A Ronde' would not end in that position nor would it hold it.

Of course, I'm assuming that hesitation's description is accurate.

jj

"A Ronde' would not end in that position nor would it hold it."

It's not a held position. The ronde is less than half done - when it's is finished, the outside legs will be back in fallaway.

The picture doesn't really have the kind of inward essence of partnering to balance the outward presentation that is normally expected of skilled dancers - so it's either in motion during an atypical action like a double ronde to fallaway where everyone compromises a little, or its simply less skilled folks mugging for a camera and not exactly doing any of the line figures, but simply something that they think looks presented.

No ronde' is held in this position for a few seconds and there would be be no movement in the upper body.

You are pathological. Grow the hell up.

jj

That was my immediate impression at a glance. If I had to wager, I'd be pretty confident with all of my money on static pose in the photography studio.

Still, there is another possibility that has not yet been mentioned: In a couple of the old school American syllabi, there was a Viennese figure (I think Arthur Murray called it "Turns & Curtsy") that alternated between this and the Throwaway position. It was a four-measure pattern, as follows:

m.1) Man steps fwd RF between lady's feet in a manner similar to leading a Rudolf Ronde. The lady begins a Ronde action, but quickly curls the leg into a back attitude position.

m.2) Lady lowers her R toe to the floor and straightens leg to a fully extended point, while man sweeps his LF forward in a quarter-ronde. The resulting position is the one seen in the photo. The position is recovered to closed in the second half of the measure.

m.3&4) Man steps forward on LF and leads the same action on the opposite side. The resulting position is similar to a Throwaway Oversway, albeit a poorly executed one.

I may have the order mixed up, but you get the idea. Would I ever recommend it to anyone? Nah, but that doesn't change the fact that it was popular for years in American style studios, and you can still see it occasionally today if you look hard enough. And I do think it is the most likely source of inspiration for this photo, since it's the figure with the posiest/most static usage of the line.

Regards,
Jonathan

I remember it well. L and R turns with Curtsy finish is the correct name ( in Gold Syl. )

I think that Bob Mitchell still teaches that step.

jj

He was F/A trained not A/M.. they do have a similar version .. different name .

Pretty much all teachers used it in Amer.style VW at advanced levels.

Bob was trained originally at FA but worked in both chains at one time or another.

jj

Funny.. Ive known ( and worked with Bob in the past ) for well over 30 yrs.

He never ever mentioned that, and he knew on one occasion, I had come over to a F/A school from an A/M one .

Even so, at that stage in his A/M career, he possibly may not have been familiar with the Gold syl.

I specifically asked him not long ago what his background was.

jj