Life: It's that time of year again....to write down New Year's Resolutions

Thanks to the winter storm Goliath, road condition is not quite good. I rescheduled my meeting with a Professor about my grant in preparation and possible collaboration.


So this morning I did my annual task during winter break, "Write down New Year's Resolutions".


That includes scheduling, so that I am not going to forget things that I am supposed to do, like some paperwork and travel arrangements. Also, "writing them down" is important. A great number of success books and business books emphasizes the importance of goal setting and writing them down. I'd just follow the advice and do it. In fact, I've found it quite useful.


Maybe you find my view wired, but to some extent I see life events like ordering things from Amazon. I place order today and pay for them, and they will be delivered later. Simple enough?


I usually do the writing down in four categories; "Professional, Financial, Health, and Others".

A key word for my 2016 is "Define". I am going to define clearer for what I want in my life in the four categories. So that the Amazon/universe would send me the right things.


Since New Year's Resolutions/Goals and to do's are personal and should be unique to each, I won't disclose what I wrote down for myself here.


You may have gotten yours too. Like they say, it is easier to live in the future when you plan and make the future happen. I don't see "plan for the future" and "Live present" are mutually exclusive.


I love "Forrest Gump", probably because my default attitude toward life is entirely different from his. 

And, I'll ignore The Joker's mockery. Lines form fictional characters in movies and novels get memorable when they reach a person's core character or value system. Sure I plan things. I'll shake his little challenge off.

Enjoy the rest of 2015 and Have a Happy New Year.

Science: Galley Proof, and a thought on professional work

My Facebook post from Yesterday (12/23/2015). 

"Today was the last day for 2015 official business for the University. In such a day and at around 430PM, the journal office dropped galley proof for my proofreading. Now the proofreading is finished and sent back. Well, it was a nice way to close the official business days for 2015."

Proofreading for a paper is a time-sensitive work. We are usually requested to return it within 48 hours. It was in "urgent/important" category. So I did it. It took about 3 hours, but it needed to be done. I am pretty happy about it being finished.


Proofreading of a paper in press is a final step for a project. 

A project goes like this; Know how to plan for a research, find an important research subject, rationalize and build a hypothesis, fund the research project, set up collaboration or work with someone (may include students, technicians or other researchers) and execute the research, obtain the results and interpret them, extract information and evaluate the hypothesis, write a manuscript and send it to a journal office, convince the editor and reviewers to publish it, work with editorial office once accepted, and get it published, ....... 

....these are a series of steps, and knowing the steps is a very important part of the training to be a research scientist (=PhD course and post-doc training). Of course there are many other things you should know to be a scientist, but this "project building to publication" is one of the core skills to be a scientist in this era of "publish or perish".


Once whole process is broken down to smaller steps, you'd realize these are the same steps for each project. In a sense research is a routine work, just like all other professional works are routine works in their own ways.


Whether you can see what you do as a routine with a structure or not is a point that can differentiate amateurs and professionals. By breaking the routine down to steps, you can expect consistency in your work. And consistent good work is a requirement for professionals.

There will be a time when you are not good enough for a work, especially at the beginning. In the case you need to take training and become good enough for the work. You cannot skip it. After a certain time, they will evaluate your work. One way or the other, the universe will hand out its judgement. 


This is my view for professional works. This view is true in my science work at least, and I am assuming the view to be true in many other professions.


Winter break is a good time to step back and see ongoing works from a distance, then decide which part needs more attention. It's much like painting.

                                    [Time to step back and look at the whole picture]

Life: I don't like long lines

The new Star Wars is coming up. I will go watch it. Eventually.

I anticipate a mall-ful of people forming long lines this weekend. I'd have to wait longer in the line if I go. That's what I don't like. 

Probably I'd go watch the movie some time later. I don't see much merit in viewing the movie earlier.  But certainly I don't mind some people see some prize in early viewing. I just don't have to be an early adopter in every aspect of my life.


