There are many websites and blogs that give good information or entertainment for your dance of choice.
Here I list three good ones I came across last month.
(i) Gancho/we love tango
This is a monthly web magazine for Argentine Tango dancers and aficionados. Based on Europe and published in English and Slovakian. There are very good articles.
(ii) Gotta Tango
A Tango blog by studio owners. They are based in New Orleans, wrote a book about Tango ("Gotta Tango") that I also recommend.
(iii)Smoothstyle Dance Studio
This particular link takes you to an article titled "What WCS judges are looking for". It is good for competitors to know these things.
From (iii), come to think of it, there is some "contrast and conflict" in the dance world in general; between social dance and competition dance. In Tango, they see the tango as Salon (social) and Stage (show) tangos.
By itself, the contrast is neutral. Some people enjoy dancing socially, focusing on their own feelings and subtleties of the dance. "Appreciate small things" they say. Others sign up for contests for a show to entertain audiences, and subtle moves cannot be seen from a distance. What they do are similar in many ways, but the mindsets are different, leading to a big difference in end results.
When you start adding your own meaning and evaluation, the contrast can become a conflict that you may feel compelled to take a side. Good or bad. Recreational or serious. etc. etc. When you assert and take one side, you tend to seek faults on others to justify yourself.
For this matter, my position is to keep open mind. Both sides have something to offer. Focus on improving what you do, and refrain yourself from dissing others. In fact, there may not even be "others". The boundary between two dance lovers can be arbitrary and imaginary.
High level competitors have to be fit physically and skilled in the art. The state is not open to everybody and acquiring it takes efforts. It's just how it is. How you feel about it is another issue.
Quote from "Star Wars Episode III".
"Let me help you to know the subtleties of the force"
"How do you know the ways of the force?"
"My mentor told me everything about the force-even the nature of the dark side"
"You know the dark side?"
"Anakin, if one is to understand the great mystery, one must study all its aspects, not just the dogmatic, narrow view of the Jedi. If you wish to become a complete and wise leader, you must embrace a larger view of the force."
I'm not suggesting you to turn to the "dark side". Maybe this is not the best quote to make my point. But I like the scholarly attitude to gain whole understanding to a subject.
Besides, Sith lords tend to be more powerful than Jedi masters, aren't they?
[Disclaimer: I have no relations or financial interests to the websites and the owners]
August 23, 2014
Dance: "Dance-ish performer" Kenichi Ebina and his book
If you missed 2013 America's Got Talent show, take a look at this link.
Kenichi Ebina ALL PERFORMANCE America's Got Talent 2013
Kenichi Ebina was the winner of the season. I enjoyed his "dance-ish performance" and was also very impressed by them. I am glad he won.
[The video presentation is not in chronological order. The performances are presented in following order; "The video game"(second round), "The head drop-Matrix" (first round), "The mirror"(Third round), "Angel"(semi-final) then "Holograms" (Final)]
On 4/21/2014 he published a book in Japanese. So I ordered it from Japanese Amazon and read it. To my knowledge, the book has not been translated to English as of today (8/23/2014). On rare occasions like this, I get benefit from my Japanese language skills here in the US.
The book title says," You can win in the world if you show it well"
[My translation: The original reads,"Misekata hitotsu de sekai demo kateru"]
Good thing about reading a book like this is that we can have a glimpse at inner workings of a creative mind. In the book he did not define himself as a dancer. He even referred himself as a second-class (or not top-notch) dancer. He thought he was not the best-of-the-best dancer. Considering the amazing things the best-of-the-best dancers can do (Young Baryshinikov, for example), what he said may have some truth.
Yet, he beat all other contestants who tend to be the best in their own specialty.
Instead of defining himself as a dancer, he defined himself as a performer or entertainer.
Kenichi's unique trait is his smartness and scope. He sees his performance as an act, not as a dance. He puts high priority on the audience's response, rather than on showing how exquisite his dance is.
So he had a fundamentally different scope from a dancer.
He pointed out that, in the America's Got Talent show, dancers had not fared well. Visual surprise or impact can fade quickly once the audience grasp what the performer would do. His (then novel) idea was to be unpredictable and to give a surprise by combining different disciplines for each of his act.
The "head drop" was originally a magic act. He saw it in a TV show, a kid was doing it. He adopted it to his act.
On a magic stage, the "head drop" may not be very surprising by itself, because the audience anticipate a magic. Yet when the audience expect dancing, the magic trick comes as a surprise, he said. Fizzle or sizzle, it really depends on the context and on how well you show it.
