Thanks!

Spot turns are dance with the feet open with the travelling foot brushing past the stationary foot on the last walk. The footwork for each step or walk is ball flat.

In the Alemana however, the footwork for the actual turn itself should be:

1. Outside edge of toe (ending flat after the first part of the turn)

2. Ball flat for the next 2 steps.

The final forward walk is towards the Man after the lady has swivelled on her right foot to ensure she is in front of the Man.

The right foot must also brush past the left foot before commecing the last 2 walks.

------------------
Steve Kelly

> It's been my experience that things in
> dancing related to differences between
> these two types of turns have been
> described as either linear (another flat
> line), or circular. That circular action,
> I believe, is what we're both desiring to
> see in the Alemana Turn.

Well, yes and no. Like you said, leeway must be left for individual style and interpretation. So on the basic level, yes, I like to think of it as a circular shape. But as you increase the competitive and dynamic quality by holding and stretching movement through the counts, it becomes more and more angular. At the most extreme level, each part of the turn may be delayed so much that it takes place only at the last tiny fraction of the beat.

With that in mind, I would say that an Alemana can range anywhere from a circle to a triangle, depending on who's dancing it, and under what circumstances. That implies that a circle is not a definitive part of the Alemana... it's more like an option within the definition. That being the case, I don't think one can define an Alemana exclusively as a circle.

My definition separates the two types of turn by the quality of rotation: Progressive rotation for the Alemana, and spot rotation for the Baisc UAT. This still allows for individual style and interpretation in the degree of sharpness one wishes to apply to the Alemana.

Sincerely,
Jonathan Atkinson

First: All ISTD technique books are written with the idea of teaching classes and couples in mind. That makes a difference in how the material is written and presented.

Second: At any level of private lesson instruction, especially if it's geared toward competitive dancing, a lot of leeway is available for personal interpretation and expression in the material taught / learned. That is, after all, why some of the technique is presented in a rather vague way.

Third: While my comments do sound similar to the description for a basic underarm turn, there are some differences.

A) The basic UA turn is danced with a sharp 1/2 turn on the LF, ending with LF back. This is similar to what Fred Astaire's syllabus used to refer to as a walk around turn at the end of crossover figures. It is also akin to the basic chase turn action.

B) The lead for an Alemana Turn is soft and circular in nature, which would ask for less turn on the LF, and which would also leave the Lady in a position to step away from the Man at the end of step 4 of the Rumba Alemana Turn. The lead for the Basic UA Turn is much sharper on this same step, resulting in the 1/2 turn desired. Fourth: Although I do understand what you refer to with the use of Horizontal and Diagonal tracks, I feel that the difference can be better understood by using different words. Horizontal is, in most people's minds, a flat line (__). Vertical and diagonal both ALSO refer to flat lines, although they are headed in different directions ( | ) or ( / ). It's been my experience that things in dancing related to differences between these two types of turns have been described as either linear (another flat line), or circular. That circular action, I believe, is what we're both desiring to see in the Alemana Turn. In the Rumba Alemana Turn, a circular action is desired. In the basic UA Turn, a linear action is desired. In the former, the position of each foot after placement for steps 4-6 does describe points of a triangle. The action of GETTING them there is circular. In the latter, the position of each foot after placement is along a linear path or track. The feet also move in linear tracks as they move from point to point along the linear track of the turn. The Alemana Turn can be danced a variety of ways. Yours is certainly a valid one.

Continued:

The actual amount of turn for each step would vary according to who did it, how the dancer was taught, or how the turn was lead. From the point of turning square to her partner at the end of step 3 of the Rumba Alemana Turn, the Lady has done 1/4 turn to R. If step 4 is danced as I described, she will make a further 1/4 turn to R to place LF in line with RF. This completes 1/2 turn to R, leaving 3/4 turn to complete the basic figure. In my method (Not an absolute, and just one of many acceptable methods), the Lady makes 3/8 turn to R as she moves to step 5, and the remaining 3/8 turn is danced as she turns and moves toward her partner to regain normal closed position.