If you are a shopkeeper, long line is good for your business, of course. It even adds sense of premium. A restaurant with long line is a state shopkeepers want to create. It has good appeal to people, or so they believe. 


However, in my science business, the state of "many people working on the same thing" is not necessarily a good thing. "This is an important issue, so we allocate many people and funding"...the approach certainly has merits, but has proven to reach a performance peak quickly. Over-allocation of the limited resource can even be a problem rather than a solution. Like ecosystem, many subjects being investigated by many niche researchers is actually a good and healthy state of science.

Influenced by the overcrowd-disliking attitude, I have this mindset, "If I have to join a long line to do something, I may not be doing it very smartly".

Well, whatever my reasoning is, I don't think I am going to join the line any time soon, not this weekend. I'll be doing something else. I don't mind being contrarian.


You people, enjoy the line and movie and have fun.

Science/Life: Comparison between cancer and radical extremists

We cancer researchers have acquired great deal of knowledge about how cancers come into being. Generally, prevailing model suggests that cancers come into being with progressive accumulation of mutations, which are influenced by genetic, epigenetic and environmental factors. Average cancer cells have 25-50 mutations, and among them are  mutations that are directly responsible for the cancer, called driver mutations.

The roles of driver mutations include (i) oncogenic mutation(s), that drive the cell to proliferate, (ii) loss of tumor suppressor(s). Tumor suppressors inhibit tumor to develop. Probably (iii) something that makes the cancer cells difficult to kill or die (or ensure survival), should be included as a role as well. For malignancy, (iv) ability to metastasize (move around), is important. 
[In case you are interested, read "Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation" (2011) Hanahan and Weinberg]


One thing that plays a role in overall cancer development is genomic instability that we study. Genomic instability is something that increases the odds of occurrences of mutations. Once genomic instability is introduced, chances of another and the other and more mutations increase.

I am not using this blog for talking about my own science much. But the concept of progressive genomic instability in colon cancer development was among what we proposed in our Review article (click to the open access [means free] article) in 2013.

[CIN (Chromosome Instability) is a cause of genomic instability]

An insight for mechanisms should lead to an idea for solution. So we introduced a few studies that may lead to solutions for preventing cancer by selectively killing cells with genomic instability. I am still working on the line of studies in hopes of preventing and curing cancers through being able to target cells with genomic instability in the body.


           ************************************************************************

Lately, we have seen a lot of terrorism-related incidents. A common thread is that random mass-murdering were done by radical extremists of religions or ideologies. They did the mass-murdering acts based on their extreme and radical beliefs. 

They start out from regular practitioners of their belief systems, then developed to mass-murdering terrorists. As current Pope said, extremism is a common issue among various religions (that include Islam and Christian, even Buddhism).

It's not only for religions. Recent Planned Parenthood shooting was done by a guy with extreme ideology, a twisted and violent version of anti-abortionism, it seems. I'd include him as a radical extremist, although, technically, he  may not be a terrorist according to a strict definition of the word. But practically, he incited fear in the community, so he is well-qualified as terrorist.



Now, if I apply our knowledge on development of cancer to the development of radical extremists, what kind of analogous parallelism can we find?


 It is the action that finally makes them terrorists, but before the action, there are transformations inside. To be fully developed as radical extremist, before they act and kill (cancer), they have to gain something (oncogenic mutations) and lose something (tumor suppressors).

What they gain would be methods and/or skills to murder many people. Then a will to act and kill.

What they lose would be respect for human lives. That is for other people's and probably for their own lives.

What factors would act as accelerators for the mutations toward radicalization, as an equivalent of genomic instability? That would be (a) your choice to embrace radical thoughts, and/or (b) constant supply (indoctrination) or availability of radical thoughts. Human minds are flexible and pliable. Certain minds may be more so than others. Certain personalities and minds may have higher affinity to radical instructions.


So what would help stopping your own radicalization?

(i) Distance yourself from killing methods. 
Gun control actually is a method for this (not the method, though).

