Thread: Dancing vs. Choreography

I just finished watching Dancing with the Stars. They had as the 3rd dance the Cha Cha Winner take all. The teams had 4 minutes to listen to the song and come up with a dance. Basically, improv!

Carrie Ann summed it up perfectly, "This gave us the chance to see if you are really dancers, or are just doing choreography".

I am still a bit in a fog from watching DWTS. Admittedly, I am a big Hines Ward fan, so I may be a wee bit biassed ;-) I just LOVED how his dancing had such fantastic energy, it totally drew me in. Even in his choreographed pieces, it felt real. It was a very emotional show for me.

Originally Posted by norma

Carrie Ann summed it up perfectly, "This gave us the chance to see if you are really dancers, or are just doing choreography".

This is absolutely true! Love it! Wonderfully applicable to belly dancing!


Buuuuuut . . . as far as *the show* is concerned, I thought the point was to take regular (albeit "celebrity") folks, have them work with a professional dancer to learn a choreography in an insanely short period of time, and see who ends up doing the best at that. The non-pro celebrities are not necessarily (even not usually?) dancers to begin with! Oy! I'd be sweating bullets. Dancing solo is relatively easy . . . trying to get two people to be in synce like that is amazing! Sounds like it went quite well on the show, tho!

Deborah

Originally Posted by norma

"This gave us the chance to see if you are really dancers, or are just doing choreography".

Best quote to come out of that show...so true.

I thought someone on the show said that their "improv" meant they were learning a skeleton choreography/series of combinations in advance, and then just assembling/tweaking the final product, as opposed to spontaneously choreographing a dance to unpredictable music like a belly dancer with a live band might have to do. I'm not sure this is substantially different from what they normally do on the show. In the past, I've seen dancers complain (I'm thinking it was the season Derek Hough was with Nicole Scherzinger) that they'd anticipated they would be performing to one song, and then well into the rehearsal, the producers changed the music and they had to retool quickly. Not that this belittles the accomplishment of doing a partially rehearsed piece well on live TV...

Originally Posted by norma

Carrie Ann summed it up perfectly, "This gave us the chance to see if you are really dancers, or are just doing choreography".

But... that's a CRAZY thing to say! That's like saying, "Oh, Fred Astaire, he wasn't a real dancer, he just did choreography."

But Fred Astaire WAS the one making the choreography. I don't think anyone argues that the pro dancers making their choreographies aren't really dancers.

Originally Posted by tigerb

But... that's a CRAZY thing to say! That's like saying, "Oh, Fred Astaire, he wasn't a real dancer, he just did choreography."

Give anyone one of Jillina's (or insert any other fabulous dancer here) choreography and see if they can pull it off. (I', agrreing with you tigerb)

Being a good dancer is being able to breathe life into the movement.

It's more than steps, it's more than being able to follow a memorized pattern of movement, it's seeing, feeling, breathing and finally being able to externalize how you hear the music in the right moment and time to actually become one with the music AND to take your audience with you on that journey.

I sincerely wish I could memorize choreography and really appreciate it when done well.

Originally Posted by AriadneBarronmore

But Fred Astaire WAS the one making the choreography. I don't think anyone argues that the pro dancers making their choreographies aren't really dancers.

But in many dance forms, the dancer's job is to dance. The choreographer's job is to choreograph. Are we saying professional ballerinas are not real dancers because they masterfully perform someone else's choreography? That's...absurd, really.

I'm not arguing that improv is unimportant to the belly dancer--I think it is vitally important. But I agree with tigerb and kina.

Creating choreographies and dancing them well are two different skill sets. One can still be an outstanding dancer if one falls solely into the latter category. Whether that is true of belly dancers specifically is a matter of some debate. But dance in general? Absolutely.

I've often seen belly dance compared to ballet in these forums. I'm not saying I agree with the comparison, but it is a frequently used comparison. So, I'll use the example of ballet in this discussion. Would we say that ballet dancers aren't true dancers or aren't truly dancing if they don't improvise?

I think performing choreography and improvising are both valid dance skills. If someone can do both, that's great, and it might be argued that they are a stronger dancer than someone who can't. But I don't agree that someone who dances choreography and doesn't improvise is not a dancer.

Improv and performing from scripts are both techniques actors can utilize. However, I wouldn't say that an actor who does not enjoy improvising and prefers to perform parts from scripts is not an actor or is not acting.

Similarly, I think it's incorrect to say that only dancers who improvise are "really dancers."

Originally Posted by AriadneBarronmore

But Fred Astaire WAS the one making the choreography.

This is going to sound really nit-picky, but just as a point of information, Fred Astaire usually collaborated with another choreographer to create his dances. Hermes Pan worked on many films with him.

Fine, point made, but my own still stands even if I did a lousy job at it. A dancer in any style can be told give me X, Y, and Z and they can do it without further instruction on what X, Y, and Z are. A dancer in any style can tell you what kind of moves go with what kind of tempo and beat. What the "stars" do on that show is repeating a set of moves shown to them explicitly but that doesn't mean they necessarily understand how they fit.

"This gave us the chance to see if you are really dancers, or are just doing choreography".

Did they actually learn how to dance or have they just been repeating what they were shown? The comparison with Fred Astaire just doesn't hold up. No one could ever accuse Fred Astaire of not knowing exactly what he was doing or of just imitating someone else.

