No, of course not. Why are you trying to put words into my mouth?

If a whisk is danced commencing DW after a Reverse Turn (probably the most common precede), man makes no turn, either with his feet, or body, if his following alignment (for, say, a chasse from PP) is going to be along LOD, facing DW.

But he could perfectly correctly choose to turn the whisk from the same precede and end facing DC, as previously stated. He wouldn't then follow with a chasse, but perhaps a weave.

What part of the standard technique do you not understand?

Astaire. There is no turn by the man on a Whisk. It's the lady that opens not the man. What you see is an illusion. Go to Learn The Dances and look read and record. P0lished : The illusion to look for is the Lady opening out on the whisk, she does NOT open out. You will see that Mellisa when turning her head to the right does an excellent job of keeping her right side to Johnathen.

Astaire. You might have to look at the Whisk and Chasse Combo to get a clear picture. Go to Progressive Chasse then Combo. See that the ladies right bust is just clear of the man's, and then it returns. There is one more thing that is being taught today. That is the lady on step two of the Whisk shapes the foot so that it is pointing in the new direction. The man does this on step two of a Reverse Fallaway also. There are other places as well. According to the book pages 149 and 150 for the man on the Whisk there is no turn. For the lady there is a 1/4 of a turn over the feet. The body turns slightly less. This is what you should be seeing. Its very good that you have selected this which is one of the most abused steps done Socialy. Pay paricular attention to the compession after the Whisk and before the Chasse. Se if you can copy. If you do you will be a sensation on the dance floor. Cheers

Being taught today? That's just the standard technique (alignment of lady pointing DC on 2), and it's nothing new. Even Moore says so.

"For the lady there is a 1/4 of a turn over the feet."

This should say "of" the feet, not "over" them, because the 1/4 is defined as the turn of the feet.

"The body turns slightly less."

Exactly, but that means that:

"for the man on the Whisk there is no turn."

Is not really the whole story. It's true that the man's FEET have no turn in the book version, but just the lady has body turns less, than man will have to have a corresponding body turns more.

If the man doesn't turn his upper body as much as the lady turns hers, the partnership will open into a V. Such an opening out is very sloppy and unpleasant looking, unless the hold is reconfigured from a closed hold to a clearly separated position as might be seen in the styles which allow breaking the hold.

Because the book talks mostly about foot alignments, it has very little to say about this issue; but you only have to watch dancers who try to ignore it to see how critical an issue it really is!

Anonymous. You still don't understand that the man with his alignment when he crosses behind will be in a Promenade position. He doesn't turn because he is already there. Why would he turn if he is already in the correct position.. Do it and see for yourself. Tell me where is your left side and shoulder pointing as you arrive on step two. It should be diagnal to the centre with the LOD . Now simply cross behind.Well what do you know, your side is still diagnal to the centre and you are in Promenade. From there after step one of the Chasse you will close it up.

Polished,
Write the definition of 'Alignment'. Nothing else, please.

lluv2Dance.Here it is full stops and all.
Whisk. The Man.
L.F. forward diag.to wall
R.F. to the side and slightly forward turning lady to P. P.
Cross L.F. behind and a few inches to the right of right foot, now in Promenade facing diag. to wall.

Contary Body.Movement. Slight C.B.M. on 1.
Rise and Fall. Commence to rise at the end of one; continue to rise on 2; up on 3. Lower at the end of 3.
Body Sway. Sway to the Left on 2, 3.
Amount of Turn. There is no turn for the man.
Footwork. 1. H. T. 2. T. 3. T. H.

This I can assure you is exactly how
Andrew Sinkinson demonstrated the Whisk in the Waltz . We about 40 of us had to follow his alignment.
The simplest way to understand is we or on a square tile
The corner our left foot is on, on the first step is to our left. Call that corner A.
The right hand corner we do not use at all. That is B.
The bottom corner is C. Thats where the RF goes and the LF crosses behind.
We are now facing corner D. Which we step along for the Chasse.
There is no turn for the man because he is already where he is supposed to be without any turn feet or otherewise.

So you asked for alignment Nothing else please.
1. Facing Diag to wall.
2. Still facing diag to wall
3. Cross behind still facing diag to
wall.
4. Step down LOD in Promenade
still facing diag to wall
5. Close feet still facing diag to wall
If you look at the chart there has been no alteration to the line of the feet from the beginning of step 1. to the end of step 6. And being that there is no turn for the man at all. What is your diagnoses.
The lady has a different story.
Is that what you wanted. Its a bit different to what is usually wrongly taught in a Social Class isn't it.

"So you asked for alignment Nothing else please.
1. Facing Diag to wall.
2. Still facing diag to wall
3. Cross behind still facing diag to
wall.
4. Step down LOD in Promenade"

As usually, you decide to answer a different question than what was asked.

You were asked to DEFINE the term alignment, not give the alignments of a figure, but DEFINE what the term means.

Do you even know what it does and does not mean? The amount of irrelevant mumbo-jumbo in your comments would suggest that you either do not know what BODY PART the definition of alignment is restricted to, or have carelessly neglected to take that restriction into account when stating your arguments!

Anonymous. That irrelevant mumbo jumbo came straight from the book. Anybody who doesn't know what is meant by alignment hasn't been taught correctly. All of the figures ever taught have a correct alignment. LOD with or against. Diag to wall also with or against. Facing centre or backing wall.For thoughs who are not sure, and it can be confusing is that if the man is facing diag to wall. The lady is backing. It could be said that at the same time she is facing diag. to centre against the LOD which she is. But we ignore that and take the man's alignment. I always think of alignment as a verb and not a noun.What do you think.
I don't understand your last paragraph which is saying " either do not know what BODY PART" .It is shown in the mumbo jumbo book that both the body and the feet are on the same alignment in the Whisk. Is that correct or not.