(ii) Don't act on killing. 
Among various religions, "Do not kill/though shall not murder" is among top instructions or commandments. Remember that. That means you are not going to heaven if you kill. Radical extremists twist common teaching of religions here.

(iii) Maintain respect for life. 
Oddly enough, this may be difficult.

(iv) Distance yourself from radical instructions. 
Turn off the d**n radio. Stay away from the news channel that is known to be biased for extremist view. Forget what that notorious preacher/imam/rabbi said. If you are in his group, why not getting out. If you are constantly posting politically or religiously extreme views in your Facebook page, you may need to consider cutting it by not visiting the original websites, much less re-posting them. When you are re-posting someone else's message, check whether you are a pawn for propaganda by a demagogue.

(v) Ask yourself, "what's good to promoting a radical view?" 
If you think you are doing it for greater good, or doing God's work, by restricting others, probably you are doing it wrong. Be careful there.


In this opinionated world, you may feel belong by employing a position, and may even feel superior or strong if your opinion is radical. But it is fine to be on the middle of the road. Silent majority is a good place to be. If you feel killing is wrong and follow the feeling, at least you are unlikely to end up as a terrorist.


Prevention of radical extremism starts from each person's mind. Discouraging environments that breed radical extremism should be important, too. Only after that, prevention of the act can work.

Book: "The Love Matrix (恋愛マトリックス(Japanese))" by Dr. Goodwill. A bluntly simple view for love and relationship

We got ice storm in the 2015 Thanksgiving weekend. Of course it's not like real "Ice storm" in northern states or in Canada or in Russia. We had some freezing rain, which turned to ice.

But around here, we are just not used to it. We do not have ice/snow-proof infrastructures and the power lines are not buried underground. Frozen tree branches came down to disturb power lines so easily. Thanks to that, I got 8 hour power outage and 2-day internet disruption during the weekend.


I am not writing this to whine. I am writing about the weather condition to talk about a book I read during the weekend. Thanks to the icy road condition, I canceled my plan to go to Dallas and read a few books instead.


One of the books was "The Love Matrix (恋愛マトリックス) ". It was a book about relationship. The author is Dr. Goodwill, who has a PhD and runs a popular relationship counseling website in Japan.

I read a few of his books before. Perhaps because of some similarities in our thought processes (we do have PhD in science), I've liked his honest and insightful writing.


Now, in the book, the author asserts that when a man sees a woman, he gives her a position in his mind-map, the Love matrix.

The author came up with this simple two-standards matrix, based on a notion that humans are animals and their judgement is affected by two major instincts, sexual desire (sex) and self-preservation.


A: Sexually attractive
B: Sexually unattractive or neutral                      (Sex instinct)

C: Helps his survival
D: Does not affect his survival, neutral
E: Jeopardize his survival.                                  (Self preservation instinct)


How he sees her and how he acts depend on her position. A-C is the best for her, and B-E is worst for her.

An example: He would not do much for her if she is not sexually attractive (B) (ouch). But if she provides a cozy place (C), he values her and she still has a chance to get him.

Or, even if she is attractive (A), if she complains a lot or is no help for him (E), the relationship can go sour.

The positioning can change as well. Her attraction can (will) go down over time (A to B).


The author's message was to assess each other's positions and act accordingly.

This is a bluntly simple view for love and relationship or what. I kind of liked it. I laughed, in fact.


Just give this simple view a try. You can see your relationship from a different standpoint and you may realize something.

[The book cover]

He also stated that there may be some other standards in human mind, which are "Guilt" and "Conscience". These two emotions can stand up against sex and self-preservation, according to his case studies. He speculated that the strength of these emotions might have come from humans' choice to live in a group or society.

I am a scientist. I enjoy watching or testing whether the author's hypothesis/model is true or not for a majority of people.

Dance/Life: Paul Ramirez Retirement Party

I went to Paul Ramirez's retirement party on 11/21/2015 Saturday at Oklahoma City Swing Dance club.

