Thread: Tribal style - how can you tell if it's cued or choreographed?

I'm curious. I've never learnt Tribal style dancing (I'm thinking ATS here), but I know that the dancers typically improvise via cues which lead into pre-learnt combinations. But as I'm looking at footage, I'm wondering, can that really all be cued? I'm especially wondering when a troupe use complex formations of their members as they dance. I know some troupes do actually use choreography to achieve this.

So how can you tell? Choreo vs improv? What are the tell-tale signs?

Well, the point is to make the improv look as synchronized and choreographed as possible.

We did two improvs on Saturday at a festival, and a troupie's boyfriend who was in the audience heard someone say, "There's no way that wasn't all planned in advance." (We had explained a bit about tribal style and cued improv before we danced.) But it was not planned, and, in fact, we had never performed to those pieces of music before, although we had danced to them together in class a few times. Not only were the specific moves and combos we used unplanned, although, of course, we've practiced the moves and combos in class, but we also had no way of knowing who would be leading at which point in the music, so it's not even possible to plan which moves one is going to pull out at a certain point in the music. (The leader cues when she is finished leading and it is someone else's turn to take over.) Oh, you might have some ideas for moves you would like to use, but if the person leading before you has pulled out those moves, you're not going to repeat them. So, even when we've danced to that music before, each time is different.

As for how to tell--one clue might be the formation. If one person is clearly standing to the left and in front (even slightly) of everyone else, when the group is in a crescent or in two staggered lines, for instance, that person is probably leading (although in turning moves, the lead changes as we turn, so that we can maintain synchronicity). You can look for signs that the dancers are looking at the leader for cues, although we do try to use our peripheral vision, and look toward the audience, and not be obviously watching the leader. You can look to see if the leader is doing an 1/8 turn in a move, to cue a turn. If you see this happen, and then see the whole group do a turn, you can be pretty sure it is cued improv.

But if it's too easy to tell, the group is probably inexperienced or hasn't danced together very long. (I always have a harder time following people who are less experienced at leading, as their cues may not be as sharp or timely.) It's supposed to be hard to tell.

Very intersting. I was watching a FCBD clip on youtube, and at one stage, several dancers would come forward and do their thing, then another few would take over, then the whole group would join in. The swap-overs were so seamless, I thought they must at least have an outline of who would be taking turns when. Is that likely to be the case?

In a longer piece, we will commonly have solos, duos, or trios. We usually plan in advance who will come out together, and which groups will come out in which order. During the time that people are soloing, duoing, etc., the rest of the group acts like a "chorus." We will do simple moves (no flashy turns or arm movements) in the background, so as not to distract from what's going on with the soloist, duo, or trio. The chorus will have a leader, usually whomever happens to be on the far left. (The leader needs to be in a position where all the followers can see.) The duo or trio will also have their own leader, and they will probably switch leaders during their bit. (The chorus won't switch leaders.) When they rejoin the main group, the person on the far left (i.e. in a crescent) is the leader of everyone again.

Sometimes there might be a little more planning involved, in that we might decide in advance which parts of the music will be used for duos, trios, etc., but not always.

We try to work on the premise that anyone who can't see the others--the leader, or the people returning to the main crescent--is at a disadvantage, so it is up to the others to adjust to them--to make space in the crescent, to mirror their moves, etc. In tribal improv, if the leader makes a mistake, say, in a combo, the leader is not "wrong." Anyone who fails to follow the leader is wrong, even if she is technically performing the combo correctly. Our goal is synchronicity and to make these things appear as seamless as possible. We don't always succeed, but FCBD is, of course, a major influence in tribal improv dance, and they have had a long time to perfect the art.

Now, when you dance with the same group of people for a while, you kind of get to know what they're likely to do. That is, you know their "go to" moves. Also, if you know the music well, you know when the leader is likely to cue a new move or combo. Ideally, the moves are going to suit the music, too. For instance, we might be in the middle of a fast combo, but if the music slows down, we know that the leader is probably going to cut the combo short and start doing slow moves. However, in improv, we need to be prepared for anything to happen ('cause it probably will *g*).

Now, I can't speak for all the moves and changes you mention with FCBD, but in our group, we have cues for turns or for moving in a big circle. We have various combos that involve fading lines or moving around one another. Some of the combos are pretty complex. So, yes, it's possible to have complicated changes, fades, etc. that are not "planned" per se, except that they are part of a rehearsed combo, if that makes sense.

We do perform choreographies, as well, and many of our new combos come out of choreographies and get turned into improv combos.

To add to this: we are only a student troupe. Just because we usually plan the order of duos/trios etc. in advance doesn't necessarily mean that all tribal groups do. If the members of a group are very experienced, it is entirely possible to make this look more seamless with less planning, I think.

I study FatChance's original ATS format so I don't know what's going on with other spin-offs but if there are say, complex stage formations then it's choreography.

