Hi Terence
I agree that's it's not a great idea to use strict engineering concepts for dancing. I really didn't want to use the term 'torque' at all to be honest.
The original discussion centred around a straightforward question - do the shoulders always stay parallel to the hips ('aligned with the hips') in movements such as natural turns, feather steps etc.
I was arguing that they don't - they are often rotated more than the hips. When i look at top dancers i see this extra rotation.

Scriv. even used the word torque in his explanations .

But-- but his cautionary bye words, " less is more " should always be upper most ..

there are inherent dangers when advising someone to use " shldrs " that is why the word was removed from descriptions in the Rev. techn. and they substituted L/ R side .

Lastly, I am not over keen to give descriptions of such a complex nature, in written formats.
Some things just need to be seen .

"Lastly, I am not over keen to give descriptions of such a complex nature, in written formats.
Some things just need to be seen ."

Or felt.

The problem I have with Serendipity's posts on this subject is the absoluteness of his prohibition on incorporating certain elements. It's not that beginners should be trying to incorporate them, or even necessarily be told about them, it's that someone with relatively little experience should not be declaring absolutely that something has no role in dancing, when - if they had a bit more experience - they'd know that in the end it does have a small but important role.

So for example, if someone hypothetically said:

"Rotation generally encompasses both hips and shoulders"

I would applaud

But if they said:

"The hips and shoulders must always be at the same angle so that there is no twist in the spine"

I would point out that they are in fact wrong.

Something that's quite notable in Moore's page on CBM is the lack of absolutes. He makes a variety of points, which if treated as absolutes would conflict with each other (don't turn shoulders without hips, vs. feel some turns starting in hips and others in shoulders), but when weighed together as a collection give a general guidance.

Twist is equall to a dirty word. On this site it seems to be using its popularity.
There is a lot more to this subject than meets the eye. In the same vein a question. Why do we on a Curving Feather do two straight steps and then turn. You can include with this the ladies steps on a Wing. Why don't we start turning on the first step.One word beginning with T is the answer.

"There is a lot more to this subject than meets the eye. In the same vein a question. Why do we on a Curving Feather do two straight steps and then turn. You can include with this the ladies steps on a Wing. Why don't we start turning on the first step.One word beginning with T is the answer."

You are confusing two very different concepts.

The presence or absence of rotational twist in the body is a very different thing from the decision to use traditional CBM vs. the decision to move in a curved track.

In traditional CBM, you take two steps in the same direction while turning the body. In the so-called curved CBM, the path of travel curves during those steps .

Jonathan and Melissa are a good example of the curved-CBM school of thought. I personally find it to be an inferior approach for most applications, though there are a few places where it is preferable.

But the important thing in the context of this thread is that they manage to use their curved CBM method in places where a traditionalist would use two straight steps, WITHOUT significantly changing their body configuration as a result of the curve - in other words, the two concepts really are fairly separate.

(If anything, curving your CBM will mean the direction of movement changes with the body orientation so that the body is closer to constantly facing squarely into the instantaneous direction of travel than it would be in the case of traditional CBM, which would mean that the configuration of the body can be simpler than would be necessary for close cooperation with a partner when using traditional CBM)

Anonymous.Doesn't your paragraph four confirm most of what I have been saying all along. This is about the Curving Feather.
" In traditional CBM, you take two steps in the same direction". ( which is called Tracking ) " while turning the body ". ( Which would have been better called side of body ), " in the so called curved CBM " which of course becomes CBMP ". Do you beleive the feet guide the body or the body guides the feet ?. If it were the body you would go into a silly circle and the feet would not be tracking.
And your paragraph six seems to indicate you believe there are two ways of doing a Curved Feather. When in reality there is only one way if it is to be done correctly.

" in the so called curved CBM " which of course becomes CBMP ".

You are mistaken, curved CBM as utilized by dancers such as Jonathan & Melissa has nothing to do with CBMP. It doesn't even look remotely like it, because in curved CBM the body remains fairly square to the curving direction of travel meaning that the legs always seem forward-backward with respect to the body, instead of ending up across it in a way that could be mistaken for CBMP.

"you would go into a silly circle and the feet would not be tracking."

In curved CBM, the foot tracking such as it is, is that the feet track along a curved path rather than a straight one. I don't believe curved CBM is appropriate for general application, but there are places where you need to be able to generate a sense of foot tracking along a curved rather than a straight path. Some examples would be the man's right foot in a slip pivot, and also in a curved three step where you must brush your feet on a curved rather than straight path.

Anonymous. If I mistakenly try to produce a very tight turn on a Curving Feather Step will my second step become something that resembles a side step instead of a foot that is tracking the other one.
Which reminds me of something I read once That I am not even a bus, but I am a tram that travells on predestined tracks once that first step is taken.

"Anonymous. If I mistakenly try to produce a very tight turn on a Curving Feather Step will my second step become something that resembles a side step instead of a foot that is tracking the other one."

If you let that happen, yes. But you can also learn to create a sense of tracking along a curved, rather than straight path. This works best when rise is incoporated to aid in the curving of the path.

"Which reminds me of something I read once That I am not even a bus, but I am a tram that travells on predestined tracks once that first step is taken."

Yes and no. You have inertia to continue in that direction, and so most figures will see you go that way. However you can also add a push in a new direction. So for example in a quarter turn, you push sideways from the first step, with the result that an original movement DW becomes a movement along the LOD - you change the direction of travel by 45 degrees.

Similarly, you can do this as a curved movement. But you must create a sense of connection between the steps. Straight lines are the most logical form of connection, but not the only option on the table.

Anonymous. Your 4th paragraph is the very thing that needs to be understood.When you say You push sideways from the first step.
You are speaking from the man's perspective only.
For the lady there is that little description which says NFR on step one.
The push will come later than the man's.In laymans terms Let him pass first. Do not try to arrive at exactly the same time.
Follow , do not lead.
A word from the wise. The Mother of Perfection is Repartition.
The Curving Feather. The first two steps are about as straight as is possible. Question. According to the latest book is there Sway on any of the three steps.I don't have the latest manuel