There were over 160 people attending and dancing. It was a big party. 


Paul was a WCS main instructor in Oklahoma City Swing Dance Club and the director of the club. He was a long timer and taught WCS in Oklahoma since 80's. The club has been one of the biggest and most successful social dance place in the city.


He used to compete earlier. But by the time I joined the club in 2000, he was sifting his main efforts to teaching WCS. He had many patterns to teach, and had a reputation of "good beginner's teacher". And you know what. Teaching beginners is one of the trickiest things to do.


A reason for his and the club's success is the school's teaching program.

When a beginner signs up, he/she usually starts from a beginner's class (the "Pink" class), and wears pink color badge. In the month's end, there is an exam night when he/she dances with an instructor. If he/she passes the test, he/she moves up to next level class. He/she does not have to move up, though. A person can stay at a class as long as he/she wants.

There are several classes with different levels of materials; Purple class, Red class, Yellow class, Green class, Blue class, then Multicolor. Pink and Purple teach WCS basics such as sidepass, underarm, sugar push, whip, sidepass with spin, close, etc. Green and Blue classes are for the people who want to compete or participate in local/regional events. Multicolor is for instructor level. A long time student turns to a volunteer instructor and teaches WCS. They came through the classes, so they know the materials by the time.

This system is similar to Karate school, in which students move from white belt to black belt. The system makes sense when beginners sign up and make progress over time. Most students are adult learners, so the system worked well for most. 

Paul and his late partner Rae Dean built the system, and the school system is a reason to success.


Another reason would be the club's generous opportunities to dance with low cost. The WCS classes were held on Mon, Tue, Wed and Sunday. Students can practice after the class. Then on Friday there is a practice party, and on the third Saturday there is a monthly Birthday party. So if you are in Green or Blue class, you can dance 4-6 days in a week. All with $40-50/month. The school is a nonprofit organization, and the inexpensive fee structure is possible with many club members.



Third reason would be that the club is supported by many volunteers who also are the club members. They bring food to party, watch the door, teach each other, and make the place nice. It became like a large family, and the club can be a very cozy social place.



A teacher's success is also measured by the students' success. The club does produce some successful competitors in regional events.

A few students joined young and showed their talent. Bonnie Cannon Subey is one of them. She was dancing in the club until her high school graduation, then moved to Philadelphia, where she grew to a prominent WCS professional in the national WCS circuit. I am glad for her.

When I go to WCS event and someone asks "who taught you?", I tell it was Paul. When I was beginning, I did spend 5 months in Purple class to really get the basics. The basics have helped me so much. In non-choreographed social party, good basics are the only thing that counts to enjoy the dance.


In the party, I was feeling somewhat nostalgic. Paul called some of his students his "sons". Stuart, Lonnie and I have been brothers and his sons.


Paul was a character, and made many friends and enemies, as he himself said in his speech. But his dedication to the dance and the club was genuine. A serious dancer would resonate and acknowledge such passion.


I heard he would move to Houston where his family live. I hope he is going to have a good time there.

Thank you for everything and happy retirement, Paul.

11/21/2015 with Paul

Life: Choose your dreams carefully

I came across this photo in my Facebook feed.

"It's a very good advice", I thought.


When we think about our "dreams", the "dreams" can be many different things. You can dream anything. But there are good dreams and not-so-good dreams from someone else's standpoint. Value of a dream is relational. 


For example, if the dream is only about you and is self-serving one (like driving a good car, wear nice clothes, travel and have fun, or be rich), no one else is going to help you to achieve it. The dream is not a good dream, because achieving it is not useful to others. If you have to beg for charity, you are not in good position to achieve anything.

If the dream is about solving a problem of others (without harming any people),  you have a better chance to get help from others to achieve it.


If your dream involves changing others (that includes harming or by force), be extra careful. When you use the word "for greater good", you assume small harm. But be careful. 



You need to choose your dream with two filters; usefulness to others, and no harm done to any people. 


