I think what is getting lost here is at the end of step one on a Natural Turn in the Waltz is that the LF comes under the body as the Right Knee is bending at the end of the step. This is sometimes called a Neutral Position. Others call it a Balance Point. Whatever it is called the LF will be under the hip line with the heel off the floor, toe in contact, and the Right knee will be flexed ready to produce Swing and Sway.

The standard pattern of rise in most waltz figures is to start to rise at the end of step one, continue to rise on 2 & 3 and lower at the end of 3. When moving backwards, there is no foot rise on step 1, but foot rise is only one element of rise & fall, and the correct use of the leg muscles, knees and a feeling of stretching upwards in the body are all just as important than foot rise.

Out of all the swing dances, Waltz is characterised by gradual rise over three steps (but there are exceptions).

Hi to All,
I queried the Howard technique to Guy regarding the Rise & Fall, about not stating that the the written technique did not include, 'Down on One', then start to Rise E/O 1. He replied that it's like this Old Boy, all professionals know that, so it saves characters, which saves paper. The swing down is carried through one, and not commenced at the E/O of one.

THe really confusing thing is that the technique books define the end of step 1 in waltz Natural turn as the moment when the feet are closed (man's moving left foot alongside right) and yet most dancers (i've never actually seen anything else) make their foot placements for natural turn on the beats of the music. So the left foot is alonside the right foot on approximately beat 1&.So the rise starts at this point as it is defined as "end of 1" not at the end of beat 1 which is just before the left foot lands on beat 2.
Please tell me i've got it wrong if i have.

The advice to dance change steps 1-2-3 and then stay on toes for a whole bar before lowering is really good. this'll "force" a dancer not to lower too quickly. Good for balance too.

"THe really confusing thing is that the technique books define the end of step 1 in waltz Natural turn as the moment when the feet are closed (man's moving left foot alongside right) and yet most dancers (i've never actually seen anything else) make their foot placements for natural turn on the beats of the music. So the left foot is alonside the right foot on approximately beat 1&.So the rise starts at this point as it is defined as "end of 1" not at the end of beat 1 which is just before the left foot lands on beat 2."

Yes Phil, the numbers in the book are step numbers, not beats. Many people forget this when reading the simpler waltz steps since there are three of each, but as you've observed, they do not line up but are instead offset from each other, with the beat falling somewhere around the middle of the step.

I would caution though against the idea that the end of step one is just before the foot lands on beat two. Once a dancer is able to fully use their standing leg, there's a lot of important body movement away from the standing foot which happens between the time when the feet pass and the later time when the moving leg find its position and accepts weight. For a newer dancer, the body may stop over the position of the first step while the free leg shoots through to the second on its own, but for a stronger dancer the body keeps moving and the progress of the body regulates the movement of the free leg with the result that the overall action evolves in a smooth and lyrical way.

"I queried the Howard technique to Guy regarding the Rise & Fall, about not stating that the the written technique did not include, 'Down on One', then start to Rise E/O 1. He replied that it's like this Old Boy, all professionals know that, so it saves characters, which saves paper. The swing down is carried through one, and not commenced at the E/O of one."

The swing down really comes from the last step of whatever precedes - either a full figure, a prep step, or (most challengingly but informatively) a start from a simple standing position. Simple geometry tells us that the body will be lowest when the legs are divided on the way to the first step.

Unless counteracted by extreme absorbtion in the knees (as one modern school now does) there will be a slight, unwritten body rise back up from this lowest position as the body approaches the receiving foot. As (or in the view of many leading experts, just before) the feet pass the actual official rise commences - specifically foot rise for the forward partner. The overall effect is a very smooth path - a descent from the previous figure that gradually levels out and then becomes a rise that begins as a gentle floating up on the way into the foot and continues more steeply out of it.

It's important to realize that in the era when the books were written, the amount of travel achieved was, by modern standard, downright tiny. A lot of things such the as the implicit body rise and fall that happens if we divide or reclose the legs without compensating becomes obvious when you scale up to modern standards, but were just not very visible or apparent at the smaller scale, and so aren't included in the written technique - see for example how the apparent plateau of rise in the written description of a feather contrasts with what naturally and appropriately happens when the figure is danced in a flowing way.

But perhaps because of the small movements envisioned, the technique does reflect the mechanics of sending the body forward with the moving foot - something dancing ideally shares with normal walking. When we scale up to modern competitive proportion we have two choices - we can project the body weight with the moving foot, in which case the old descriptions of technique are accurate in what they address but substantially short of the full story, or we can let the body hang back and place the moving foot on its own, in which case we need an entirely new technique book.

"A lot of things such the as the implicit body rise and fall that happens if we divide or reclose the legs without compensating becomes obvious when you scale up to modern standards, but were just not very visible or apparent at the smaller scale, and so aren't included in the written technique"

As they are implicit and we have no control over them then there is no point mentioning them in the technique, but they were discussed at quite some length by Henry Jacques in his 571 page tome, "Modern Ballroom Dancing" which shows rise and fall in graphical form. Not sure of the publishing date, somewhere between 1937 & 1944.

"they are implicit and we have no control over them then there is no point mentioning them in he technique, but they were discussed at quite ome length by Henry Jacques in his 571 page ome, "Modern Ballroom Dancing" which shows rise and fall in graphical form."

I continue to be impressed by how many ultimate truths were recognized by one author or another of that era.

But I would disagree that we have no control over the implicit rises, as we can and must compensate them where they are counterproductive. Consider how terribly bouncy viennese reverse turns are if much of the height gained from closing/crossing the legs is not absorbed.

You land too quick? So you hear the tempo differently than your dance partner? Right? If that is the case you are the leader, and you lead the dance the way you hear it. The follower should be following her lead, enjoying the music, but NOT dictating to her leader what he should hear.

I teach social dancing to beginners in Orlando. This may be my philosophy, and not others but it works well for me and my students.

Jo

Count the music as 1&2&3& ,make sure you are moving the body at one continuous speed through al the halve & whole beats. The beginning of the beat is a foot position the end(&) of the beat is a body position (weight of body over standing foot).