace

Embrace means you have an embrace that feels nice and works well. The basic, characteristic, close embrace for social tango has the torsos in contact and each partner within the arm of the other, rather like an affectionate hug; it can be tighter or looser, and more or less mobile, and there are lots of variations but no real rules. There are also open variations (with less contact) that some people use and others don't, either to make various things easier to do, or for practice, or just because they enjoy the feeling of bringing it in and out. The same person will often use several variations, minor or major, depending on who they are dancing with. It's not like competition ballroom dancing where there's a refined, prescribed look with specific hand positions.

Embrace is equally important for leader and follower. Whether you need a wide range of different skills, or you're only really going to use the close version, depends on your situation and your preferences.

Floorcraft

Floorcraft means having a good relationship with the other couples around you on the dance floor, sharing the space positively and not bumping into them. Although it's principally the leaders' job, the follower can screw it up royally by doing stupid things or being uncontrolled or difficult to steer. For the beginner leader, you already know how to walk along a crowded pavement or platform, or across a pub, mostly without bumping anyone, even in quite tricky situations. So you have two main challenges - integrating your partner into that, and avoiding learning any bad habits that cut off your perception of those around you, limit your choices of where to go next, or put you off balance or out of control. You'll also learn what situations to avoid, and how to cooperate with others.

Following

Following pretty much means just that. It's basically the same mental process as following someone on a rapid, zigzag path through a crowded shopping centre without needing to hold their hand. It's something you decide to do; it has nothing to do with guessing what they want, and they don't even have to know you are there. You go wherever you need to go to stay with your partner, only from in front. The power do to this at a basic level whenever you want, comes for free with being a human, or indeed a duckling fresh out of the egg. In a partner dance we practice, extend, and refine it to build connection on top of it, and then do far more with it than you could reasonably have imagined was possible.

If you have taken at least one lesson, you should be able to successfully follow weight changes, walks, and sidesteps with a more experienced dancer who you've never met. If not, something has gone wrong. And nothing you do later should take away this ability.

If you mainly lead, doing some following gives you a chance to solve some problems one at a time that you'd otherwise have to tackle all at once, and also to find out which problems are most worth your attention.

Free leg

Your free leg is the leg you aren't putting weight on right now. Being 'free' means it's free to move, and perhaps swing. So that means it's relaxed where it joins to the hip, rather than being held in a particular position, give or take some friction with the floor. The consequence is that your partner can feel where that leg is through the connection with you (try it).

It's important for both partners, but it's more obvious for following, because the leader can cause it to move without the follower doing any more than allowing it - this can produce some amazing movements which you will never see on Strictly Come Dancing. The leader having a free leg is less obvious, but makes everything more stable and clear.

Grounded

Grounded means you feel as though it would be very difficult to push you over. At first, you might think of this as like having "good balance" (I certainly did) but it isn't. You can balance in a position where it's easy to push you over. Being grounded is having habits in the way you move so that you don't get in such positions unless you want to.

Grounding is equally important for leader and follower, but leaders may need more of it more urgently. If you're leading and you're not grounded, you're likely to bump into other people, even if the follower has no problems. If you're following, and you're not grounded, then you may be out of control and difficult to steer. If you're well grounded, you can compensate quite a bit if your partner isn't, but it's hard work.

Heavy

Heavy means it's really hard work to move you at all. It has nothing to do with your physical size, but you feel like a fridge. Your partner will get a sore back, hips, knees, ankles, arms or shoulders. It's a very bad thing, as it means dancing with you can cause significant injury. People may also say someone is 'heavy' or 'a little heavy' when they only mean the connection is not working that well for some reason. In that case it's not so dangerous.

It mostly comes up in relation to following, but it's also possible for the leader to stand or move in such a way as to hurt their partner physically. When you make changes, check.

Leading

Leading is making use of the fact that another human being has decided to follow you, in order to create a partner dance. As soon as they make that decision and start acting on it, you can already lead at a minimal level. You learn how to do it better, practice it, refine it, and find out what you can do with it. It's crazy how much you can do with it together.

If you mainly follow, doing some leading is very illuminating and helps you prioritise; it may also give you more confidence in the things you are doing right as a follower.

Light

"Light" means you are easy to move. Being easy to move is not just being grounded and not heavy - it also has to do with connection. "Too light" means you tend to get away from your partner in an uncontrolled way. But exactly how "light" different people are varies naturally and there isn't just one perfect spot that's the same for everyone.

Lightness mostly applies to following.  But if you are leading and someone says you are too light, it might mean the follower can't detect where you are going at all.

