What are we missing?

Message

GemZombie · #46 Post by **GemZombie** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:30 pm

yedancer wrote:Which, in turn, seems to be proof of the pro-originals' argument that groove music is bad for lindy hop, because one of the prime reasons the pro-groovers don't like the old stuff is because they can't dance well to anything over 150-160, which is pretty much the bottom of the chart when it comes to original stuff, and the top when it comes to groove stuff. (was that a run-on sentence?)

This pretty much sums up my issues with the "Groove" folks. I had a guy show up to my gig the night. A really good Westie/Groove dancer, but once the music hit above 160 he flatly refused dances. He did give it a go once to a song at 180 and failed miserably. I didn't feel bad, though, since i do advertise my night as a Swing Night. My average tempo is 160 or more.

If you're going to call yourself a Lindy Hopper... you better be able to dance to Lindy Hop tempos.

Lawrence · #47 Post by **Lawrence** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 3:50 pm

GemZombie wrote:This pretty much sums up my issues with the "Groove" folks. I had a guy show up to my gig the night. A really good Westie/Groove dancer, but once the music hit above 160 he flatly refused dances. He did give it a go once to a song at 180 and failed miserably. I didn't feel bad, though, since i do advertise my night as a Swing Night. My average tempo is 160 or more.
If you're going to call yourself a Lindy Hopper... you better be able to dance to Lindy Hop tempos.

Not sure if he's just intentionally baiting us, but "this post pretty much sums up my issues" with "original/classic" folks.

I call myself a Lindy Hopper, and there are MANY nights or occasions where I choose to not dance to fast songs: if only because I'm tired from teaching, running, jumping, or whatever. Up-tempo speed has never been a measure of whether something is a Lindy Hop tempo or not, and it is flat mistaken to dogmatically (or flippantly) declare or imply that "Lindy Hop tempos" are all fast, or over 160 BPM. The implication of this kind of example of a skinny, slimy Westie-type who can't dance over 150 BPM also commits the straw-man fallacy of portraying all of "us" as similarly incompetent.

Moreover, SO WHAT if he "specializes" or prefers slower tempos? Does everybody need to be hyperactive?

As for the little flip-side, I have never heard a "Groover" insist that "Lindy Hop tempos" are all under 150 BPM, whereas higher tempos are reserved exclusively for Bal/Shag or Charleston. That would be just as ignorant, but I've never heard it from anything other than a misinformed beginner. "Us groovers" all simply state that we prefer to dance slower. Why is that so evil or difficult to accept?

yedancer · #48 Post by **yedancer** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:43 pm

First off, why would recordings of that era be faster than average? When people couldn't dance to live music, what do you think they danced to? The recordings of the era. Record Labels would not produce music that was faster than the preferred speed, because at the time, people bought those recordings to dance to whether on the radio or in juke joints.

Second, while there are always going to be exceptions to any stereotype, it's not out of line to say that "groovers" do not like faster stuff. And by the way, choosing not to dance to a fast song is not the same as not being able to. There are lots of "groovers" who literally cannot dance to fast music. As someone who was taught to dance by a "groover," I can say from personal experience that that kind of dancing is bad for you if you want to be able to bust out to a fast song.

Being close-minded in either extreme is dumb in my opinion.

p.s. I challenge you to find a "groove" song that's like 220 or more that makes anyone want to really lindy hop.

SirScratchAlot · #49 Post by **SirScratchAlot** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 5:43 pm

GemZombie wrote:
If you're going to call yourself a Lindy Hopper... you better be able to dance to Lindy Hop tempos.

well, I'd be more specific Lindy Hop tempo tends to be historically more uptempo, today we dance slower so to be more inclusive I would take your quote and change it to:

" if your going to call yourself a Lindy Hopper, I think you should be accepting of faster tempo's"

Lindy Hoppers tackle any tempo with a smile regardless of their ability....

SirScratchAlot · #50 Post by **SirScratchAlot** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 6:05 pm

Lawrence wrote: Up-tempo speed has never been a measure of whether something is a Lindy Hop tempo or not, and it is flat mistaken to dogmatically (or flippantly) declare or imply that "Lindy Hop tempos" are all fast, or over 160 BPM.

Not if your doing a lecture on the history of the Lindy Hop....

Lawrence wrote: Moreover, SO WHAT if he "specializes" or prefers slower tempos? Does everybody need to be hyperactive?

