Nathan told me last night that a HUGE controversy erupted from my post. I don't see the controversy or know what ball is in my court. I completely agree that friendliness and good people are the most essential aspects to growing the scene. I've said so repeatedly, and emphasize it to my instructors. Indeed, many have noted that factor in sticking with our classes at Austin Lindy Hop: our instructors are not snooty, make people feel welcome, and dance with all students, not just their friends.gatorgal wrote:Lawrence... the ball is firmly in your court. I'll stop trying to speak for you and eagerly await your response to all this tom-foolery.
But we were talking about the music. Someone suggested playing faster, up-tempo music to recapture/replace the energy and excietment of Neo Swing. I pointed out a more essential aspect of Neo Swing that made it popular and drew most of us (or the people who inspired/taught most of us) to dance: accessibility to popular musical tastes. (Neo Swing is crap compared to "real jazz," but was more similar to rock music, and thus more accessible to pop rock fans).
I also merely noted that groove swing is not as much of a stretch in musical tastes as, say, Chick Webb (whose music I love because it makes me smile), from what normal, average people listen to on their own. Tina was right that it can serve as a bridge toward developing an interest in jazz, but the ultimate point was to play music that is *accessible* to current musical tastes.
To cover the obvious retort, no, I don't mean to suggest playing Celine Dion in lieu of Ella Fitzgerald.