I virtually NEVER have anyone, for any reason, on any step, position their feet AND body so that they face squarely to their direction.

This is, among other things, the natural result of the hip action in Latin / Rhythm dancing. The lower part of the body, from the hips down, almost ALWAYS turns more than the upper body in a movement such as this. I've always referred to this technique as 'slicing.' It is also due to the fact that the feet are turned out in this type of dance.

The point of view taken when describing foot placement for dance figures can be quite puzzling at times, especially where turns are involved. Turns are usually accomplished *at the end of the preceding beat* (or step). With few exceptions, especially in turning movements, balance is better served if weight can be transferred to each foot in a forward manner. That's why step 4 of the Rumba Basic UA turn, or the Switch Turn, is described as *forward, ending back.*

If you look at the alignment given for step 6 of Foxtrot's Reverse Turn and Feather Finish too literally, it seems as if it's given wrong. The alignment is given as *Facing Diagonally to Wall.* As any experienced teacher knows, this would result in a very unflattering dance position. The actual position of the body when the foot ARRIVES in its position for step 6 of this figure is between wall and diagonal to wall. But, as the body moves across the foot on its way to step 7, it briefly passes through the true alignment of DW. Step 7 is also given as DW. But, again, the body would only briefly pass through that 'true' alignment while moving toward the following weight change.

In describing any dance figure, movement, or action, there must be a starting and ending point for each weight change. When placed on paper, these weight changes bear little resemblance to the physicality of actually performing the movement, pattern, or action associated with those weight changes. A technique book containing every minute detail associated with the performance of each and every weight change in a figure would be a weighty tome indeed! That's why teachers, along with their knowledge and experience, will never become unnecessary baggage in learning to dance.

One tidbit of information I picked up at some point in my training is that the beats / counts we use for each dance are for weight changes. And that dancing is what happens in between.

I agree 100%

And again, it causes the left shoulder to overtake the rotation too quickly. I prefer to see the majority of rotation happen as a pivoting action on the end of 5, after the weight has been fully transferred to the right foot.

Sincerely,
Phillip B. Stephens
Dual Fellow - USISTD

> after turning 1/4 to
> R to face Man at the end of step 3 (5 in Cha Cha) I'd like to
> suggest the following: Swivel a further 1/4 to R on RF,
> taking step 4 (6 in Cha Cha) as LF fwd in line with RF.

This is certainly technically sound, although it strikes me as more of a basic underarm turn than an Alemana. As I understand it, a basic underarm turn works across a horizontal track similar to a spot turn, while steps 4-5 of an Alemana move along a diagonal track, such that step 4 is taken in a direction diagonally towards the man, with step 5 moving on the same diagonal track away from the man. With step 6 moving directly towards the man, this is the reason many people describe the resulting shape as a "triangle".

Assuming this is true, this would actually result in the following amounts of turn: 3/8 between 3-4, 1/2 between 4-5, and 3/8 between 5-6. But in order to agree with this, you also have to subscribe to the theory that the lady should face squarely each direction that she steps to. And while I might be inclined to write it that way in a technique book for simplicity's sake, I wouldn't necessarily teach it that way.

The reason I don't have my lady students facing squarely to their direction of step is because I think it tends to cause their left side to overtake the rotation much too early. I like to feel step 4 as somewhat of a forward-and-across action, so that the lady's upper body is still almost facing me, and the left shoulder is held slightly behind the rotation. As a result, I often describe her position as facing man, even though the right foot may be pointing 1/8 farther to right. The question is whether you consider this 3/8 between 3-4 with body turns less, or 1/4 between 3-4 with toe turned out. Being that this is latin, I'm inclined to choose the latter. This is why I described 1/4 between 3-4 in my original message.