Dreams by idealistic radicals are angry and violent with intention to change others. They are self-serving, and they harm others. Don't choose such dreams. 

Choose your dreams that solve problems and serve others without harm. Create, not destroy. That's the best. 

Dance: "Trickle down" in dancing

There is a theory in economy called "Trickle down" theory. The theory says if the rich gets richer, the wealth possessed by the rich will "trickle down" to the less rich and poor, and the society overall would be well-off. It is a theory preferred obviously by the rich (and by political parties that support the rich). 

But in reality the theory largely has not gotten support by evidence. In other words, the theory does not work nor is supported by facts. Hence it has been wrong. The theory might have worked if the rich practice "Noblesse Oblige" (meaning that the rich is required to fulfill social responsibilities). But the practice of the "Nobility obligation" is hardly done. Instead, many companies with large profit have chosen to move the money to overseas to evade tax. So much for social responsibilities.

Economic "Trickle down" does not work because there is no incentive or merit for the rich or the companies to trickle down. It is much easier to get the capital to work to generate more capital. "Noblesse oblige" was practiced by the kings and nobles as a moral obligation. Asking companies social moral? Apparently such request is futile, uphill battle in capitalism.


There is a similar, but working, "trickle down" in fashion and dance industries.


In fashion industries, a small number of designers have shows that present their collections, such as New York Fashion week or Tokyo collection. 

Their ideas for upcoming seasons are picked up by top-tier clothes designers and producers. They make clothes for a select few, like party-attending celebrities.

Then the ideas and products are imitated (or "creatively copied") by brands targeting upper tier fashion, like brands in high class departments.

If the products and ideas are liked by many, next tier brands targeting middle class-mass market start producing similar items. They sell many, and the products become cheap.

So the men's dark skinny pants originated from 2005 Dior collection is now everywhere in $30.

[This "trickle down" process in fashion industry was neatly explained in "The Devil wears Prada" movie with a Cerulean sweater.]

It looks like a process in which an art becomes a mass-market product. Unique becomes ubiquitous.



Now, trickle down in dance industry.


There are a few dance pros who show their routines in national competitive events.

People watch the routine, and pick up and imitate some impressive moves of theirs. 

Instructors who teach social dancers also pick up the new and cool moves and teach them.

In some months, the new moves become a shared knowledge among social dancers in the dance community.

If you are avid watcher of the dance, you can even trace back the move to the original.

In the dance trickle down, deterioration is inevitable. Poor copies are everywhere. But we do recognize the move with the original.




Trickle down in fashion and in dance work, because these industries benefit from the "trickle down" process itself. Apparel makers can introduce fashionable-looking new clothes that sell. Dance teachers get new moves to teach and in teaching they make money.

When the dissemination process itself has merit, people who benefit will support dissemination process. Thus "trickle down" will occur with people who are willing to perform.



Now,  ....do you notice the difference in fashion trickle down and dance trickle down?

Fashion industries "trickle down" apparels. That is, things and products that take maker's efforts to produce. You probably do not want to produce them by yourself. The makers will just sell them to you, and you can get the apparel. The makers made money for their efforts, and you get the apparel you wanted. Fair exchange and both are happy.

On the other hand, in dance move "trickle down", you need no middleman. You watch the original performance, and you can just try the moves. Dance moves are information product that no one can patent. How well you can imitate and dance the moves is up to you, though.


There are different kinds of trickle down. Some work, others don't. In case of dancing, whether you can reproduce high quality moves is up to you.

[BTW  I like this Pope with his rational take on many subjects]

  

Life: "It is not about X, but about Y": (False) power of reframing

"It is not about X, but about Y."

This is called reframing. It is an attempt to redefine a problem ("It"). Reframing has potential power to view the problem from another angle, leading to a (previously unnoticed) solution to the problem.

Politicians use reframing a lot. We are going to hear this many times during upcoming presidential debate.

