Hello, guest.

Log In or
Return to Forum   View Topic « Prev    Next »
Re: English 101 for dancers
Posted by SocialDancer
9/15/2008  5:04:00 PM
"Can body turn (CBM) result in CBMP on that same step?"

Let's take as an example a step forward on the RF. A strong body turn to the right, accompanied by a natural turning of the trailing left foot, can result in a position where the RF is on or across the new line of the LF. If we had to name that overall position it would be reasonable to name it CBMP, and we would probably think of it as a 'body' position.

"Or does that conflict with the part of the definition of CBMP ("but without turning the body") that some were considering so critical?"

No, I don't think it conflicts with the definition of CBMP as a 'foot' position, where we are talking about achieving the same overall position by placing the foot relative to a body which has already turned.

In the first case we are turning _into a_ CBMP, and in the second we are stepping _in_ CBMP.

"If you believe this is possible, then what is the meaning of "but without turning the body" in the definition?"
"The text in question: ""The placing of the stepping foot, forward or back, onto or across the line of the other foot, giving the appearance of CBM having been used, but without turning the body.""

Unfortunately, the original author was not a very good writer, especially with regard to punctuation. The last comma is unnecessary and actually distorts the clarity of the phrase.!

Therefore, the last part of the text should read: ""giving the appearance of CBM having been used but without turning the body.""

Clearly - at least to myself - the author is trying to say that a dancer in CBMP appears to have just executed CBM except that the body is not turned."

I believe the phrase is almost redundant, with or without the comma (which I also believe is correct).
How would CBM appear without turning the body?

If the comma is correct, we can remove the phrase between the commas and get: "The placing of the stepping foot, forward or back, onto or across the line of the other foot but without turning the body."
We probably do not need the part about not turning the body - if it is not mentioned, don't do it.

However it may actually help clarify the definition, and definitions are notoriously difficult to make accurate, concise and unambiguous.

The simple definition without reference to turn or CBM is not sufficient.
In the absence of any pre-conceptions, a person asked to stand with their feet slightly apart, then to place their RF in front and in line with their LF will most likely turn the body slightly to the left. They will have met the requirements of the simple definition but are not, and have not stepped, in CBMP. Adding the comment about not turning the body will result in a just recognisable CBMP. Adding "giving the appearance of CBM having been used" makes it unmissable.

As far as the original poster is concerned, it is probably simplest to forget about CBMP until your teacher explains and demonstrates it. Just keep your body facing your partner.
Copyright © 1997-2014 BallroomDancers.com