When she finishes her half turn on the end of 4, I like to feel her take the next step either with a right side leading, or at the very most, squarely to the dirction. I don't like too much rotation towards step 5, because I think it takes her right shoulder away from her right foot, which is negative. And again, it causes the left shoulder to overtake the rotation too quickly. I prefer to see the majority of rotation happen as a pivoting action on the end of 5, after the weight has been fully transferred to the right foot.

I'm also told that another fundamental difference between basic underarm turn and alemana is that the alemana is progressively rotational, so that you actually take 3 forward walks over 456, whereas the basic underarm turn is a spot rotation so that the equivalent step 5 is more of a "replace weight to RF" instead of a forward step.

> We had a discussion about the vagueness of some of the
> descriptions in the technique books. The easy
> answer is that each person dances differently, and this
> allows for individual expression.

I can see both sides of that. I agree with the statement as justification for keeping the syllabus simple and straightforward in its presentation, allowing for individual interpretation. But I also agree with you that it's too inconsistent to have so many figures so specific, while this one is so extremely vague.

I must say, though, that these new Latin books are far superior to the original Latin book. I was really impressed.

Sincerely,
Jonathan Atkinson

In looking over the message board, the question about "Alemana Footwork" and
your reply caught my eye. Your answer is thorough, but, after turning 1/4 to
R to face Man at the end of step 3 (5 in Cha Cha) I'd like to suggest the
following: Swivel a further 1/4 to R on RF, taking step 4 (6 in Cha Cha) as
LF fwd in line with RF. This works better than having her step diagonally
forward toward the man's L side. Also, the last step should go forward slight
ly to man's R side when returning to closed position.

I was in England last fall, taking some final lessons with Elizabeth Romain
before taking my Latin Fellowship Exam. We had a discussion about the
vagueness of some of the descriptions in the technique books. The easy
answer is that each person dances differently, and this allows for individual
expression. Since they are so specific with everything else, my feeling is
that this is a cop-out. They probably couldn't agree on EXACTLY where each
step went, so used this as a compromise solution. At any rate, I've always
danced and taught the Lady's Alemana as I suggested, since first studying it
with Elizabeth in the early 70s. She still prefers this method.

Sincerely,
Phillip Stephens

(:

Jonathan Atkinson

But assuming you're asking about foot positioning, that's a slightly more complex issue.

The red ISTD Latin technique book descibes the lady's part as all forward steps (except for the foot closing on step 1 in Fan position), with a total of 1 & 1/4 turns to right over steps 3-6. Pretty vague. We all know that it's a little bit more involved than that...

For example, the lady will usually turn 1/4 to right and brush LF to RF on the end of 3 to face partner. Step 4 is taken with LF forward and across RF (on a diagonal slightly towards partner), then turn about 5/8 to right on LF with an optional brush of RF to LF. Step 5 is taken diagonally away from partner forward on RF, then turn about 3/8 to right on RF to face partner, brushing LF to RF. The last step is usually taken either forward or sideways, depending on the following figure.

The man's part is described as a forward break on 1-3, and a back break on 4-6, (closing feet on 3 and 6) which is more or less accurate. Although the book doesn't specify turn, some men like to shape or even turn slightly towards the lady on the forward break. It's also common to turn about 1/8 to right on the back break.

The same positioning is used in Cha Cha, except for the triple steps on counts 4&1. Again, the technique book doesn't very accurately represent what people really do, but it's a place to start. It describes the man's triples as "Almost close LF to RF to Chasse LRL" or "Almost close RF to LF to Chasse RLR". Lady's are descibed as "Forward to Chasse" RLR or LRL.

The man's first Chasse (steps 3-5) is often danced as a "Slip Chasse", which is sort of like a back break with the RF slipping slightly back towards the LF on step 5 (the "&" count). His second Chasse is either a side chasse or a forward lock, again depending on the following figure.

The lady's triple steps are usually forward, but they're usually forward locks, not chasses. And if the man decides to dance the last chasse sideways, so will she.

Hope this helps.

Sincerely,
Jonathan Atkinson