Musicality

Musicality means you are really listening and moving with the music. You have dynamics. It's not just that you follow what's led or that you move on the beat; the way you move, sharply, softly, swooshily, smoothly or not, and so on, always expresses what you are hearing and how you are feeling it. Each partner can feel the other doing this, and respond. So your attention to each other is mediated through the music, and the music is mediated into the dance through your attention to each other (and often, in the leader's case, to people around you) - they are working like one thing.

Musicality is equally important for leader and follower, but it tends to be discussed a lot more in relation to leading. This is because the leader has to decide what to do - whether the next step will be slow or quick - and learning how to do that and be on the beat takes a lot of time and attention. As a result, the women can often end up thinking that their own musicality is some sort of ornamental extra that has to be stuck on top of the leader's dance, like icing on a cake - and that it's necessary to stop moving and break the connection so they can take their turn. You can probably tell I think that's a terrible way of looking at it. You want to be on the beat, yes, but it's important to think of musicality in terms of how you move all the time, how you both do everything you are doing, and how that feels in the connection, not just when you step. That's what makes someone actually feel musical to their partner.

Posture

Posture has its normal meaning. But it's what creates lightness, heaviness, axis, grounding, and a successful embrace. So it's a good place to look if you are having trouble with anything on this list.

If you are working on any of the above, directly or indirectly, then you probably aren't wasting your time in class. If you find that one of them is the reason why whatever you are trying to do doesn't work, then you have learned something useful. 

There are lots of recreational arguments in tango, but none of the above is particularly controversial. Some people talk and think about this stuff a lot; some do it occasionally; others just hate the idea of thinking about what they're doing at all.

I have not dealt with manners in social dancing. That's for another day.

What I'm aiming for is to be useful and practical for people with no previous knowledge, in a range of communities. If you can get most of this stuff working to an ok-ish level, then you can reasonably expect (at least if you also like the music) to be getting lots of practice and to be well on the way to "dancing very nicely". Then you can take it as far as you like.

Argentine Tango for TV Viewers

So, I interrupted the series of posts from my trip to Buenos Aires to work for a solid week on a video-illustrated explanation of what Argentine Tango is, for people who've only seen it on Strictly Come Dancing.

I have no problem with Strictly Come Dancing or its children like Dancing With the Stars or Ballando con le stelle and so on. But they have limitations, and we can't really complain if they give people a wrong picture of tango. If people are curious, it's up to us to take that opportunity, and if they're not curious, that's their affair.

I've made it a page, instead of a post, for ease of reference. This is a bit of an experiment. It's linked in the menu at the top ^^, or you can click here, and come back to the blog by clicking Home.

I had to cut out loads of stuff to make it not too overwhelming. I hope I didn't edit out too many of the good bits. Perhaps people will ask questions and I can blog them. It's still quite long, and has some lovely videos. I really hope it will help both people who want to know what tango is, and people who want to explain it to them. Please feel free to send the link around.

Preferences for Teachers

A commenter on another post made an important remark which I think is worth promoting (I edit because I don't want to single out that particular teacher in what I'm about to say. I don't think I am misrepresenting the comment in any way):

"... as a result of ... harsh(ish) style and poor(ish) reviews the thin skinned stay away ... If you don’t want any meaningful feedback go to a handful of other classes where the teachers are kind and smile and say “so much better” all the time."

I agree with the need for meaningful feedback. This is important in a teacher. But personally, I prefer above all a teacher who knows what good dancing is, can dance well, has carefully thought through, worked on, and tested their approach to teaching, and treats the students like intelligent adults. Criticism and praise are useful tools in as far as they help achieve results. Good advice is much more important than either.

In my opinion, someone who cannot give useful feedback while being courteous to other people and making efforts to put them at ease is by that fact poorly qualified to teach anything to anyone, but least of all social tango, a broad skill-set of which good manners and behaviour are an indispensable part. And no qualification of any kind excuses poor results.

Bottom line: if you care about results, it is your responsibility to make them happen - by choosing your teacher, among other things. If you don't care about content or results, you can freely indulge any preference you have as to the box it comes in. Such things are widely available at very reasonable fees.

Was that good? DJ questionnaire

DJing well is a tremendous amount of work. Owning a lot of music is not enough; it also requires knowledge, taste, and immensely time-consuming preparation. I'm not interested in doing it, because it's far too much work, and I'd rather be dancing. It's only done well by people who really like doing it for its own sake, and who really like doing the work that's required.

Uninformed dancers with no expectations create bad DJing and help it persist, and bad DJing limits the overall quality of dancing by making social dancing much more difficult than it needs to be.

I'd like DJs to be more appreciated. This checklist aims to help the dancer, especially the beginner, think about DJing. It assumes no more musical knowledge than the ability to tell the difference between tango, milonga, and vals, but it does partly rely on tango music making some sense to you and making you want to move. Some of it is very subjective, but some of it is not. Enjoy the usual bitchy bits.