There is absolutuely nothing wrong with that and I don't beleive anyone is saying there is. the controversy is if it is Lindy Hop. Lindy Hop is an active dance , it was originated by teenagers, sure all ages can enjoy it...but it is what it is...

Lawrence wrote: "Us groovers" all simply state that we prefer to dance slower. Why is that so evil or difficult to accept?

again, there is nothing wrong with that, espeically is the venue is known as such. whats evil is when you go to a Lindy Hop event and it is hosted and ran by groove dancers, so you don;t get to Lindy Hop. And it's hard to accept the Lindy Hop events have become influenced by this slow and groovy trend.

This Groove trend has infiltrated the Lindy Hop scene and have changed it. Many dancers do not like that, thus a various post against it.

If the Groovers and Lindy Hoppers had their own clubs then we probably wouldn;t be seeing any of this controversy.

It's 2 worlds growing further and further apart every year , that still use the same floor....no body will ever be happy, one side or the other will always voice their opinion.

GemZombie · #51 Post by **GemZombie** » Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:45 pm

Ok, I admit it... I baited a bit by overstating my opinion.

But I do believe that a Lindy Hopper should be able to dance to a wider range of tempos. Lindy Hop developed with a range of tempos, not just slow.

Lawrence · #52 Post by **Lawrence** » Thu Jun 12, 2003 12:47 pm

Good. I was wondering how to interpret that smiley at the end of your post.

Seems like we agree, then, even though we might place the emphasis on different ends of the spectrum. Which is how it should be.

Lawrence · #53 Post by **Lawrence** » Thu Jun 12, 2003 12:54 pm

SirScratchAlot wrote:Whats evil is when you go to a Lindy Hop event and it is hosted and ran by groove dancers, so you don;t get to Lindy Hop.

You mean, "I don't get to kick it like I want to kick it." You CAN Lindy Hop.

SirScratchAlot wrote:And it's hard to accept the Lindy Hop events have become influenced by this slow and groovy trend.
This Groove trend has infiltrated the Lindy Hop scene and have changed it. Many dancers do not like that, thus a various post against it.
If the Groovers and Lindy Hoppers had their own clubs then we probably wouldn;t be seeing any of this controversy.
It's 2 worlds growing further and further apart every year , that still use the same floor....no body will ever be happy, one side or the other will always voice their opinion.

I have noted the same thing about "Swingers" (Neo Swing, Martini-drinking, zoot-suited clad posers who want to listen to Jump Jive and Wail and Dean Martin Lounge music) vs. "Lindy Hoppers" (people more interested in dancing than "the scene"), so I agree somewhat. It is good for each to have their own venues, if there is enough interest to support it.

But I also don't want a complete divorce because even I see value in mingling and sharing. (In contrast, I don't see the same sort of value in mingling with "Swingers" except keeping in touch with friends who happen to be Swingers.) Plus, it is not impossible to cross-over; it just takes a bit of open-mindedness and practice.

KevinSchaper · #54 Post by **KevinSchaper** » Thu Jun 12, 2003 3:33 pm

Lawrence wrote:
But I also don't want a complete divorce because even I see value in mingling and sharing. (In contrast, I don't see the same sort of value in mingling with "Swingers" except keeping in touch with friends who happen to be Swingers.) Plus, it is not impossible to cross-over; it just takes a bit of open-mindedness and practice.

Portland's regular sunday venue has it's bar downstairs, and soon (if not already?) it's the regular DJ'd rockabilly night is moving from somewhere else down to there - so they'll be down there drinkin while the swing dancing is on upstairs - I'm really curious if we'll end up getting a little crossover from them, or if they'll just end up starin in at us and laughing..

mark0tz · #55 Post by **mark0tz** » Mon Jun 16, 2003 9:22 pm

"Dexter and I used to do a Lester Young-Herschel Evans two-tenor number called PORK CHOPS," said Illinois. "It went over big with the audiences. I remember, one night at the Savoy Ballroom, Dexter and I were out front playing it. People at the foot of the stage were blowing pot smoke up at us. By the thirtieth chorus, we had no idea what the changes were. (laughs) I wanted Hamp to record it, but we never did. He regretted not doing it and used to bring that up to me for years."

Just read the above from the liner notes of my new Illinois Jacquet box set. ahahaha Some insight into what we're missing.

falty411 · #56 Post by **falty411** » Tue Jun 17, 2003 1:41 pm

maybe the rest of you are missing it.....im definitly not