Like this one at the beginning during the fast part and near the end where the chorus joins in with the same movements:



Of course, you'll also have loosely choreographed pieces where you'll talk with your troupe first that you want to do something that can't be cued but you let them know that if it's this move, then they'll need to do something specific. Or sometimes you have entire pieces that are choreographed but can very easily be improvised with cues...there are subtle things to look at...maybe the piece fits a little too well with the music, the dancers are looking at the audience more than the leader, there's no hesitating and absolutely no mistakes...but the best way to know of course would be to know the format.

It's funny that you posted that film clip, because that's the exact one I was watching that got me wondering about all this.

Just to throw something else in - not only do the best groups practice together for hours there are a limited number of moves, directions and combos from which the group can select. On the day of the performance you cannnot throw in a new move that just occurred to you or something outside the set of combos - with the cues which are also memorized. So it hardly fits the exact definition of "improvise" which is to do it extempore - without preparation.

Originally Posted by CalgaryBibi

You can look for signs that the dancers are looking at the leader for cues, although we do try to use our peripheral vision, and look toward the audience, and not be obviously watching the leader. [...] But if it's too easy to tell, the group is probably inexperienced or hasn't danced together very long. (I always have a harder time following people who are less experienced at leading, as their cues may not be as sharp or timely.) It's supposed to be hard to tell.

This is the answer in a nutshell. When you're talking about tribes who are not well known for their artistic prowess and professionalism, it's often quite easy to tell when it's improv. The back dancers will noticeably lag in following, they'll turn their heads around to keep watching the leader when they change orientation, they'll grimace or laugh when they miss a cue, someone will start doing the obviously wrong thing--in other words, mistakes from inexperience or flabby practice standards. You won't get seamlessly good at this by skimping on dancing together as a group. Just because it's improv, it doesn't mean there aren't hours and hours of preparation behind it.

Also, if you've studied a little ATS, you will be exposed to what some of the more common cues are. If you know that in the FCBD system, you do X to cue Y, then that tells you what to look for when watching others who do that style.

One more aspect that typically contributes to the feeling of cohesion: Everybody, whether follower or leader, listens to the same music and presumably knows the music well or understand the structure of ME music when working with new music or a live band. Transitions between moves are usually done when it fits the music (there are of course trip-ups), because it is dancing, after all. One won't typically switch moves in the middle of a musical phrase, but rather at the transition from one musical phrase to another. So, as a follower, I anticipate a transition before it is cued, and I also have an idea of what is more or less likely to happen because, e.g., some moves just fit the music better and some moves don't make a lot of sense in sequence.

Originally Posted by kashmir

not only do the best groups practice together for hours there are a limited number of moves, directions and combos from which the group can select. On the day of the performance you cannnot throw in a new move that just occurred to you or something outside the set of combos - with the cues which are also memorized. So it hardly fits the exact definition of "improvise" which is to do it extempore - without preparation.

I agree. It isn't improvisation in the usual sense of the word. However, to some degree, even true "improvisation" will make use of specific moves that have been previously learned and practiced. I mean, if I'm improvising to a piece of music (Egyptian/cab style), I might throw in hip-drop-kicks, undulations, hip circles, 3/4 shimmies layered with hip slides, etc.--all moves that I've previously learned and practiced. I may even use some combos that I've previously developed or been taught. I will, hopefully, choose moves that make sense with the music and change what I'm doing, and the tempo of my moves, when it makes sense, musically, to do so. However, I'm probably not going to go out there and do just anything. I'm probably going to use moves and maybe combos that I've practiced. This is not so different from tribal improv.

The difference is, when "improvising" with a group, there has to be some predictability in order to achieve group cohesion. So, it makes sense to have some predetermined combos, or cohesion would be nearly impossible. Either that, or the dancing would have to be so simplified, it would be very boring (4 of this, followed by 4 of that, and then 4 of the other).

Our group's repertoire is fairly extensive. I just counted our "bingo cards" and we currently have 81 different moves and combos that we use. And we are encouraged to develop new combos all the time. (The bingo cards are cards we sometimes use for practice. Each dancer chooses or is given several cards at random and has to lead those moves at some point during a piece of music. This helps us to become comfortable with leading all the moves, so that we don't just stick to a few that we like best.)

We do try to know the music as well as we can, so that we can really dance to it--choosing moves that fit the music. We currently have about 8 pieces of music that we use in performance, including a 10 minute piece. However, in class, we sometimes improv to unfamiliar or less familiar music, as well. We also perform with live drummers on occasion.

When soloists, duos, and trios "break out" from the main group, regular "improv" rules do not apply, and they are free to bust out moves that are not in our usual repertoire. Of course, this is more likely with soloists than with groups of 2 or 3.