Start at 0. Add or deduct points as shown to compare DJs. You might choose more than one answer for some of the questions. If you wanted to customise it to your priorities, obviously you could change the scores. I tend to penalise bad performance on the more mechanical, measurable things, because there's no good reason for getting that stuff wrong.

Musical Basics

Was any of the music unsuitable for dancing tango socially? For example:

• It asks you to stand still and pose, like a pillock, rather than dance
• It is impossible to keep exactly with it unless you know the particular recording by heart
• It strongly suggests big, fast dramatic movements and sudden changes of speed that are rude and impractical for social dancing in the space available
• It is great dance music, but brings out the worst in the dancers who are actually there.

If in doubt, look at the room as a whole: giveaways are that the line of dance stops flowing and collapses into chaos, there are lots of crashes, and most of the actually-good dancers sit down, hide, or go for a smoke unless somebody grabs them. If that's what your place is normally like, adjust your judgement accordingly. [Edit: What you are looking for is whether the DJ, or an individual tanda, makes a difference].

1. None of those problems happened (+10)
2. One or two dodgy moments (-5)
3. Several dodgy sections (-7)
4. Tanda after tanda, I was bored, bruised or both (-10)

Were you ever caught out by a piece that did not fit in that tanda and caused difficulty, embarrassment or disappointment to you or your partner? For example:

• A jarring change of mood or style mid-tanda, so that you felt you had to unscrew your head and screw it back on again
• A misleading opener that meant you missed out on a tanda you would otherwise have liked
• A weak or disappointing piece in the middle, or to finish
• Excessively jarring changes of speed
• A mixed-up tanda of music you would have preferred to dance with two different people - or some of it not at all.

1. None of those problems happened (+10)
2. Once or twice, maybe a matter of opinion (-3)
3. More, maybe a matter of opinion (-5)
4. Once or twice, definitely! (-7)
5. More than that (-10)
6. All the flipping time! (-15)

As a whole, not worrying about specific tracks, how was the sound quality?

1. Good - I could feel the music and really get into it (+7)
2. OK - I could hear it everywhere (+5)
3. Poor - I couldn't hear it clearly enough to get into it properly - muffled / no detail / no depth / too quiet / loud-but-muddy / distorted / too loud because DJ is deaf (-5)
4. Not applicable, the equipment at this venue is poor so I can't tell (0)

Were there any poor choices of specific tracks, like something much too fast, much too slow, or with unacceptable sound quality?

1. No (+5)
2. One or two, not sure (0)
3. More than that (-5)

 Did the cortinas make you happy?

1. Yes (+5)
2. They made people happy, just not specifically me (+3)
3. No, they were generally annoying (-3)
4. They didn't do the job, I couldn't always tell what was a cortina or they didn't play any (-5)
5. Not applicable - this milonga has a no-cortinas policy (0)

Basic Basics

Were there enough vals (V) and milonga (M) tandas in proportion to the tango (T), and were they played in a regular pattern so you knew where you were?

1. About right - somewhere in the range TTVTTM or TTTTVTTTTM, whatever made sense given the length of this milonga (+5)
2. Not enough - TTTTTTTTTTM or something (-5)
3. Too much - TVTMTVTMTVTM DJ WTF? (-7)
4. So chaotic that I couldn't tell - TT VV TTTTVTTTTTMTMV, or something. (-10)
5. "Tanda" isn't the right word. (-15).

Were the cortinas long enough for you to clear the floor and find your next partner without obstructing anyone else's view, given the size of the room, and supposing there was somewhere to sit down?

1. Yes (+3)
2. No (-3)

Did the DJ sign off gracefully at the end with some non-tango music for people to calm down and clear up to, assuming that was possible?

1. Yes (+4)
2. No, they used all the time available and just stopped there (0)

Professionalism

Did the music have the DJ's full attention?

1. Yes, all or almost all the time (+5)
2. Yes, as much as necessary in the situation (+3)
3. Less than that (-3)
4. No, they went out for a smoke and the music stopped (-10)
5. No, they put on a playlist/CD and buggered off (-20)

If there were any problems with the equipment, did the DJ deal with them calmly and competently?

1. Yes, outstanding - e.g. drove home and got some better kit, found another computer (+7)
2. Met expectations - worked around it, fixed it (+5)
3. Drama! But dealt with it (+3)
4. No (-5)
5. Not applicable (0)

Did the DJ have any difficulty operating the sound equipment?

