I wonder why Billy Irvine teachs to accent the third beat of a Foxtrot. Could it be to get higher on the toes.
Quote . In the Waltz , he stressed to accentuate the first beat. In the Foxtrot accentuation of the third beat. From a lecture, in writting , given by Billy Irvine in Singapore.

Does he not explain why?.
Unfortunately, 'accentuate' can mean different things. Waltz - accentuate the first beat in the sense this is where the drive occurs. Accentuate the second beat in the sense this is the 'showy' beat and use it as much as possible.

"I wonder why Billy Irvine teachs to accent the third beat of a Foxtrot. Could it be to get higher on the toes.
Quote . In the Waltz , he stressed to accentuate the first beat. In the Foxtrot accentuation of the third beat. From a lecture, in writting , given by Billy Irvine in Singapore."

It has nothing to do with extra rise (which will RUIN foxtrot).

And everything to do with that being the ONLY place in a characeristic figure where a step actually lands on the beat. First quick, third beat. Nail that with precision, and let everything else float by feel.

"I wonder why Billy Irvine teaches to accent the third beat of a Foxtrot. "

Because he understands that there is more to dancing than taking as dogma all the figures in the syllabus.
And because he understands that the Foxtrot oftentimes has a different "lyrical accent" (it is on 3) than other 4/4 dances.
Or so explained my mentors that were Irvine-trained.

There is an entire technique devoted to this thinking.
It is called rubatto-timing.
It is not something you can learn from a tape or recording because it is quite advanced dance work.




m

Madmaximus. I have a friend who was taught by Irvine. One thing that was passed onto me was. If a step is not going right look at the one before it. I've found that very good advice.
About the accentuation of the third beat On my John Wood tape. He has a different way of explaining the same thing. He says lift the front shoulder. Or if you like think of it as lowering the rear shoulder, the result will be the same.
I like Irvine's the better because I can carry the accentuating the third beat through most of the Foxtrot.

"Madmaximus. I have a friend who was taught by Irvine. One thing that was passed onto me was. If a step is not going right look at the one before it. I've found that very good advice."

True. Consider:

First quick happens to early (before third beat). Why?

Because the preceding slow was rushed. Why?

Because the preceding second quick was rushed. Why?

Because the preceding first quick ROSE TOO HIGH. Why?

To use up the time from it being too early, because the preceding slow was rushed...

and so on.

Why?

Part of evolving into a master dancer is understanding that ACCENTUATION is not a formula (such as lifting a shoulder here, or raising a leg there). Rather, it is a CUSTOMIZATION of moving parts that create an interpretation of a segment of music that will evoke lyrical qualities of that music.

There is a point in the mastery of dance when you have to stop thinking about the MECHANICS (again, parts such as lifting or lowering a shoulder).
And instead focus on the type of expression that the music demands from your OVERALL technique.

The irony is, true, you need to learn the rules--BUT--until you can divest yourself of those same rules, you cannot truly dance with unfettered expression.



m

I couldn't imagine what he means, since I have been taught to rise to toe on 2 on heel lead straight SQQ timing - and that is all the rise the measure gets. Moore doesn't mention this in his book - yet Irvine's picture is all over earlier editions. I'm sure Irvine reviewed the book

Miles. Your not getting muddled betwean beats and steps are you. Its the third beat which is the second step.Best of luck there.

"I couldn't imagine what he means, since I have been taught to rise to toe on 2 on heel lead straight SQQ timing - and that is all the rise the measure gets. Moore doesn't mention this in his book - yet Irvine's picture is all over earlier editions. I'm sure Irvine reviewed the book"

Miles - you will understand it a lot better if your ignore quickstep's mistaken posts.

The accent Irvine is talking about has nothing to do with the rise. It is more the timing/attitude of the step. This is the one step that is really "nailed" to the music, while all the other float to a position that is comfortable rather than mathematically precise.

In terms of rise, although the book talks about the deliberate rising action, there will be an incidental gain and then loss in altitude as the legs close at the end of step two and reopen at the start of step three. Alex Moore chose not to talk about that, but it surely happened to him. Len Scrivener on the other hand did choose to talk about it, and took exception to Moore's failure to mention it in his explanation of rise and fall. It all depends on if you consider this incidental change to be part of the rise and fall, or if you consider only the more deliberate foot and related actions to be rise and fall, as Moore has done.