I like reframing. Reframing can shift my mental framework of understanding. It can be intellectual pleasure. It can be like a miniature version of a paradigm shift, an "ah-ha" moment, or a puzzle solved. Or even a comedy.


One thing I am careful about reframing (especially by politicians) is that whether the reframing helps solving the original "It", the problem.


Here is an example.

"School shooting is not about guns, but about mental illness". 

Are we getting any closer to solve school shooting by redirecting our attention from gun availability to people with mental illness? Would the reframing eventually help to solve or reduce school shooting? 

Problem solving by reframing needs follow-up measures for the "Y". Can the people reframing the school shooting issue as mental illness issue provide a (better) solution to mental illness? "Just saying" should not be enough.


Reframing can give us a small mental pleasure, an "ah-ha" moment. But if we are satisfied by that small pleasure and stop working on solving the original problem, it would mean that we fell for the agenda by the reframing guy. 

Because, in many cases, reframing is used to redirect attention from "X" to something else rather than to solve the problem. The reframing guy can be quite sinister, hoping some of us to buy their reframing and forget about "X".


It's November before 2016 Presidential election in the US. Political season is coming up. Hope people keep healthy dose of problem-solving mindset.




PS 
When "It" is not a problem, reframing is still an attempt to see "It" from a different angle. Whether the overall attempt is correct or not is open question, though. 

Example: "Tango is not about technique, but about passion". Some will agree, others won't.

From my observation, people who neglect technique tend to lack it. You gain what you value.

Dance: Tango class note/reminder

Here is a part of Tango class note that I taught last week.


         ***************************************************

(a) Axis

Stand on your right leg, and put 100% of your body weight. Draw an imaginary straight line inside right side of your body. That is your right axis.

Stand on your left leg, and put 100% of your body weight. Draw an imaginary straight line inside left side of your body. That is your left axis.

Be very stable on each axis.

Notice you can freely lift and use the other (non-axis) leg when you are balanced on your axis.


(b) Use of axis

You use your axis leg to support your own body weight.

You can pivot around the axis, so the direction your body is facing can change.

To pivot freely, you need shoes with leather or suede sole (or socks). No sneakers.


(c) Use of non-axis leg

You can use your non-axis leg for mainly four ways;

  (1) Extra balance support
  (2) Embellishment (tap, boleo, etc)
  (3) Interaction (stop, sweep, entanglement, wrap, sandwich, etc)
  (4) Moving (to gain or control momentum by swinging, twisting, flicking or kicking)

They are not mutually exclusive but somewhat intertwined usage.

(d) Walking

Walking is shifting your axis


(e) "Ankle magnet" rule for followers ("collect your feet" rule)

Imagine you have magnets in your ankles. After taking a step (changing your axis), your ankles come together (you collect your feet).

If you think your Tango somehow looks sloppy, be very conscious about collecting feet, and do it religiously after every step. In many case, your dance starts looking much cleaner just by collecting feet after every step and also take your time to pivot.

It's leader's fault if he does not give you balance support or time to pivot cleanly. But sometimes you cannot choose your lead. 


            ***************************************************************


We talked about many more things. These are some reminders and extra explanations.

Book(+Dance): Balance casual and formal -- "Quickest way to look fashionable" by MB (Japanese)

I read a Japanese book that boasts itself as a textbook for men's fashion. It's titled, "Quickest way to look fashionable" (最速でおしゃれに見せる方法), published on 9/17/2015.

The book was very good. The author MB, who has been in fashion industry for a long time, distilled his ideas of looking fashionable and good in the street and came to theories. His basic formula for street wear is "to balance casual and formal" to look fashionable and to be likable.

A useful concept is that, he rates all components of men's clothes in a "casual-formal" axis.

Casual being casual, like sneakers, sweatpants, jeans, hoodie, t-shirts, baseball cap, etc. They tend to be relaxed and colorful.

Formal being something like serious business/dress attire; dark shiny leather shoes, dress slacks, constructed jacket and dress shirts. They tend to be structured, monotone, or black and white. 