1. No (+2)
2. There was one cock-up (-2)
3. There were some problems, understandable in the circumstances (0)
4. The DJ was clearly unprepared (-7)

Did the DJ seem at any time to forget what s/he was there for? Did they, for example, follow a twenty-minute performance, in a three-hour milonga, with a five-minute jive track for just one single couple to dance to in an unofficial bonus performance, while everyone else waited around like lemons, as though for the photographs at a flipping wedding, and in the awkward position of having to pretend that they weren't at all annoyed and didn't have anything better to do than watch this vanity?

1. No (0)
2. Yes (-5)
3. Yes, and that couple included him/her self or his/her spouse/partner and/or at least one of the couple who had just been performing (-10)
4. Yes, but, I was ok with it under the circumstances (0)

If there was an interlude of country dancing, like chacharera, or some other dance like jive or salsa, was it considerately timed, not too long, and enjoyable by a reasonable number of the people who were there?

1. Yes, it was fun, I enjoyed it / I didn't mind watching (0)
2. No, it was a tedious mess, nobody could dance to it, or it took up the last hour before the last train! (-5)
3. It was annoying but it was required by the guest teachers or the venue (0)

Harder Questions

Was the music:

1. Pretentiously salted with the undanceable, the obscure or the inappropriate (-10)
2. Thoughtlessly arranged over time, with good things spoiled by being too close together (-5)
   
3. Ok, but one-paced, too much of one kind of thing (+5)
4. Good, but with a strong DJ style that just isn't my taste (+10)
5. Appropriately varied, with a good mixture between rhythmic and lyrical and dramatic, given the situation (+15)
6. Brilliantly mixed, with every tanda feeling like a perfect change after the one before (+20)

How did you feel about the 'energy' in the room?

1. Confused and chaotic. (-7)
2. Low. I couldn't get started, or my favourite partners couldn't. (-5)
3. A bit flat, I liked the music but somehow didn't really feel like getting going (-2)
4. Good, it was going consistently well (+5)
5. Beautiful, it really came together with varied good feelings (+10)
6. Fantastic, I had a great night, everyone was buzzing, everything flowed and I was also really happy when I was sitting down (+15)

Pick three very good social dancers who were there, preferably single ones. How much did they seem to be dancing?

1. Not at all, maybe one or two tandas with the right person (-5)
2. A bit, same as usual really (0)
3. More than usual (+5)
4. All the time, and taking more risks than usual with partner choice (+10)

Subjectively, what did you think? No scores here - compare with what you got above.

1. It was genius / it was a revelation to me / it transformed the place or situation for the better.
2. It was very good. I was very happy with it.
3. It was good but had some flaws, or it was well-done but not my thing.
4. It was good and consistent, I could trust it, but maybe it wasn't inspiring.
5. It was generally innocuous and didn't cause me any serious problems.
6. Not good - it was weak or annoyed me a few times.
7. It was poor. I couldn't trust it. If something good came up, I had to grab someone.
8. It was bad - I, or my desired partners, just didn't want to dance. No point in staying.

I'd draw the "ask them back" line between 4 and 5.

[Edit 24-08-2012: Cet article maintenant disponible en Francais. Merci, Ben de El Recodo Tango.] 

Screw up early and often

When you dance with a new person, I think it's a good thing if your first mistake happens early. A missed lead, a moment of leader indecision, some interruption to the flow, whatever. Some followers are lighter than others and react more or less strongly to movements which may or may not be fully intentional. Some people's leads are softer or firmer or bigger or smaller or faster or slower or more or less complicated, and no matter how good they are, they are all different. The follower has to tune in. Once you've done something that felt like a mistake, and got out of it gracefully without making anyone feel bad, you can dance together with a lot more confidence, because you know now that mistakes don't matter with this person. You've proved that there's a working two-way connection there.

It's particularly good to get the mistakes in early if you're dancing with someone who other people want to watch, because the sensation of being watched, especially when you're not used to it, is horribly distracting and you don't need the extra stress of worrying about what will happen if you make a mistake. Better to get it over with.

I cannot, however, recommend announcing to your partner between tracks that "Part of tango is covering mistakes!" - especially not if you've just severely failed at that. If they lack confidence they will feel crushed, if they don't, they will just think you're a twit. Even if you did not fail, you throw your success away by drawing attention to it.

And if you're so vain you think that part of this post is about you, don't worry, I'm sure you're good enough to fix it.

What Beginners Want? Really?

Every now and then I see remarks vaguely in this form, more often than seems justified by any evidence that I know of:

"I suspect/believe/am sure most beginners were like me/you/her/him and attracted to the big flash moves you see on stage and screen ..."

Well, I wasn't that beginner, and I don't see any grounds for saying "most".

