Discussion in 'Ballroom Dance' started by Chris Stratton, Jul 9, 2010.
This says nothing about the appropriate angle of the body relative to the feet.
Clarify 'angle of the body relative to the feet'
CBMP is ONLY provided with the information of foot position, no information related to body.
Just I gave the example, the Natural Turn from Outside Partner, the body position change is described by CMB, not CBMP. There are many terms describing body positions after movement, such as just mentioned CMB or Side Leading/Shoulder Leading.
Another example: If a step description only states as LF forwards in CMBP, we only move our foot forwards and slightly sidewards and keep the body position CONSTANT because no information is given for body movement.
Normally, the angle of foot and body face the same direction unless there is some actions such as CBM, Sway or whisk action etc.
In other words, before a step: LF forwards in CBMP, the angle between our RF and our body is X DEGREE, then after LF forwards in CBMP, our RF and our body is still X DEGREE, not only the RF, but also the angle between our LF and our body is X DEGREE as well because our LF and RF are on the same LOD!
I hope it clarify the difference of position and body.
No information in the ink on the page, because the theoretical concepts of cbm and cbmp are distinct. But optimizing actual dancing makes everything related again. Some body orientations will be more compatible with cbmp situations than others, in the opinion of a particular dancer examining a particular application.
But specific non-zero values are rarely given.
We both know what the book says, but how many dancers do you know who have zero body rotation during a left foot tango walk?
A majority of figures in the book include or are normally preceded by such opportunities to change the body vs. foot alignment. And actual practice adds even more.
Which book states the value of X or gives sufficient information that it may be specifically calculated?
Who treats the absence of the term "cbm" in the official description as an absolute prohibition against body rotation in their interpretation of actual dancing?
Can we even get universal agreement on what the "body" is, anatomically?
I wasn't asking a question about the technique book, I was asking a question about dancing.
My coach once told me that CBM is an [internal] feeling. I figured it as an "almost as if;" it's almost as if your shoulder is being pulled towards your foot, but never quite makes it because of the [continuous] movement forward (or backward). Thus you feel the torque of the contra internally, that is within the frame as it effects your 'body alignment' --that is, you're not as square as you started but your top is not rotated or turned, just torqued -- and yet it goes mostly unnoticed (read: unseen) yet not unfelt (uless CBMP is implemented, in which case, it is both felt and seen, respectively).
It follows to deduce that if CBM is a feeling, than CBMP is the result of a step that takes CBM through its full ROM (if such a term can be applied to a feeling), that is to say: CBMP is the result of the feeling being applied with greater strength, thus effecting the body alignment to a greater degree, and in that way changing from an internal torque to a rotation or whatever is necessary, depending upon the figure being danced.
I do not know if this is a correct distinction. I do know that the two are different and that one causes the other, and that it impossible to have one without the other. I also know that the word 'movement' in CBM implies that it is on-going and fluid. The word 'position' in CBMP implies that there is a stop -- a clear and indicated stop to the movement, rendering it fluid no longer, and forcing me to change [perhaps read and understood as 're-align'], or one can maybe even say to 'go back to square one' with, my own bodily/body alignment.
That's my most elegant guess at it.
But in the abstract, so to speak, I think CBMP implies the same position that almost every figure or step implies: your body over your feet, or your feet underneath your body. What position your feet are in and just how much rotation of the top you have upon arrival depends entirely upon the step that got you there. But the fundamentals remain the same, if only because of what the dancer works with and utilizes: the body. What is the body? It's a whole unit of bones and muscles, etc, and thus cannot be separated. Even if not facing in the same direction, my torso and appendages remain attached to one another. I don't mean to sound like a smart ass but during dancing the body can only be in one position: vertical. Everything else is a playing with and a variance of said verticalness (or verticality if you prefer).
govnu, this is a trough thread to jump into Please don't be discouraged at the lack of appreciation for your answer.
yes you are correct. cbmP is a position often used a lot during OP steps. cbM is movement in the body. And by the book it is very clear that the two are distinct concepts that can function quite independently of each other.
What the opriginal poster was trying to debate was not the book definition of cbm vs cbmp (believe me we have multiple threads where this has been hashed out for hundreds of pages) but rather looking for the more nuanced implications of cbmp to the rest of the body instead of just a basic definition of "cbmP is a foot position"
Welcome to Dance Forums and we look forward to more discussions with you!
Look at reverse turn, natural turn, most anything inline, and you'll see that the above isn't correct. Just look at the basic definition of CBMP.
CBM does not imply anything regarding fluidity of movement. And certainly CBMP does not indicate a stop to movement.
I'm not sure if it was meant, but I would just caution against a common conceptual confusion that CBMP is the result of strong CBM, because it actually isn't. CBMP is the result of moving diagonally across the standing foot, not of rotating as you move. CBM often is the ultimate cause, but not during the same step. For example, a feather has CBM on 1 (but no CBMP), carries the result through 2 as a side lead, and only on step 3 does this become CBMP. If a step with CBM is also into CBMP, its because the CBMP is already predestined, even if we decided not to use CBM. (The cbmp of reverse pivots is apparently an exception actually caused by rotation during the step, but the cbmp of natural pivots isn't since its not cbmp of the moving foot)
True, there is no CBMP in the Natural Turn or Reverse Turns in the most basic definition of it, but that doesn't mean that CBM does not lead to CBMP. It just means on those figures there's no CBMP, but there is sway, shape, etc. That torque from CBM has manifested itself differently. The idea that one causes the other is valid. If you argue CBMP is "pre-destined," that doesn't mean CBM is not present. The CBMP is caused by CBM itself, it's just a matter of how far you take it and how it manifests, and when. (Such as in the Feather Step.)