Even within an item category, there are more dressy/formal ones and more casual ones. Pale and torn jeans are more casual than dark skinny jeans.


And he advocates to mix and balance the casual components and formal components in one appearance for a street wear.

I had not come across a book that states street fashion rules in such a simple and practical manner. Most magazine photos and company catalogs have an agenda to sell and tend to focus on components themselves, not necessarily the whole appearance, and much less on how to construct the look. "Looking good" is left to some "sense" or individual's "talent" that are too elusive to grasp quickly. 

He says otherwise; there are rules that can make your appearance appealing to a majority (not all) of people, and he'd teach the rules. I like this kind of thinking. To tell the truth, I wanted my "Beginning Argentine Tango" book to be like that (in the field of Tango, not fashion of course).

In the book he added some rules that make sense. For example, he asserts that "bottoms determine the overall tone of how one looks, and tops change one's appearance".

Consistent with his assertion, we have been told that shoes are the most important part in men's fashion. Shoes are a main component of the bottom, also are a part of "tips" of the body that tend to get attention. 

We know wearing formal and sharp shoes can uplift the whole attire, and wearing overwhelmingly casual crocs sandals (these guys in the photo) can irreparably damage otherwise dressy attires. Even expensive suits cannot save the look.

If you look at street fashion photographs with this theory in mind, you'd be surprised how much of them follow his theory.

When a guy wears sneakers (casual), he may tip the balance to formal side by wearing slacks and a jacket (formal). But he might add more casual side with long sleeve t-shirts. Right. I've seen these street wear photos in some websites like The Sartorialist (link to the site).

I recommend the book (well, if you can read Japanese. Sorry).




Then, I was thought-experimenting by rating various partner dances in "casual-formal" axis.


What makes difference between this dance "casual" and "formal"? I'd say, how it looks. Specifically, how classical and line-emphasizing the dance looks. Ballet-like long lines makes it more formal, and body rolling makes it more casual. Assuming that they are all danced by the performer-level professionals, how they look and how much classical appeal they hold is the criteria.

Then, elite dances like Ballet (duet), competitive ballroom dance by professionals, stage tango, contemporary duet dance by dance company, would be formal. Among ballroom dances, smooth dances would be more formal than Latin/rhythm dances, although they both require hard training to perform well.

Casual dances would be like many social party dances. Kizomba and bachata would be most casual. Most Salsa and swing styles fall on casual, too. The less you need specific practice for the basics, the more casual the dance rating goes.

There are dances fall in between two extremes, like social style serious Tango, or contest-level WCS. Some dances hold more potential to look formal than others.



Personally, I like formal dances more, to watch and to do. I feel like, casual dances are fun to do, but they may not look as good as the dancers can. I am referring to a fact that Kizomba pros may have harder time to distinguish themselves from intermediate non-pros compared with Ballroom waltz pros, who "obviously" look different from intermediate non-pros. But you can have your own opinion on this one.

Dance: "Improvement" in dancing is qualitative

"Improvement" usually means that you can do something that you could not do before.  The "something" should be something positive; more impressive, more aesthetic, more joyful, more beautiful, more connective, etc.

It does not necessarily mean that after improvement now you are faster, stronger, or endure more,....something that you can measure and quantify. A standard quantitative measure does not necessarily apply in evaluating dancing. 

But if you are used to see contemporary sports with quantifiable performance, you may have a hard time for this notion to sink in. I am only saying that speed, time, length, height, weight, etc, are not good measurements for dancing.


Improvement in dancing is qualitative. It is about sophistication in the ways you move, communicate with your partner, and work together.


It is certainly true that factors that you can measure (quantitative) can affect your dance greatly, as you are more flexible and can reach further, or you can jump higher or can spin more, so you have more options. Quantitative improvements are, well, quantitative. You can measure the "results". It's much easier to addict to quantitative improvements.