I'd seen a tango performance which wasn't of very high quality, and did include some of that sort of stuff, but what I was attracted to was the way the couple were wearing relatively ordinary clothing, weren't faking cheesy smiles (nor, in that particular case, cheesy fake foreplay) and seemed to be principally concerned with each other rather than the audience or with wiggling around. I had no dance experience, I just wanted to get out and dance. I chose Argentine Tango because even a fairly bad performance looked so much less fake and less flash than any kind of ballroom performance. And I guessed that a social form existed, which I might take up. I had very few preconceptions about what it might be like, except that obviously, as a matter of common sense, it would not be very like the stage form; the whole point of going to classes was to find out.

Maybe "most beginners" are one way or the other, or maybe they are very diverse. You can't just extrapolate your own mind to "most" of a population.

How would you even tell? You could, of course, ask them on Day One, but it seems unlikely to me that they're going to say anything more specific than "I saw X and I thought it was amazing". You can't assume from that, that it was the big flash moves in X that attracted them. When you don't have any dance experience, you don't even perceive anything specific about what sort of moves were done in something you saw. If a particular movement "attracted" you, you don't know why. All you get is some overall emotional effect that X managed to communicate, and this could be almost anything. If you ask someone to articulate that on Day One from a position of total ignorance, you put them on the spot, defending a position, and fix their ideas in a way that is unlikely to be helpful. What's the point?

If most of the people who turn up to a class that's intended as social-style tango, really are unshakeably "attracted to the big flash moves you see on stage and screen", and totally unwilling to consider anything that comes from the real person standing in front of them, I would also want to at least briefly look at how the class was marketed, and who to. Did that just play along with a main-stream-media stereotype, or did it try to say anything else?

Yes, there is lots of stuff out there making people think they want a tango class when really they just want to be on stage. It's possible that this really does totally overwhelm all resistance. That could be the truth. But I'm sceptical. There are lots of different people out there, the ones who didn't turn up as well as the ones who did.

The upside of being crap

A brief exchange on Twitter between two Arsenal fans that deserves a wider audience:

GarethDParker Gareth Parker
Looking back on yesterday, can't help but worry that I celebrated the 2nd goal as though we'd won the league. I'll be cheering corners next.

@HighburyJD JD Evans
@GarethDParker don't see it as a downside, that's the advantage of being crap dude.

Never forget to celebrate and enjoy small successes from moment to moment. If you can keep doing it when you get good, you're laughing.

What is style anyway? Styles, brands, and quality

For me, a person's style is not just their choices about what to put in and what to leave out, but much more the way that they do it, how they move, what kind of music suits them, what their natural speed is, the way they make me feel as a person. It does include their choices of what techniques to use or not use. But those technical choices aren't a big part of it. Certainly not big, compared to the differences in feel that exist between people who use exactly the same range of techniques at a similar level of skill.

In the context of social dancing, it makes sense to me to use vague descriptive terms like 'dynamic' or 'soft' or 'calm' or 'inventive' or 'spare' or 'quiet' or 'exciting' or 'busy'. I don't find it very useful to give styles names. That makes more sense if you're talking about 'style' in the sense of a brand or a product, like Vivienne Westwood, but not really for the kind of thing I have in mind.

My very favourite partners have individual styles of their own, so the whole concept is a bit meaningless. Everyone has more in common with some others, than other others. I could group them in families, like the sounds of different orchestras. Overall, they definitely tend to share certain techniques and habits, but I wouldn't really say it goes beyond what anyone needs for a good level of competence in social dancing. There's all sorts of variation in the kind of trivia people like to set up as shibboleths, naturally. But people who haven't got some compatible version of those techniques and habits, plus or minus trivia, just aren't good social dancers, so the concept of style is not much help.

What I'm saying here is, it doesn't make sense to me to put something into your dance because you think it's part of a 'style' that you're trying to cultivate. The only good and sufficient reason for doing an enrosque is that you really, really want to. If it was me, I don't think I'd bother, but if you think they're super cool, that's an adequate reason to put the work in to get them right. Otherwise there isn't one.

There is such a thing as a brand name. For example, you can associate some set of techniques and habits with some place in Buenos Aires or some set of people. That just does the mundane job that brand names do. Brand names have a function, they're there so you can identify, locate and purchase something you want. Vivienne Westwood, for example, has a style and a brand. The brand allows you to find the style, if you want it, by asking the attendant in Selfridges where it is. You'll get a product that looks a certain way and has a more-or-less-known provenance and quality. Business done, everybody's happy. But if the 'enrosque' outfit doesn't suit you and demands unfeasible underwear, you don't buy it just because it's got the label. You buy it if you know it's useful or believe it's beautiful, or both.

There's also 'style' as a euphemism for quality.

