Dance: Dress for Stage Tango, a primer

We had a nice weather for Memorial day holiday (Monday 5/29 observed). I spent some time to get ready for Summer; cleaning rooms, washing cat, buying new batch of books, etc.


For our Tango group, there is a couple of stage Tango performances coming up in June 4 and 17. 

Original version of the choreography was a three-couple formation. But now, due to family emergency, a couple is likely going to back out. We were adjusting the original choreography to a two-couple choreo on Sunday (5/28).



Today (5/30) we were testing the stage dress.

In general, for Tango performance on stage, the easiest choice for men is dark suits with some sheen in the fabric. They can make your silhouette long and visible, and can correct your (shortcomings in) shape and posture to some extent. Nuevo dancers may aim for "less traditional" clothes, though.

For women, the choices are much broader, provided you can dance Tango in the dress. But overall, formal/dressy clothes will not go wrong, as Tango has a perceived image of adult affairs.


Usually, the balance between formality and casualness is a critical factor in choosing your dress. But for stage, different rules dictate.


The very first step for thinking of the stage dress is to think of what you want to show, that is, your message. Stage dress actually is a costume.

 Audiences will start interpreting what they see on stage immediately, and each will form an opinion within 15 seconds. If you have clear message in the choreography, the dress should help/augment the message visually.



Practicality and comfort are secondary. "Sending a message" "Looking good" can trample practicality and comfort for stage dance.


There are additional, special factors and requirements for stage clothes. 

(a) Consider Distance
You are far apart from the audience. Details that can be spotted in 3 feet distance won't be seen from 30+ feet, stage-audience distance. What audiences can see will be very different and limited; silhouette (shape), color (shine, contrast), design, and overall message.

(b) Consider Lights
Although adjustable, the stage lights usually are very bright. In bright lights, weak or pale dress can be washed out. It helps to choose dress with high contrast. Use strong, bright, or even neon color. Use iridescent or jewel tone. Use plain rather than patterns. Plain looks clearer than small patterns that audiences cannot see from a distance. If you wear a pattern, use bold or loud one.  

(c) Be Memorable
Above all, the performer's stage dress should be memorable (or easy to summarize in the viewers'/audiences' minds).

Most audiences do not know you personally. Don't count on it. What they would remember is "I liked the couple in red". If all dancers wear some type of uniform, they'd say, "that one on the right" "the tall one" etc. You have to keep it simple for the audiences, yet have to stand out.

In a book "So you want to dance on Broadway" by Tina Paul, the author recommend for dancers in audition to be "identifiable", and "do not change dress between rounds", to be remembered by the viewers/producers/judges. It's the same idea. 

[Recommended read]

Steve Jobs always wore black turtleneck for Apple. Spider man wears the red and blue costume, otherwise he is unremarkable Peter Parker. You have to see yourself as a memorable and identifiable character on stage.


Stage dress have many functions, including, sending a message to the audience, making you look good and memorable, and creating a sense of special occasion for the dancers and the audiences. 

You need to consider them and plan your dress beforehand.

Science: our new review article on Arsenic and human cancer, and...

On 5/10/2017, our review article "Biological effects and epidemiological consequences of Arsenic exposure, and reagents that can ameliorate arsenic damage in vivo" came out. It is about Arsenic and human cancer, and emerging studies on reagents that can ameliorate Arsenic damage in animal models.

Link to the article (online, open access)

From local epidemiologists, we learned that main aquifer of central Oklahoma tends to carry high level of Arsenic. In the US, Northeast states, Nevada, a part of California and Florida, also harbor "hot spots". Many other countries including Taiwan, Bangladeshi, Chile, and Argentina, have arsenic-polluted areas. Millions of people use water that carries arsenic higher than the EPA/WHO standard. 

There facts are not very well known to general public, much less what can be done to possibly reduce the biological damage and cancer risk. That was the reason we wrote the review.


Hint: [antioxidants] 


In fact, translational medicine is a tricky field. There is a certain level of skepticism in translating results in animal models to humans. However, there are not many alternatives. We need to consider both limitations and biological applicability of the results, while being careful not to throw out baby with bathwater.



Tomorrow we'll have a brief meeting with an incoming summer student for a research project. Summer is coming.

Dance: What to watch in a dance choreography

There were some occasions to watch dance performances last week. Following are the points I pay attention when watching someone else's dance choreograph.


Same kind of thinking can be used to dance a social dance with an emphasis on "on-spot" improvisational choreography, including West Coast Swing and Argentine Tango. 

In contrast, salsa songs are too often used like metronome. In the case, the dance becomes more pattern-oriented. How unfortunate.


Knowledge
Does the choreography demonstrate that the dancers are knowledgeable in the dance? Do they know what they are doing?

Beauty of motion
How well do they present the basics as well as advanced moves?

Uniqueness
Every body is unique, and has strengths and weaknesses. How well do they present (or work with) uniqueness, or idiosyncrasies, of the body?

Music appreciation
Do they dance with the music? How well do the dancers translate the song to the dance?

Emotion
Music comes with, or provokes, an emotion or emotions. Does the dance demonstrate the dancers' (as well as viewers') emotions?

Story
There are two major choreography schools; one "pure dance" school relies more on dance and motion itself, another school believes that dance should tell viewers a story. You can tell which school the choreographer belongs by watching his dance.

Viewer-friendliness
Related to the Story segment, some choreographs are more considerate for the viewers. Other choreographs choose viewers instead.