But it is hard to quantify how smooth(awkward) you are, or how good (not-so-good) your dance looks, or how you changed your body usage so you move more elegantly.

Sophistication and elegance sounds like an elusive target. But we should remember that dance improvements are not always coming as improvements in numbers.

Dance: How to get better quicker in dancing

Some say it takes three years to be able to walk properly in Tango.

Others say give yourself a few months to fully enjoy Salsa.

They assume that it takes time to be good at dancing.


Is it true?  

No. It's only half the truth. Time alone will not grant you a good dance.


Be good at a dance requires three things; (i) knowledge, (ii) physical ability developed through training, and (iii) confidence/right attitude.

(i) Knowledge can be acquired relatively quickly, if you know good sources and if you have been proficient at academic studies. Occasionally it is difficult to find "good sources", though.

Knowledge is important. For example, if you keep dancing Tango as if it is casual Country western, you are not really getting better at Tango. Over time you reinforce your habits, and you are stuck there. To get out of there and change your habits, you need knowledge.


(ii) Physical ability through physical training. 

This is where you can make difference most.

Imagine you are learning basketball. If you want to be good at basketball, what would you do? Watch the professional games? Sure. Talk about last nights' game and criticize some plays and tactics? Fine.

But if you really want to be good at basketball, you have to grab a basketball, and start practicing basics. You practice in-place dribbling with your right hand, then left. Then you practice dribbling and moving. You practice shooting from various positions, from right side of the post to left, changing angles. You practice 3-pointers from afar, with different angles. The drills can go on.

Once you can handle the ball and maneuver in the court by yourself, then you are ready to practice with your friends for passing and role play for offense/defense. Game day will come after all these practices, if you want to play a decent basketball.


These practices are the point where you want to take your time to be good at basketball "quicker". They say no shortcut. Actually, knowing what to do and do it is the shortcut.

Even after only one week, concentrated practice every day will make a huge difference compared with untrained self one week ago.


Your body is an animal part of you. It has it's own intelligence (you don't have to think to digest, breath, or keep your heart beating), and it can be incredibly smart. But it follows its own rules for introducing something new and for improvements. It takes certain patience and repetition to train it.

Remember the time when you learn how to ride a bicycle. Train your body until your body takes care of the dance moves automatically. This is what you need to "get better quicker". 


Note that training is very specific to the dance you want to install. If you want to be good at Tango, practice Tango. Just like in the example of Basketball, work on important basics you use for the particular dance. 

If you look at athletic ability alone, a good soccer player may be well prepared for playing basketball. But he has to learn basketball to play basketball well. Does it not sound like a common sense? This notion is called deliberate practice or purposeful practice.


Once you have sufficient knowledge and physical training, (iii) your confidence should follow. Mental work is no less important. But for most people, I recommend to work on physical training first. It's easier to measure. Showing something through actions is much more trustworthy than "just saying".


The key parts are the first (knowledge) and the second (physical training).


If you want to get better quicker, (1) learn what to do to install good training for the particular dance (and to avoid acquiring poor habits). You may need a coach or an instructor who can help you do that. If they provide well-designed deliberate practice for you, that is great. (Do you remember "Wax on, Wax off"?). Then, (2) "just do it". Train your body until it takes care of the dance moves by itself. This "training" part can take time and patience, but can be a great fun part. 

In case of Tango, you practice basics until your dance looks "clean" as a initial goal. For many followers, if  she collects her feet neatly at her ankles, pivots on stable axis, and steps to a direction that is well-aligned to the direction suggested by natural body alignment, it looks much "cleaner".



I have seen very good dancers. A character they have in common is that at least at some time in their development, they enjoyed the practice and did it single-mindedly. They don't see practice as tough or pain. You don't want to do painful things. It may be work to some, but enjoyable work to them. Getting better than yesterday's self is their joy. This is the mindset that made them.

So, let's see "training is fun", shall we?

[Practice basics and train your body until you have clean basics. While doing it, have fun]