If I say that I saw a couple dancing like an arse with six legs, you could call that an antisocial style, but I may not think they even have a style - they might, or they might not, it's probably hard to tell - I just think they danced selfishly and rudely, and looked like a pair of halfwits. Calling it a 'style' seems like making an excuse.

But if you are trying to persuade someone to improve their dancing by not kicking people so much, one possible way around resistance is to present it as exploration of a new 'style' rather than an improvement in quality. It's a useful lie, a polite lie, and perhaps it's a necessary lie. It really, really does help sometimes. But it's a way of avoiding saying that they're incompetent at the thing they think they're doing, namely social dancing.

As for grouping techniques together and labelling them as style, well, I think that if we really want to talk about technique, we're better off just doing it directly. If I say that someone leads with the point of his shoulder, is a bit tippy, and has no embrace, or if I say someone else has a grip of death and poor balance, leads vaguely, and wrestles the woman around turns, I'm saying they are hard to dance with, not that I don't like their respective styles.

The most these things have to do with style is that you'll tend to catch one disease rather than another depending on what you've unsuccessfully attempted to learn, how, and who from. They are technical issues. Actually having a style in any meaningful way is not something that comes into the picture until after these issues have been fixed.

I have stood in the middle of a conversation in which my partner and the partner of the lady behind me really did start taking the piss out of each other about style, or at least about musical interpretation. But that kind of thing doesn't happen a lot.

There's style, there's branding, and there's quality. They all mean something, they're related, they quite often stand in for each other, especially when we talk about them. But they're not, in my view, the same.

[Edit: some obscure and unexpected interaction between my drafts file and Blogger has bumped this post down to a few weeks before I actually posted it ... fixing]

On being told what to do with our souls

It's not given to us to know what is in another person's mind. We sometimes think we do, but when any means of checking happens to occur, we turn out to be wrong as often as not.

You often get a strong impression of someone's personality by dancing with them. Somebody's dance is bound to express their personality - it isn't exactly going to express someone else's. Even if they are the sort of person who tries to imitate someone else, they'll only ever succeed in looking as though that's what they're doing; I don't really suppose it's possible to imitate the way someone else feels, unless by sheer accident. You do feel a strong sense of personality, and it may well be pretty accurate, as far as it goes. But it's never the whole story. There's a lot more to people than expresses itself in their dance.

In dance classes we sometimes get told what to do with our souls, whatever that means and whatever those are: a daft and impertinent instruction, in my view, but not necessarily useless, if you like that sort of thing.

If you're worried that you don't give your "soul", or your "whole self" or your "hundred percent" to a dance, whatever any of that is supposed to mean, and you feel a bit inadequate and as though you might be Not The Right Sort Of Person, or perhaps even Not The Right Nationality, and perhaps you should just give up and go home because you'll never ever be accepted here, or if you feel as though you're being asked to be less than yourself or to pretend to be something you're not, stop. I don't think it makes a lot of sense to create imaginary demons (still less borrow someone else's) and let them beat you up.

It might be better to ask yourself what you've got. I bring what I've got. Some of what I've got is:

A willingness (in this context) to feel the fear and do it anyway
A sense of humour
An emotional connection with the music
A strong disinclination to take any crap from anyone at all
A Bullshit detector
Patience
A lively curiosity to know what other people have got.

This seems to be, at least, a pretty good substitute for whatever some people call, soul. At any rate, it seems to be good enough for them. And perhaps it is the same thing. That's not given to us to know, about ourselves or about anybody else. Be honest and be brave, concentrate, do the best you can, be willing to make mistakes, and I reckon it'll be all right.

Shoe Brands and Heel Heights

If you wear heels to dance in, you probably have a current preference as to heel height. And suppliers and makers of dance shoes normally tell you what their heel height is, so you can decide which product to buy, if you order online.

There are, however, pretty wide variations to how they measure.

My preferred heel height for tango shoes is, more or less, 7cm - which is about the same as 2.75" if you're American, or you're the kind of British eccentric who measures even small things in the old-fashioned way, instead of only things larger than you can easily carry. At 9cm I'll get joint pain, knee strain, and a choppy, ungainly motion. 8cm is my maximum. Lower is fine by me, right down to socks.

Here are some salsa shoes, made by a company called Oobashoo, who as far as I know are British. They sell these heels as 2.75". I've rested a steel ruler, which starts at zero, in the gully of the seam that goes up the back of each pair of shoes, and taken a picture as near straight-on as I could manage so there's not too much perspective. Then I've continued the ruler's lines at 7cm and 8cm across the picture.

Oobashoo - 2.75 inch heels (=7cm)

Here, I think a 7cm measurement is fair; your foot is about 7cm off the ground where the heel supports it, allowing for the thickness of the sole.