Anyway, it's certainly a different animal from "regular" bellydance. That's why I like to do both, and I belong to both an Egyptian-style troupe and a tribal troupe. I find each style challenging and enjoyable in its own way.

Originally Posted by marsbar

I study FatChance's original ATS format so I don't know what's going on with other spin-offs but if there are say, complex stage formations then it's choreography.

Like this one at the beginning during the fast part and near the end where the chorus joins in with the same movements:



Of course, you'll also have loosely choreographed pieces where you'll talk with your troupe first that you want to do something that can't be cued but you let them know that if it's this move, then they'll need to do something specific. Or sometimes you have entire pieces that are choreographed but can very easily be improvised with cues...there are subtle things to look at...maybe the piece fits a little too well with the music, the dancers are looking at the audience more than the leader, there's no hesitating and absolutely no mistakes...but the best way to know of course would be to know the format.

We have developed our own variation and don't strictly adhere to a specific format, but I still recognized several improv moves and combos during the first 2 minutes that are similar to what we do. These include combos that involve fading and moving in pairs around one another. Just after 2 minutes, when the whole group joins in and moves into a vertical line, that might be choreographed, to be sure. The trio after that section definitely appears to be doing cued improv, switching off leadership.

Actually, watching this again, I'd guess that this is at least 90% improv. The only part I'm not too sure about is the part between ~2 and 4 minutes, when the entire group is in a vertical line or lines and coming forward. Still, there's a pattern to that, and it could be a cued combo.

Even some parts that might appear to the uninitiated to be planned are probably not. For example, at 8:55, the trio is doing what's called Egyptian Basic. (A hip bump step kind of move.) At 8:57, the leader (in the olive skirt) cues a turn sequence by doing a slight, 1/8 turn to the left. Normally, in FCBD style, I believe this sequence is usually executed with four half turns (back, front, back front). However, the leader stays facing the back when the rest of the group turns to face front on the second half turn. This is a signal to move into a circle, which they do. This is cued improv.

Originally Posted by CalgaryBibi

Actually, watching this again, I'd guess that this is at least 90% improv. The only part I'm not too sure about is the part between ~2 and 4 minutes, when the entire group is in a vertical line or lines and coming forward. Still, there's a pattern to that, and it could be a cued combo.

Even some parts that might appear to the uninitiated to be planned are probably not. For example, at 8:55, the trio is doing what's called Egyptian Basic. (A hip bump step kind of move.) At 8:57, the leader (in the olive skirt) cues a turn sequence by doing a slight, 1/8 turn to the left. Normally, in FCBD style, I believe this sequence is usually executed with four half turns (back, front, back front). However, the leader stays facing the back when the rest of the group turns to face front on the second half turn. This is a signal to move into a circle, which they do. This is cued improv.

I've been studying FatChance's format for about four years now so I'm quite familiar with what's going on in the vid. When the leader faces the group in the Egyptian basic, that is not a signal to move into a circle - this depends on the next move. The dancers could very well just stay in place and dance with the leader's back facing the audience where she'll do something and return to facing the audience. There is no cue that calls for the dancers to move into a circle - you just have to go (at least for FatChance) or cue a movement that will naturally turn into a circle when the dancers start to move.

I'm pretty sure that it's choreography for the first 3:21 minutes of the vid and from 10:32 till the end. As far as I know and unless something's changed recently (FatChance is always evolving) there is no cue that initiates a floor pattern like that and no cue that calls for the chorus to join in with the dancers upfront like in 10:32. Everything else might or might not be improvised.

Keep in mind that I'm talking about Carolena's ATS - not ITS such as Black Sheep Belly Dance, Gypsy Caravan, and others.

Here's a vid where they're clearly improvising - Carolena misses a cue and giggles at 1:51!

You probably know better than I. :^) Although I've been studying tribal style for 5 years, including some FCBD moves, I haven't focused strictly on that one style of tribal improv. Our group does cue moving into a circle in the way I described (i.e. that's one way we cue it, but there are other ways, as well), so I thought that was what was going on in the video--it looks exactly like how we would do it--but I'll defer to your knowledge, since our group has been moving away from doing strictly FCBD style improv and has been developing our own combos. I'm still sure I saw the leader cue the turn while doing Egyptian Basic, though.

Based on what I saw in the video, there isn't anything in it, other than the vertical line sequence, that our group can't/doesn't do in improv (or we do something very similar), including line fades, dancers switching off, dancers moving around one another, forming circles, etc. so I was basing my observations on what I know our group commonly does in improv.

In the past, members of FCBD have said (on tribe.net) that for theater and big stage productions with large numbers of dancers, when crisp, complex formations are an important element for the performance, they sometimes rely on choreographing those formations, esp. for opening and finales. That makes good sense, and it doesn't mean that they could not put on a fantastic show without choreographing elements of it, it just means that they do what they can to put on the best possible show for their audience.