To be the best of the best, it takes so much training, yet you risk becoming predictable and getting less reward. Rather, he said he would combine two not-the-best-of-the-best disciplines and create unique and surprising entertainment.
His approach is brilliant.
Kenichi Ebina ALL PERFORMANCE America's Got Talent 2013
Kenichi Ebina was the winner of the season. I enjoyed his "dance-ish performance" and was also very impressed by them. I am glad he won.
[The video presentation is not in chronological order. The performances are presented in following order; "The video game"(second round), "The head drop-Matrix" (first round), "The mirror"(Third round), "Angel"(semi-final) then "Holograms" (Final)]
On 4/21/2014 he published a book in Japanese. So I ordered it from Japanese Amazon and read it. To my knowledge, the book has not been translated to English as of today (8/23/2014). On rare occasions like this, I get benefit from my Japanese language skills here in the US.
(Book cover of his book)
The book title says," You can win in the world if you show it well"
[My translation: The original reads,"Misekata hitotsu de sekai demo kateru"]
Good thing about reading a book like this is that we can have a glimpse at inner workings of a creative mind. In the book he did not define himself as a dancer. He even referred himself as a second-class (or not top-notch) dancer. He thought he was not the best-of-the-best dancer. Considering the amazing things the best-of-the-best dancers can do (Young Baryshinikov, for example), what he said may have some truth.
Yet, he beat all other contestants who tend to be the best in their own specialty.
Instead of defining himself as a dancer, he defined himself as a performer or entertainer.
Kenichi's unique trait is his smartness and scope. He sees his performance as an act, not as a dance. He puts high priority on the audience's response, rather than on showing how exquisite his dance is.
So he had a fundamentally different scope from a dancer.
He pointed out that, in the America's Got Talent show, dancers had not fared well. Visual surprise or impact can fade quickly once the audience grasp what the performer would do. His (then novel) idea was to be unpredictable and to give a surprise by combining different disciplines for each of his act.
The "head drop" was originally a magic act. He saw it in a TV show, a kid was doing it. He adopted it to his act.
On a magic stage, the "head drop" may not be very surprising by itself, because the audience anticipate a magic. Yet when the audience expect dancing, the magic trick comes as a surprise, he said. Fizzle or sizzle, it really depends on the context and on how well you show it.
To be the best of the best, it takes so much training, yet you risk becoming predictable and getting less reward. Rather, he said he would combine two not-the-best-of-the-best disciplines and create unique and surprising entertainment.
His approach is brilliant.
PS.
In more recent dance shows, like in this season of "So You Think You Can Dance", the choreographers are adding more story into the dance. This trend may be a far-cry result of his presentation.
[Disclaimer: the YouTube video is not mine. All rights belong to the creator of the original]
August 17, 2014
Life/Dance: You do it and you are outta here!
I am running an unofficial survey. It is for Argentine Tango dancers.
Q: How do you define "personal connection" in Argentine Tango?
If you could email or message your definition, it will be greatly appreciated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yesterday, facebook stream brought a disturbing news.
It was about a California-based West Coast Swing (WCS) dance instructor sending inappropriate texts and making sexual advancement to his supposedly student, a 17 years old girl. The parent of the girl involved in the incident stepped forward and disclosed rather nasty details. The police was investigating. More reports indicated that the instructor may be a repeat offender and is likely involved in a rape case of 14 years old girl as well. The WCS-related facebook page is getting attention of WCS community.
Yikes.
I categorized this news as grievous professional misconduct.
A University professor can lose his job by sexual misconduct with his student. Bankers can lose their job by embezzlement. Scientists can lose their reputation and/or job by forging results.
Likewise, a dance instructor should lose his job by making inappropriate sexual advancement.
A common notion is that there are things in an industry that lead you to lose your position if you violate one of them. They are "you do it and you are outta here" things. With a major violation of the industry rule, finding another position in the same industry will be difficult. Punishment is great.
Sometimes these rules are set and published rules, like a University policy. Other times, it is a "common sense among the professionals", and in case of violation judgement call will be made by the people involved in the industry.
Although we tend to believe opinions by many should matter as democracy, in many real cases it is not democracy but Oligocracy, in which only a few people in the industry are in the position to decide. In this case, WCS event directors/organizers, regional associations, and his students are the people to decide how this incident is handled. They should decide whether they allow the instructor to keep teaching WCS or appearing events as an instructor or competitor.