Originally Posted by tigerb

But... that's a CRAZY thing to say! That's like saying, "Oh, Fred Astaire, he wasn't a real dancer, he just did choreography."

but on those shows I've usually found phrases like "This gave us the chance to see if you are really dancers, or are just doing choreography" non-objectionable because they've tended to be about the difference between "doing the choreography/doing the steps" vs "Dancing/performing the choreography." I don't see it as a comment about improvisation vs choreo. For me it's a comment about being good enough to make whatever structure you are given appear seamlessly part of the music/stage/dance.

When it comes to bellydancers I think the phrase is akin to when we "notice" that a dancer is performing a choreography (and the noticing causes a slight to great disconnect for us) vs dancers who use choreography but all we see/feel is the dancing.

In this case, yes, it was about improvisation/choreo...and so I don't agree with it. I think that I am a solid dancer in my field...but if you threw me new music outside of my field It would test my connection/understanding to that music more than it would be a good way to judge my "dancerness." It would showcase my ability to fake confidence as well,

Okay, let's talk JUST BALLROOM for a second here, not any other style of dance.

What competition ballroom dancers do is not the same as generalized ballroom dance. (Note: not an expert. Have friends who do this, know what they've told me.) People who learn ballroom dance well learn leading/following and the style, combinations, and rhythms of that dance. In most cases, people learn that BEFORE they take up the highly choreographed competition ballroom dance stuff. If you watch competitions, you see the dancers clearly executing planned combinations in the group section, then performing something even more closely choreographed in the finals. This isn't the same as the social dance in which the couple works as a team to respond to group dynamics around them, changes in the music, et cetera.

The stars on the show have in most cases been thrown into the deep end of the pool. They probably didn't come in knowing how to do the Viennese Waltz. So their knowledge of the social dance is minimal and they are taught the choreographed numbers.

Given all that, if they are suddenly thrown a piece of music and told: "Waltz. Go!" I certainly have sympathy for them. Particularly the guys, who may not understand how much they have to lead.

But I still take issue with the idea that performing the choreographed numbers isn't "really dancing" and is "just doing choreography". It's a different KIND of dancing.

Unfortunately the clip is no longer on Youtube, but it seemed like a good time to mention this song:

CHOREOGRAPHY (SHEET MUSIC VERSION) LYRICS - BERLIN IRVING

Originally Posted by tigerb

The stars on the show have in most cases been thrown into the deep end of the pool. They probably didn't come in knowing how to do the Viennese Waltz. So their knowledge of the social dance is minimal and they are taught the choreographed numbers.

I think many of us can testify that one of the biggest issues with going from being good at bopping around at a party to being good in the sense of looking like a polished dancer has to do with an understanding of posture and body lines. People who have years of dance lessons or even specific types of athletic coaching have an advantage on the show. That's why stars like Donny Osmond or Evan Lysacek almost always do well. They may not know how to samba when they start, but they've already accumulated hours and hours of nagging about keeping their chins up, smiling, and not doing weird, clenchy things with their hands. True, sometimes they struggle to unlearn habits that were desirable in what they were doing before (and aren't desirable for ballroom), but they don't need to expend the same kind of effort on processing the concept of finesse that someone who's coming in cold would.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

True, sometimes they struggle to unlearn habits that were desirable in what they were doing before (and aren't desirable for ballroom), but they don't need to expend the same kind of effort on processing the concept of finesse that someone who's coming in cold would.

I agree. And it makes me feel bad for people like the football players, because no matter how effective they are at their sport, probably nobody has been yelling at them to make it "look better."

Originally Posted by tigerb

I agree. And it makes me feel bad for people like the football players, because no matter how effective they are at their sport, probably nobody has been yelling at them to make it "look better."

Absolutely! And, from what I read, Hines has been struggling a lot with posture and where the center of gravity should be during this competition. His body is supposed to be hunched over and he has to keep his center of gravity low, it is crucial for staying stable and injury-free during tackles. Correct dance posture would be quite bad for a football player. Plus, he has suffered through multiple shoulder injuries that make it very hard to hold dance posture.

And, he really dances from the heart, whether it is choreographed or not, there is emotion and joy, the choreography is more of a stepping stone than the main attraction.

[QUOTE=tigerb;870831]Okay, let's talk JUST BALLROOM for a second here, not any other style of dance.

What competition ballroom dancers do is not the same as generalized ballroom dance. (Note: not an expert. Have friends who do this, know what they've told me.) People who learn ballroom dance well learn leading/following and the style, combinations, and rhythms of that dance. In most cases, people learn that BEFORE they take up the highly choreographed competition ballroom dance stuff. If you watch competitions, you see the dancers clearly executing planned combinations in the group section, then performing something even more closely choreographed in the finals. This isn't the same as the social dance in which the couple works as a team to respond to group dynamics around them, changes in the music, et cetera.


TRUE.

a great improve dance does not a great dancer make....

a great choreograph dance does not a great dancer make


the quote is sad to say the least and insipid to say more.


I agree the heart of dance does not come from organized steps- which is probably what they were TRYING to say- but it was said- albeit very... very very poorly.

Originally Posted by Basha

a great improve dance does not a great dancer make....

a great choreograph dance does not a great dancer make


the quote is sad to say the least and insipid to say more.


I agree the heart of dance does not come from organized steps- which is probably what they were TRYING to say- but it was said- albeit very... very very poorly.

I agree in that I *think* the quote had the intention of distinguishing between:
giving the impression that one is dancing with real inspiration, or soul, or vibrancy (the "it" factor) (which could be choreographed or not) = A Good Thing Thing;
& giving the impression of one who looks like he or she has memorized steps by rote (which could be choreographed or not) = not so good
Sometimes I think when we criticize choreography, what we are really criticizing that we can SEE the memorization/rote process, not the dance, eh?