This next pair are made in Italy for a German brand, Werner Kern. Their range for the tango market is called Nueva Epoca. This style is labelled as a 7cm heel. (The thickness of the heel is completely irrelevant to comfort or function as far as I'm concerned, as long as it's correctly placed, and in many cases I prefer the look of the thicker ones; but a thinner heel is the current fashion for tango.)

Werner Kern Nueva Epoca - 7cm heel

It's about the same as the Oobashoo. Nothing in it, really.

Lastly, here are the well-known Argentinian brand, Comme Il Faut (sold in London by Coleccion la Recoleta). Comme Il Faut label them as 7cm heels. I really think this is pushing it. I would label them 8cm. On the upside, if I can dance well in these without hurting myself, then I can probably wear Nueva Epoca's 8cm styles.

Comme Il Faut - “7”cm heel

But it's marginal. The difference between the Oobashoo and the Comme Il Faut is more than enough to cause problems if it comes at a point that's crucial for your body. And all of these are labelled as the same height.

When I buy a new brand I try to have a longish try-on with big steps and pivots, and to wear them first to a nice long gentle practice session, and do some boring technique exercises, just to make sure they're OK, rather than find out they're not when it matters.

Classic 'cabeceo' errors no. 1

"I know he prefers being asked by looking, and I tried it, but I couldn't get it to work, so I went up and asked."

Noooooooo! if you can't make it work, that doesn't mean you're doing it wrong. You probably did it practically perfectly. It means he said no, not right now, thanks. The fact that it didn't hurt is a feature, not a bug. Put him further back in your queue and try again another time.

Knowing who really enjoys your dance is quite informative and helpful and gives you a lot of confidence over time, I recommend it.

Tango and the Internet Umpire for beginners

Argentine Tango is not standardised. It has a long, complicated history over a hundred years and at least three continents. There is wide variation in details of technique. There is wide variation in look-and-feel. There is wide variation in methods of learning and teaching. There is tremendous variation in quality.

There is no commercial system for teaching tango. There is no coaching qualification. There are no labeling rules. There are a few brand names knocking about, which do the mundane and mildly useful job that brand names do, as far as that goes, but that isn't very far.

Some people are a lot more fun to dance with than others, and if you get more skilful yourself, and especially if your musical ear gets better, the way that changes your experience of other people's dance and your own is complex and sometimes surprising and not always straightfoward or predictable.

There is quite a lot of information available on the web to help you assess what it all means. Some of it's true and some of it's false. Some of self-serving, some of it's wise, some of it's silly, some of it's mistaken, some of it's recycled half-understood platitudes, some of it's rumour, some of it's funny, some of it's useful and some of it's made up. And, obviously, if you understand what the internet is, are literate and have a trace of common sense, you already know all of that.

I don't always, or even usually, feel that I know which is which. I just have current working hypotheses and theories (some strong, some weak), and I try not to make stuff up. What I want to say is this:

No matter what you attempt or in what order, you will find someone on the internet to tell you you're doing it wrong. The only umpire of such sports is you.

Enjoy the journey.

The Beginner's Questionnaire

Suppose that you've never done a partner dance before. You take a deep breath and you jump in. You don't know what's normal or where you are going, but you are intrepid. How do you know if you've been to a good class? What should you have expected? Did you waste your time?

Well, I know what I think a good class is, and here's my handy Beginner's Questionnaire.

Answers with high numbers are better. Some of the questions won't make sense if you've only taken one class, because there isn't time to deal with what they mention in an hour. Other questions will help you make a decision right away.

However, what I've written reflects my character, experience, and opinions, and you have no way of knowing if I'm right. In fact, Everything below reflects my character. Especially the bitchy bits.

Approach, content, and outcomes

Were you told what to do with your soul, or to imitate the action of a tiger/kitten/river/snake or any other animate or inanimate object whose relation to yourself was purely metaphorical?

1. A lot
2. Sometimes
3. Once or twice
4. No.
   

Were you told clearly what to do with your body?

1. No
2. Once or twice
   
3. Sometimes
4. A lot.
   

Were you taught about the line of dance?

1. No
2. Mentioned briefly
3. Mentioned repeatedly
4. Emphasised and acted upon.

Were you given advice on floorcraft, for example, that the leader should protect the follower, look where he is going not at her, never step where he can't see, and the follower should be careful with her heels?

1. No
2. Mentioned briefly
3. Mentioned repeatedly
4. Emphasised and acted upon.

Were you given advice about how to behave and what to expect when dancing socially, for example, how to request, accept, or decline a dance politely, what and how long a tanda is, the meaning of 'thank you', or even what to wear?