In regard to a Feather Step, while the second step is not CBMP and is left side leading, the third is CBMP, and to me that implies that only by the third step have I gone through the full ROM of CBM, and that included leading with my left side. It isn't necessary for CBMP to caused by CBM right away, nor is it necessary for me to go through the entire process in a forward progression, if that makes sense. If I arrive in CBMP for a pose or whatever else, I have to "undo" the contra, which still -- to me -- implies taking it through its full ROM, if only to undo it and return to a squared position or move into a shoulder or side lead.
What about the Promenade Link variation in Tango in which there is CBM to lead the step but no CBMP until later? Let's take the most simplistic approach: All I do is torque my body and point my left foot and then square away and that magically leads the lady into the Promenade. My first step of a Promenade is what? -- a left side lead, followed by a step in CBMP, followed by another 'squaring off.' I have taken that very slight CBM (MOVEMENT) through its Full Range, and that included taking a Left Side lead, like in the Feather Step.
I stick to my guns that a Position implies a stop. But not a stop in the sense that I am rigid, I am frozen, I am stuck. Perhaps I should have used the word 'conclusion' and not 'stop' since there is never truly a stop in dancing. Even in a position, my body is still moving somewhere and somehow, but not in the same way as it is moving in a turn (Reverse, Natural, Pivot, Twist, w/e). I've concluded a movement or a feeling that the conclusion of said movement or feeling is the beginning of something else, like a chain reaction.
I'd like to say the following as well: I believe that, even if we look at the Feather Step, the power to move comes from the standing leg and the opposing side, meaning, the right leg and the left side sweeping through. Correct me if this is wrong, but it is my belief and understanding that it is impossible to move without the usage and the utilization of the power of the opposite side. If I want to go left, I use my right leg to push off, I do not reach with my left, and vice versa. And in Latin, if I wish to move my hips or ribs to one side, I first have to conclude the movement on the other side and "release" so it can be transfered over. If this is indeed the case, then what we have with CBM is an explanation and labeling of what has started or what has led you to taking that first step. My power has come from the contrary movement of my body, which is then continued and manifested in the side that started it in carrying through the movement's full range, and ending up in a position that can only be called the result of the contrary movement of my body, or CBMP.
CBMP does not imply a body position because it is a feeling. Granted, it is a feeling sometimes generated by the diagonal movement across a standing leg, which results in a position, but sometimes such an action is not present and the feeling is replicated internally. I'd argue that most of the time CBM exists and is utilized only internally. It is when we come to the conclusion of a movement and have no choice but to reset our legs back to underneath our body squarely that we resort to CBMP. I don't want to say "as above, as below" but the legs dictate what the torso does and vice versa. The body is a machine in which all parts work together.
It means that CBM is not necessarily used at any point during that action. Essentially, CBMP is a direction of travel, not an action. In tango I can simply decide to move in that direction and instantly achieve CBMP. In the swing dances I generally am already moving at the start of my step, in a direction that is or isn't destined to CBMP.
Its critical to realize not only that CBMP can occur without any CBM having been used at any preceding time, but also that ordinary CBM cannot be taken to an extreme of causing CBMP of the step to which it is applied (Hearn calls the reverse pivot exception in which the direction of travel is sufficiently altered "thrown cbmp").
Its not only unecessary, its ordinarily not possible within the confines of sound partnering.
While swinging a side through can be an important source of power, its important to realize that it is not the only one. Consider the natural turn commenced outside partner in CBMP. There is already something of an opposite side lead, so the opportunity to swing a side through (the opportunity for cbm) is reduced compared to the inline case (though couples with a mature hold may be able to get some windup on the preceding step). This is the type of situation that exposes the need to have powerful linear actions. For example, its critical for the forward partner to be able to move the weight through the length of the right foot and off the end of the toe, because there will not be an opportunity to swivel the foot and depart from a point foot further back on the inside edge as might be a tempting habit in the inline case. A really good inline natural takes advantage of both side swing power and the same linear travel over foot power relied on in the outside case, while a weak one may use sideswing to a degree that stops progression of the weight from travelling fully through the right foot by treating it as a more stationary fulcrum.
I would agree when we are talking about optimal dancing, as opposed to book concepts which need to remain clearly distinct.
On that score, I recognize four, maybe five distinct types of good cbm (plus a broken one) - but the book only has one umbrella term.
I have also found that some world class teachers focus their message more on what to do with the body in a given case than on keeping the language organized.
The CBM on the man's step 2 of the promenade link is given because in this version, the man turns 1/8 to the right to face the lady. In the more common version where the lady does the full 1/4 turn and the man does not turn, there would be no CBM (see closed promenade step 2, for example).
What is impossible to do is to move off of a leg without releasing body weight from that leg, which is done in ballroom by relaxing the joints of the ankle, knee, and thigh. It IS possible to take a step, even a powerful one, without changing the configuration of the "sides" of the body. It is not CBM that has started the movement. But, I believe that in practical dancing, CBM and thus the curve of foot and body directions is almost everywhere, and that it does generally contribute to more powerful swing and movement.
Separate names with a comma.