Professional misconduct should have consequences. Otherwise, the industry will lack quality control, will lose trust, respect or relevance, and will corrupt.
If they rule his actions acceptable and give him the second chance, they would be sending a terrible message. They would be saying it is okay to rape a minor, make sexual advancement and send inappropriate texts in this dance community.
Personally I will not deal with a dance instructor with long history of misconducts. Teaching dance is a privilege, and once he abuse the privilege, he should be outta here.
PS
I read some comments on the WCS instructor incident, saying "let's not judge, forgive him and give him a second chance". These are misuse of Christian ideas. When the instructor die, where he go is God business and not for our judgement. But people in an industry have responsibility to make judgement call for the integrity of the industry.
Q: How do you define "personal connection" in Argentine Tango?
If you could email or message your definition, it will be greatly appreciated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yesterday, facebook stream brought a disturbing news.
It was about a California-based West Coast Swing (WCS) dance instructor sending inappropriate texts and making sexual advancement to his supposedly student, a 17 years old girl. The parent of the girl involved in the incident stepped forward and disclosed rather nasty details. The police was investigating. More reports indicated that the instructor may be a repeat offender and is likely involved in a rape case of 14 years old girl as well. The WCS-related facebook page is getting attention of WCS community.
Yikes.
I categorized this news as grievous professional misconduct.
A University professor can lose his job by sexual misconduct with his student. Bankers can lose their job by embezzlement. Scientists can lose their reputation and/or job by forging results.
Likewise, a dance instructor should lose his job by making inappropriate sexual advancement.
A common notion is that there are things in an industry that lead you to lose your position if you violate one of them. They are "you do it and you are outta here" things. With a major violation of the industry rule, finding another position in the same industry will be difficult. Punishment is great.
Sometimes these rules are set and published rules, like a University policy. Other times, it is a "common sense among the professionals", and in case of violation judgement call will be made by the people involved in the industry.
Although we tend to believe opinions by many should matter as democracy, in many real cases it is not democracy but Oligocracy, in which only a few people in the industry are in the position to decide. In this case, WCS event directors/organizers, regional associations, and his students are the people to decide how this incident is handled. They should decide whether they allow the instructor to keep teaching WCS or appearing events as an instructor or competitor.
Professional misconduct should have consequences. Otherwise, the industry will lack quality control, will lose trust, respect or relevance, and will corrupt.
If they rule his actions acceptable and give him the second chance, they would be sending a terrible message. They would be saying it is okay to rape a minor, make sexual advancement and send inappropriate texts in this dance community.
Personally I will not deal with a dance instructor with long history of misconducts. Teaching dance is a privilege, and once he abuse the privilege, he should be outta here.
PS
I read some comments on the WCS instructor incident, saying "let's not judge, forgive him and give him a second chance". These are misuse of Christian ideas. When the instructor die, where he go is God business and not for our judgement. But people in an industry have responsibility to make judgement call for the integrity of the industry.
August 10, 2014
Life/Science: Ideas are cheap, or are they?
Our bodies eventually die. The biological vehicle that carries each of us will perish and decay in a due time. No body is immortal. I am not very happy about it, but it's a fact, however cold it may seem.
In contrast, ideas can live longer than a person. Teachings by Jesus or Buddha. Philosophies by the ancient Greek or Chinese. Feminism, Patriotism and political right or left. Causes that are worth supporting. Even scientific discoveries. They are all ideas to a mind. Nietzsche is dead, but his ideas still live inside his books, and among minds of people who learned them.
Ideas can be immortal. They can just switch the host like a virus, and live on.
Here, I do not intend to discuss in depth about the purpose of life. It's personal, and it is different for everyone. To the least, it seems most people are aiming at leaving a dent in this world as a proof of his/her life. Let's call the "dent" as his/her purpose of life.
Intentionally or not, each of us has a favorite strategy to "leave a dent". What each of us is "doing" is the favorite strategy. What each of us is doing reflects who we are.
According to a book "Just your type", an MBTI-based relationship guidebook by Tieger and Barron-Tieger, people can be roughly categorized in four categories;
(1) Experiencers/Doers
(2) Traditionalists
(3) Idealists
(4) Conceptualizers
Which one do you (mostly) belong? There can be crossover categories, but you would have your favorite(s), where you (mostly) belong.
And, do you see each category has different stance with the "ideas"?
Doers have more focus on physical, body's aspects than on ideas.