1. No
2. A few tips
3. Yes, lots of useful advice
4. Yes, with encouragement to dance at one or more specific places or times.

Were the mechanics of the embrace explained at all?

1. No, we just watched and imitated what we saw
2. Once or twice
   
3. Sometimes
   
4. A lot, with different possibilities discussed.
   

What (if anything) do you think you were taught about when the follower should cross?

1. She should remember to cross at a specific point
2. I think she is meant to know when to do it, but I'm not sure how
3. Not sure - I'm confused about this
4. Do whatever steps are led.

What (if anything) do you think you were taught that the follower is supposed to do in a turn?

1. Once the first couple of steps are led, she should remember to keep going back-side-forward until stopped.
2. Basically keep going back-side-forward, but I think it might be different at a more advanced level.
3. Not sure - I'm confused about this.
   
4. Do whatever steps are led.

Were the followers taught to follow, and were the leaders taught to lead the various movements?

1. We learned steps seperately and then worked on synchronising them
   
2. We learned the steps seperately, but the followers were told to wait for the lead before doing them, and the leaders were shown how to lead them
   
3. We learned the steps and then broke them down into leading and following simpler movements
   
4. We were taught to lead and follow simple movements, and we built up the steps from there.

Followers: were you given useful general advice on HOW to follow (as opposed to just where to put your feet and in what order)?

1. Not sure what this means
   
2. Not really
   
3. A few tips
   
4. A lot.
   

Leaders: Do you now believe that you could lead whatever was covered in the class with a more experienced follower you had not met before?

1. Maybe if she'd taken the same class
2. Not really
3. Yes, some of it
4. Yes, a lot of it.

Professional and conscientious teaching

Did the teacher(s) single out any student(s) in a way you felt was less than kind?

1. Yes
2. Maybe
3. Only as a means of managing attention-seekers
4. Never.

How much did the teacher who did most of the talking, talk about him/her self?

1. A lot, it was all about him/her and I was annoyed/bored with it
2. A lot, but it was useful/funny/informative/I liked it
3. A little bit - just to be friendly
   
4. Not much or not at all.

Did ANY of the teachers appear to be doing ANYthing in class other than teaching to the best of their ability, whatever that ability might be?

1. Yes, leching the students or sleeping off the dope
   
2. Yes, showing off, leching each other, or manipulating people to gratify their vanity
   
3. Yes, something else (are there other possibilities? My goodness, I've got to hand it to them for imagination)
   
4. No.
   

Did the teachers observe the students while they were practicing, give feedback, and make themselves available to answer questions and resolve problems?

1. No
2. A little bit, or only some of that, or not very kindly
   
3. Yes, but not very intelligently, there was a bit of autopilot there
   
4. Yes, and they treated the questions with respect and thought about how to answer them.
   

Did the teachers check your progress by dancing with you personally?

1. Never
2. Occasionally
3. With some students/when necessary
4. With most or all students.

If the teachers did dance with you once or more, and setting aside your own embarrassment and nervousness, do you think you learned from this what tango is supposed to feel like?

1. Don't think so
2. Maybe
3. Yes, I think so
4. Wow!

After the class, did you feel good about having been there?

1. No, I felt bored/mystified/discouraged/ripped off
   
2. Not crazy about it, it was very stressful, or I had a few mishaps
   
3. It was fun or interesting, I felt all right
   
4. I felt good.
   

You're not going to get all the 4's in an hour, and you could get some 1's in a good class. But if you've got a good score, you landed OK.

[Edit 19th Oct - added 'feedback' question - thanks for reminding me!]

Mostly Harmless Tangos

They're all part of the fun, but I wonder how many of my species you recognise?

• Powerpoint tango
• S ... p ... a ... c ... e ... d ... O ... u ... t ... t ... a ... n ... g ... o (Remember the super-super-super slo-mo when Channel 4 had the cricket?)
• iPod tango (what are you listening to? Is it good?)
• Supreme Pontiff tango (I'm just the audience)
• Motorised Corset tango (please may I breathe when we get where we're going?)
• Bad Sex tango (noisy, but the ceiling needs painting)
• Frog-in-a-blender milonga (heels down, heels down, heels down - oops!)
• 8-step basic vals

I'm getting fewer of them all as my own dancing gets better, but the mildest sense of adventure usually gets you one. A mental taxonomy is my way of dealing with it, although if I get the giggles while I'm actually dancing it can be tricky to explain away. I almost did that once tonight, so I thought I'd spread it around.

My limited experience (following only) doesn't allow me to know what the equivalent follower faults are. I've heard about the wet fish and the kung-fu princess, and I've seen lipstick in some surprising places. I'm almost starting to be tempted to find out.