Raising the bar

I read a quote recently by Pixar co-founder and chief creative officer, John Lasster: “Oftentimes, it feels like Hollywood thinks of the audience as the lowest common denominator,” says Lasseter. “We [Pixar] always think that the audience is so smart they’ll be there for you – especially kids.”

This made me think about the way we teach dance. I find that many teachers – myself included at one time – teach to the lowest common denominator, oftentimes underestimating the interests and abilities of the students. They lower expectations, lower the bar, and lower the meaning of successful dancing. They say, “Oh, they don’t want technique” or “They won’t get it, but oh well” or “It’s okay if they don’t do it right, as long as they have fun.”

Naturally, your first thought is, “Well, but it’s just as bad to go to the other extreme, to raise the bar impossibly high or have unrealistic expectations.” And you would be right. Teachers who teach above the level of the student, who expect students to achieve goals inappropriate for their level, who get lost in technique, or who ignore the needs and interests of the student are just as dangerous. They either don’t care about the student’s progress or else don’t care about the student’s feelings – this is, after all, a hobby for most of us and it should be fun and emotionally rewarding.

What I am advocating is to raise the bar enough to challenge the students and then help them get there. To not teach to the lowest common denominator and abandon the others. To not doubt the ability of the student to do a move properly if shown how to do it. To not assume that the student will not like technique or will not care about doing a pattern correctly. (This last one is a huge one for me: students can understand and feel the difference in doing something correctly, if only you take the time to show them.)

We face many challenges as dance teachers, one of which is often teaching to a wide variety of skill levels in any given class. It is up to the teacher to assess the skill level of the class and determine the appropriate level of class content. In some cases, teachers may have to inform students that they are not yet ready for the given class. (I’ve done this on several occasions, and I have only received “thank you”s for being honest and helpful.) Yet if we as teachers hope to raise the level of dancing in our communities, we need to raise the bar a little and then help our students reach it.

Teachers, do you teach to the lowest common denominator? Do you teach at a level beyond your students?

And students, does your teacher challenge you? Does your teacher help you understand the dance or does your teacher speak way over your head? Does your teacher not seem to care about helping you do the dance properly? What do you want from a teacher, dance or otherwise?

Following through

I worked with a student recently who had difficulty following. She, like many followers, often “missed” leads but recognized the disconnect between the lead and her movement. She just couldn’t figure out what was going wrong and how to fix it.

The problem is this: she was not following through. In other words, the leader initiated her into a given movement, but she didn’t finish it, and by not finishing it to its end, she did not establish the proper connection to get a clear lead into the next movement.

Followers, something to keep in mind: everything you do should end in compression or extension. If you don’t feel either of these, you haven’t finished the movement you started. You need to continue moving in the same direction until you feel either compression or extension. Once you have compression or extension, you’ll be able to more easily feel what the next lead is. And remember: your job is to finish the movement that the leader started; it is not to worry about the next pattern.

Proactive following

There are lots of followers who move when leaders move them. Literally. They get pulled, pushed, and dragged around the floor as a result of someone else moving their bodies from one place to the next. These followers are active, in that they are moving, but they are reactive, not proactive.

“What’s wrong with being reactive?” you ask. Sure, being “reactive” is part of following: the leader provides an impulse and you react to it. One assumes that reaction is a basic expectation of followers, a necessary function of following, a precondition and part of the definition of “following” itself. Not reacting at all implies ignoring the lead or simply disconnecting, neither of which is considered following. (Would it be called “anti-following”?) So yes, followers to some extent should – no, need to be reactive.

Yet I would argue that followers should really be more than reactive – they should be proactive. Rather than simply allow themselves to be moved in response to a lead, they should proactively move themselves.

The usual assumption is that the leader moves the follower, but this is a misunderstanding: the leader – get this – leads the follower. What does this mean? Well, if you were in a tour group, would the tour guide literally pull you from one place to the next? Of course not. The guide provides a direction of movement and where to stop and you move yourself in response. Following should be the same way. The leader initiates your movement in a given direction, and you move yourself in accordance with that lead. Plus, the follower doesn’t just follow, she follows through: she continues moving herself in that direction until otherwise redirected. In this way, the follower creates more stability for herself, smoother movement, more flow in the dance, less need for the leader to constantly lead, and overall improved connection.

Followers, don’t just react. Be proactive, and feel the difference.

Wheels powering the engine?

Dancing is all about movement of the center. Our most basic form of movement – walking – demonstrates how movement of the center drives all other functions: footwork, posture, timing, balance, and stability.

Yet most dance teachers emphasize footwork. They comment on where to put your foot, which part of the foot you should use, and the size of your steps. When these teachers mention the center, it is often in reference to your feet – as in “get your center over your foot” – or in reference to your partner – as in “point your center at your partner.” Admittedly, I used to teach that way, and when it comes to brand new beginners, it helps to direct the students’ feet to provide some framework for the dance.

But I have found that by repeatedly putting the focus on moving the center, rather than on footwork, the student gets the desired results with less effort. This is because, again, movement of the center drives all sorts of other functions, including the feet. If the student can get the center to move first, it helps to fix posture, balance, and stability by aligning the center directly over the foot on each step. And by moving from the center, it creates more continuous movement, cleaner body flight, and provides more flow in the dance.

The center is the engine. The feet are just the wheels.

Knowledge vs. Understanding

Lots of people know how to dance. They know patterns and where to put their feet. They know syncopations and “styling.” They know how it all should look.

But few understand how to dance. Few understand the mechanics of the dance or the fundamentals of movement. Few understand connection or the dynamics of partnership. Few understand how to express the music through movement.

Knowledge is having information and awareness. Understanding is comprehending the how and why of information, and having the capacity to apply that information.

If you want to be a great dancer, you need more than knowledge – you need understanding.