The exact wording we used was, "...the man cannot easily lead the lady to do such an action", which I admit leaves some room for interpretation.

I don't mean to say that a Promenade Develope' absolutely cannot be lead on some level, but it would be very difficult to do without restructuring the technique in some way. Our aim with our syllabus is to reflect as much as possible what people actually do, and so our interpretation and subsequent description is a reflection of the prevailing theory amongst those who dance this figure -- mainly social and casual hobby dancers -- for whom it is generally considered an interpretation by the lady.

According to this theory, the lady can choose to lift the leg (or not) much in the same way she has control of the artistic interpretation of many aspects of her dancing -- arm styling, for example. It doesn't change her shape, or her weighted foot, or anything else that might be considered a "hijack" (which, incidentally, is another technique considered acceptable in certain social dance circles). However, she does need to be aware of how it affects her balance, which is another good reason not to attempt to lift the leg too high when social dancing.

So if you accept the idea that the follower has room for interpretation when it comes to her legs and feet so long as it doesn't interrupt the leader's intentions, then it doesn't actually matter whether or not it is leadable... The fact is, it's doable.

That being said, it would still be interesting to explore the topic of leadability with respect to the develope'. I will tread lightly here, because I've witnessed many heated debates over the years regarding what makes something "truly leadable", and it can wind up being pretty philosophical. But here is a point or two to consider:

People have different standards of leadability. The strictest interpretation is that only the actions that can be directly caused by the leader without any cognitive interpretation by the lady, such as weight changes, can qualify. The most liberal interpretation would be one that includes anything you can make your partner do by any means, such as standing 3 feet away and saying "turn to your right!" Most people's opinions fall somewhere in between these two extremes.

Since a develope' is not a directly-caused action, it requires at least some degree of cognitive interpretation, based on principles agreed upon ahead of time, typically some combination of shaping and elevation. This puts it on the "liberal" end of things, since there's nothing inherent in the man's movement that suggests she do anything other than shape and elevate equally.

If your interpretation of acceptable lead-and-follow includes that, then you would be one who would describe a develope' as leadable. But even if that's so, the syllabus version of the Promenade Develope' will still be more difficult to lead than other develops, specifically because when taken exactly as written, there is little you can do with your shape or elevation that would indicate to the lady that she should lift her leg. An advanced dancer would be more likely to modify the interpretation to allow for more shape and therefore leadability, as in the version I described in a previous post.

Regards,
Jonathan

dheun's original statement didn't include the "easily" though I guess your version did.

I would propose activity of the center in relation to the standing leg as the leading mechanism.

Criterea for leadability of a figure which requires some "skill" would probably be something along the lines of - can a skilled leader get a skilled follower familiar with the possibility but not aware that it is at the moment the subject of an "experiment" to do a hesitation with or without the develope, soley by the details of his body usage?

And no, the "pregnant pause" until she guesses something is missing doesn't count.

Not particularly in disagreement with anything Anymouse has said. I just had some additional thoughts on the subject...

You can do just about anything you like to shape yourself and the lady, the question is really what can be done to actually cause her to lift her leg.

A skilled follower will have the experience to know what types of body actions are commonly used as signals of the man's intentions (e.g. lift, shape, activity of the center in relation to the standing leg, etc), but the bottom line is, they're still signals. There's nothing about the lead that physically causes the lady's leg to lift; She must feel the shape, interpret it as a signal to lift her leg, and respond accordingly.

I'm not being critical of signal/response leads, I'm just pointing out that this is one of them. And as with any signal/response, we can decide just about any criteria we like to determine what the signal and response will be, (e.g. 3 taps on the back means I want you to flick your left foot). To that end, I could propose that the Promenade Develope' be lead very easily by deciding that the appropriate signal is for the man to apply slight pressure with his left pinky. That way, any couple who have been taught this signal and response could lead and follow with accuracy.

What separates the signals we designate as the skills of learned dancers from the signals one might think of as a trick or a cop-out, such as the silly examples I proposed above?

I have a few criteria of my own, but I'm going to withhold them in a shameless attempt to stir up more activity on the message board. :)

J

"I'm not being critical of signal/response leads, I'm just pointing out that this is one of them."

I would disagree - it's not purely a signal.

"What separates the signals we designate as the skills of learned dancers from the signals one might think of as a trick or a cop-out, such as the silly examples I proposed above?"

If the component we consider the lead is a joint participation in the physical creation of the action, then it's more than a signal. There may need to be additional actions done by the lady alone - her knowledge is more of the followthrough than possession of a secret decoder ring.

So for this develope, you don't describe it as a body action, and it's not one of the tilt the torso back to raise the leg variety, but there's still some small but critical action in the core as it begins. And that action can be done together.

Maybe you will still call it a signal - but it's a signal that's physically involved in the early stages of the action, rather than one that is arbitrary.

We might also question the wisdom of using figures that appear to come from nowhere not just in their visual impression, but in their explanation. A lot of dancing is illusion, but if the people trying to do the dancing are among the illused... it's not going to be easy to do. One of the problems with a lot of social dance material or the way it is often done is that it's not all that evident how basic principles can be applied to create it, so it ends up being learned as something arbitrary rather than something with its own flow of each action implying the next.