Purposefulness/intent
If you check the points above, it may help you to appreciate the design of the dance, and the background purpose and intent of the choreographer. When a choreography reaches this level, I'd like to call the dance an art.

Interesting
As in previous point, a dance comes with an intent of the choreographer. Let's say you got the message from the choreographer and dancers. But, is the dance interesting? Will it add something new to the art, like intending to incorporate a "novel" element? Does it emphasize a unique aspect of the performer's motion, or musical interpretation, or storytelling? Is there anything that makes the dance interesting?



Thoughtless dances tend to be uninteresting. Piling up moves after moves can be sporty, but such dance can turn boring quickly after 30 seconds, unless they have something (like, very athletic moves few can do, or easy-on-the-eyes dancers, or both).

Dancers and choreographers got only 15 seconds window to get people's/viewers'/audiences' attention. After the 15 seconds, you have to keep providing something to maintain their attention. That "something" is what you got.

Book: "Why Chinese martial arts and Aikido are tough" by Eiji Yamada (Japanese)

The author is an editor of a Japanese martial arts magazine. He also practices various martial arts, involves in running martial arts events, and runs a martial arts school in Japan. This book showed how knowledgeable he is on the subject he loves; martial arts.


The title is somewhat counter-intuitive. Everyone knows that Chinese martial arts never fared well in octagon, and Aikido does not even compete publicly. That makes the title effective to pique curiosity. I did pick up the book. 



First, he points out that what we think as "martial arts" is a very limited part of the bigger picture in "martial arts".

When we think of "martial arts", it's in the boxing ring, in the octagon, in the cage or in a (limited) field. There will be two unarmed contestants. They fight following the rules, over a duration of usually limited time, and one emerges victorious according to the rules.

The author points out that we tend to believe an art or a champion is better than others, if the art or a champion fares well in a particular format. For example, Brazilian Jujutsu fared well in the octagon. Now we tend to believe BJJ is a good "martial arts".


Then he points out that "martial arts" have many different aspects. There are many different situations, in which you deal with;

 one unarmed opponent
 one armed opponent
 two or more unarmed opponents
 two or more armed opponents,

 in a closed area (like ring or octagon where you cannot flee). or,
 in an open area where you can run.

Moreover, "you" may not be one single person."You" may mean you plus someone else, like family member(s). In the case, they may be a liability in terms of fighting ability. Or, like in military or in gangs, they may be comrades in combat.
  
If you are armed or not, is also a changeable factor. Type of weapon (gun, knife, baseball bat, stone, belt, other environmental objects like wall, floor, chair, etc) is a factor, too.


Unless you are trained in some way, like in military, police, gang or mafia, peaceful civilian life can make you forget martial aspects of life.


After questioning our assumptions on martial arts, the author points out that these traditional martial arts, Chinese martial arts and Aikido, are products of different era and paradigm. In the older era, one-on-one, unarmed contest was rarity. "Martial arts" were actual means of combat between armed soldiers, police officers, or gangs.

From the viewpoint, the author reviews various techniques in Chinese Martial arts and Aikido, and shows that these techniques are, in fact, meant to be used in armed combat situations. A technique useless against boxing jab turns out to be designed to redirect sword or knife slice, and disarm the opponent in the following move. Some funky footwork in a forms sequence, which appears meaningless, are usable to move among multiple opponents, break away encirclement, and run for survival.

Many techniques in traditional martial arts are useful in the original situations such as armed combat and one-against-many. But we forgot how and when to use them.


We are conditioned to think a style effective in "one-on-one, unarmed, time and area-limited, and refereed" contest, as an effective "martial arts" style. 

Perhaps, we may need to break this mental conditioning and see "traditional martial arts" from a different angle, with the original usage in mind. That was a major message in the book.


His argument was convincing enough for me to rethink my opinion. It helped me to broaden the scope of "martial arts". It is a joy of reading to find such books.

[A brilliant example of "martial arts"]

The author also asserts that fear and panicking are major performance disruptor, and it may take a few experience in tough situations to get over the fear and panicking. Probably the same goes for many different kind of performances, including dancing in public. 

Science: How many "leading experts" are there in the world?

Scientists are specialists. No scientist knows everything. They dig deep in their own expertise. For his core specialty, he is supposed to know more than "most". "Most" means 99.999999% of human beings.

Let's say there are 7 billion people on earth. 0.000001% of 7 billion is 70. In practice, a scientific field may have 5-100 "leading experts". This estimate should be about right. 

In other words, a leading expert is one among 100 million. Are they many, or are they few? Either way, it sounds miraculous.


Of course there are some tricks in the number. Unlike Olympic games or professional sports, we do not play exactly the same game. A specialty is further sub-categorized, and occasionally the small divided sub-categories cross-pollinate to generate a new or a unique field.  

Science does not work like "oh, everyone is doing the same thing and it is great". It is very elitist, yet collective discipline at the edge. People may take different approaches, yet solve a problem with collective efforts. Science does have a progressive nature, too.


This week I was finishing sample collection from some mice for a research project. Sometimes delegating this task do not work due to schedule conflict and other reasons (shrug). Also, seeing cancer myself helps to confirm what I am working on and talking about. While stretching my back after 2.5 hours sample collection session today, I was wondering how many other people are working on the same thing. Hopefully zero. And it is a good thing. I don't like competition.

Although people tend to believe an important problem attracts fierce competition among many, it is not always true.



Some time ago, I was taking a quiz for my political tendency. I was surprised when the result placed me among the libertarians. But perhaps, from my professional habits it may not be surprising after all.