Traditionalists honor and follow existing and established ideas. They submit to the idea of their choice and act to preserve the idea in this world.
Idealists see this existing world as a lacking place for an idea, and try to make the idea real, or spread wider.
Conceptualizers focus on creating ideas.
It may be helpful to know which category you belong and who you are. According to the book authors, it is helpful for your relationship. Hmm, I should have known.
I'll finish this entry with an example of myself. I am a scientist, and have a few ideas that may have an impact on public health by reducing cancer deaths. I am testing the ideas. If the ideas fly, the ideas and the impact may outlive me. When I act as a scientist, I am a conceptualizer (and idealist).
Yet, all scientists know ideas are cheap. For scientists, only ideas that are backed up by results and stand as "real" count. Scientists learned the cheapness of ideas in a hard way in the lab or in the field, where many of their hypotheses (ideas) go unsupported by their own experiments. In the process of science, there is an inherent BS elimination mechanism.
This difference in the stance of handling ideas may be a source for the occasional discordance between religious people (usually traditionalists) and scientists (mostly conceptualizers). Traditionalists don't take their core ideas as cheap. The ideas are off-limits (even infallible) and not a subject of testing, doubting, revising or switching. Scientists do test, doubt, revise and switch ideas.
PS
Comedian/thinker/commentator Bill Maher made a documentary-movie "Religulous" in 2008. No amount of his efforts, eye-rolling and mocking and facts-presentation, is unlikely to sway solidly-"religulous" midwest bikers, unfortunately. It's who they are. Some minds provide particularly good hosts to certain ideas. The combination results in very different people.
The movie was entertaining to me. The differences between Bill Maher and the "religulous" people are deeply character-based. You can see the movie as a comedy or tragedy, depending on how you see it.
In contrast, ideas can live longer than a person. Teachings by Jesus or Buddha. Philosophies by the ancient Greek or Chinese. Feminism, Patriotism and political right or left. Causes that are worth supporting. Even scientific discoveries. They are all ideas to a mind. Nietzsche is dead, but his ideas still live inside his books, and among minds of people who learned them.
Ideas can be immortal. They can just switch the host like a virus, and live on.
Here, I do not intend to discuss in depth about the purpose of life. It's personal, and it is different for everyone. To the least, it seems most people are aiming at leaving a dent in this world as a proof of his/her life. Let's call the "dent" as his/her purpose of life.
Intentionally or not, each of us has a favorite strategy to "leave a dent". What each of us is "doing" is the favorite strategy. What each of us is doing reflects who we are.
According to a book "Just your type", an MBTI-based relationship guidebook by Tieger and Barron-Tieger, people can be roughly categorized in four categories;
(1) Experiencers/Doers
(2) Traditionalists
(3) Idealists
(4) Conceptualizers
Which one do you (mostly) belong? There can be crossover categories, but you would have your favorite(s), where you (mostly) belong.
And, do you see each category has different stance with the "ideas"?
Doers have more focus on physical, body's aspects than on ideas.
Traditionalists honor and follow existing and established ideas. They submit to the idea of their choice and act to preserve the idea in this world.
Idealists see this existing world as a lacking place for an idea, and try to make the idea real, or spread wider.
Conceptualizers focus on creating ideas.
It may be helpful to know which category you belong and who you are. According to the book authors, it is helpful for your relationship. Hmm, I should have known.
I'll finish this entry with an example of myself. I am a scientist, and have a few ideas that may have an impact on public health by reducing cancer deaths. I am testing the ideas. If the ideas fly, the ideas and the impact may outlive me. When I act as a scientist, I am a conceptualizer (and idealist).
Yet, all scientists know ideas are cheap. For scientists, only ideas that are backed up by results and stand as "real" count. Scientists learned the cheapness of ideas in a hard way in the lab or in the field, where many of their hypotheses (ideas) go unsupported by their own experiments. In the process of science, there is an inherent BS elimination mechanism.
This difference in the stance of handling ideas may be a source for the occasional discordance between religious people (usually traditionalists) and scientists (mostly conceptualizers). Traditionalists don't take their core ideas as cheap. The ideas are off-limits (even infallible) and not a subject of testing, doubting, revising or switching. Scientists do test, doubt, revise and switch ideas.
PS
Comedian/thinker/commentator Bill Maher made a documentary-movie "Religulous" in 2008. No amount of his efforts, eye-rolling and mocking and facts-presentation, is unlikely to sway solidly-"religulous" midwest bikers, unfortunately. It's who they are. Some minds provide particularly good hosts to certain ideas. The combination results in very different people.
The movie was entertaining to me. The differences between Bill Maher and the "religulous" people are deeply character-based. You can see the movie as a comedy or tragedy, depending on how you see it.
August 3, 2014
Life: Neighborhood Malfoy kid and Crabbe kid
Today.
There were two neighborhood kids (teenage for sure), taking turns riding a motorcycle, revving loudly and going up and down the unpaved alley facing my backyard every 40 seconds.
They kept coming back and going. Apparently they were having fun with the motorcycle, thinking the alley was their private track.
They were there yesterday, and they came back today. After 20 or so rounds, it got annoying. Also, I did not like a motorcycle coming and going in the alley where my cat sometimes wonder.
One kid looked like overgrown thick kid, like Crabbe kid in Harry Potter. He was the one on the motorcycle when I yelled "hey kid!". When he heard my complaint, he made lame excuses like "the cops said we can ride in the back alley" "we know people around". Duh. You are disturbing and provoking this entire neighborhood, and cops did not mean to permit that. It's not your private motorcycle track. This is a usually-quiet residential area and it's Sunday afternoon when many working people rest at home. You didn't hear the dogs barking at you?
Then quickly stepped in was another, shorter kid. he quickly said, "oh, so you live here?" and signaled the Crabbe kid to leave, then they left without apology. To my eyes, he was the smarter and slicker one, the Malfoy kid.
I heard some revving a few blocks away later on, but they don't seem to be sticking around. Okay, they are gone for now. It's an acceptable outcome. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.
Kids, go to a park or an open field or somewhere. There are plenty of them in Oklahoma. But this is a residential area. Don't be lazy.
In America, there are many nutcases with guns, who shoot you in the eye when provoked. They are particularly dangerous if they feel it is justified and if the provocation happens around their residence (territory). I personally don't really fancy shooting a person (ok, honest. Not unless I find a stranger inside my home at night). But there might be someone who is itching to make his day in this neighborhood. Let's hope I did a favor for the kids.
What kind of crazy reasoning is this.
I'm originally from Japan where gun control was very strict and the gun-related deaths toll was 724 in 1999. In America, gun-related deaths toll was about 30,000 in 2010, suicide and homicide combined [wikipedia]. I don't intend to get into an argument on gun control in this entry. My point is that there is a difference in these two societies. This gun society certainly requires different ways of thinking.
There were two neighborhood kids (teenage for sure), taking turns riding a motorcycle, revving loudly and going up and down the unpaved alley facing my backyard every 40 seconds.
They kept coming back and going. Apparently they were having fun with the motorcycle, thinking the alley was their private track.
They were there yesterday, and they came back today. After 20 or so rounds, it got annoying. Also, I did not like a motorcycle coming and going in the alley where my cat sometimes wonder.
One kid looked like overgrown thick kid, like Crabbe kid in Harry Potter. He was the one on the motorcycle when I yelled "hey kid!". When he heard my complaint, he made lame excuses like "the cops said we can ride in the back alley" "we know people around". Duh. You are disturbing and provoking this entire neighborhood, and cops did not mean to permit that. It's not your private motorcycle track. This is a usually-quiet residential area and it's Sunday afternoon when many working people rest at home. You didn't hear the dogs barking at you?
Then quickly stepped in was another, shorter kid. he quickly said, "oh, so you live here?" and signaled the Crabbe kid to leave, then they left without apology. To my eyes, he was the smarter and slicker one, the Malfoy kid.
I heard some revving a few blocks away later on, but they don't seem to be sticking around. Okay, they are gone for now. It's an acceptable outcome. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.
Kids, go to a park or an open field or somewhere. There are plenty of them in Oklahoma. But this is a residential area. Don't be lazy.
In America, there are many nutcases with guns, who shoot you in the eye when provoked. They are particularly dangerous if they feel it is justified and if the provocation happens around their residence (territory). I personally don't really fancy shooting a person (ok, honest. Not unless I find a stranger inside my home at night). But there might be someone who is itching to make his day in this neighborhood. Let's hope I did a favor for the kids.
What kind of crazy reasoning is this.
I'm originally from Japan where gun control was very strict and the gun-related deaths toll was 724 in 1999. In America, gun-related deaths toll was about 30,000 in 2010, suicide and homicide combined [wikipedia]. I don't intend to get into an argument on gun control in this entry. My point is that there is a difference in these two societies. This gun society certainly requires different ways of thinking.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)