We are dancing a Curved Feather from PP followed by an Open Impetus Turn in International Foxtrot, and I have a question about the lady's footwork.

The given footwork for lady in the Feather is HT, T, TH, and her first step in the Open Impetus Turn is HT. If the second step of the Curved Feather (a side step) is T (Up), how should lady articulate the foot so that she can come forward, two steps later, with HT (Down)?

Thanks.

The same way you would on the third step of a Whisk followed by a Chasse from PP.

On step 3 of the Curved Feather, you step back on your LF, toe-heel, small step. The right toe remains in front, however, it won't be an extended point because the step shouldn't be big enough to cause such a position.

As the RF moves forward into the first step of the Impetus, the heel will lower, and then the toe will raise shortly thereafter. As with all steps, constant foot contact with the floor is desirable, so make sure you lower the heel before lifting the toe. The intermediate position should be one where the whole foot is in contact (as opposed to the alternative, which is none of the foot).

Regards,
Jonathan

Jonathon,, we have a complete disagreement here ( Foot in CONSTANT contact etc ) .

Scriveners theory on HOW the feet move from point A to point B, emphasises the fact that that foot, at some point, actually LEAVES the floor, going across the top ( you can even see this in some of Hiltons actions in the " swing " dances ).. "skimming" is a word that was often used.

He believed that, an appearance of heaviness in the legs, is created by the insistance of continual floor contact, at the expense of " flite ", was a primary e.g. of the technique, that is often quoted .

I would hasten to add, that if this theory is used in the "hands " of a novice, it may get an undesirable result .

Thank you for the replies, although I am not quite sure what to make of your disagreement.

Is it right that the foot moves forward again, having not lowered, rather as a forward walk coming under the body would, on ball of foot first, then curving to a flat foot skimming the floor, with the foot continuing to move in an arc forwards (and upwards), until the heel is placed for the following step?

"Is it right that the foot moves forward again, having not lowered"

Yes. The right heel would not contact the floor during the curved feather itself, but only during the course of movement towards its placement as a heel lead in the following figure.

There are two things to watch out for here.

One is to not "settle back" on the left foot when lowering at the end of the curved feather. The lower body, meaning the thighs and not just the hips, should say forward, maintaining a feeling of "up" under the partner even as the foot lowers. The left heel should not lower too quickly; in some interpretations it might only lower just when departing the step (a common refinement in the whisk as well).

The second is to be sure and project the body weight into the following movement, and not sit back on the hip while reaching the moving leg out in front. This is an issue to watch out for in any forward step, especially outside partner ones, and even more care is needed when there's been a degree of pause in the travel such as this case or 3-4 of the natural or spin turn, than in the more typical foxtrot case of continued movement. The proper size of the body movement is determined by the amount of movement of the partners body - that is what should be matched, with the foot simply following along under the body. If instead the foot is placed first, then the body will have to either match the foot with disregard for positioning relative to the partner's body (resulting in a bad outside partner position), or the body will not match the foot, resulting in an off-balance dancer who begins the next step at a disadvantage.

Terrence:

I wasn't actually speaking to the amount of pressure, which I agree on average is very light (although I would add that it will be naturally variable depending on the nature of the movement). Anything that would serve to diminish your body speed at the bottom of the swing is inefficient and would therefore contribute to a labored movement.

Still, "skimming" is contact, and the opposite of continuous floor contact is a picking up and placing of the feet, undesirable in the swinging dances. If you release your toe prior to lowering your heel, you will have momentarily lost contact, in effect picking up and placing the foot.

Guest wrote:
Correct. The right heel has not lowered -- the footwork of "toe" on the previous step tells you that. The following "scooping" action of the foot is what allows you to maintain continuous -- albeit light -- contact with the floor.

I should also mention that since it isn't natural to flatten the foot when it is in advance of the body, an unusual feature of this action following a Whisk or Curved Feather is the movement of the body *before* the foot. That is to say, for a very brief moment, when the body first starts to move, the toe stays fixed in its position, for just enough time to allow the body to arrive in a natural position over the foot. It's a very subtle detail, but one that makes all the difference between a skimming heel lead that's natural, and one that's forced.

Regards,
Jonathan

I had to dig out my "book " to get his exact wording.. which is..


Quote "There still appears to exist serious misunderstanding as to the correct foot action. The old cliche"keep feet in contact with the floor", dies hard. Why this idea EVER came into being, I cannot conceive, for in fact, the opposite is true. Any effort to maintain contact between foot and floor thruout your dancing must result in heaviness of action.

He goes on at length about the Ladies foot action in backwards motion, again, making reference to the foot "leaving the floor" after a specific action is taken .

The consumate prof. will create the illusion that, there is contact but.. there is a momentary lapse thru the "swing " when the floor is cleared, which the imperceptable eye may miss.

As i said.. check out some of Hiltons vids, and it is quite clear that he is using that technique in certain instances .

"The old cliche"keep feet in contact with the floor", dies hard. Why this idea EVER came into being, I cannot conceive, for in fact, the opposite is true. Any effort to maintain contact between foot and floor thruout your dancing must result in heaviness of action."

I suspect this to be a case where necessary advice to correct a fault of many new dancers (substantially picking up the feet) can become counterproductive in those able to invest time in learning more nuanced detail.

It's interesting that a common argument against letting the feet leave the floor is that it will disturb balance. A quite valid counterargument would be that if this is true, then the dancer does not yet have the skill and strength to move cleanly in and out of balance in time with the music. While actually lifting the feet any distance is inefficient and out of character for dances other than tango, trying to generate elegant body movement with the moving foot well off the floor can be an interesting exercise which focuses attention on the movement of the body relative to the standing foot.

Another argument is the sometimes recommended technique of using drag-pressure in the moving foot to control the speed of actions. Personally, I find this far, far inferior to timing the action properly in the first place and controlling it from the strength of the sending (and later receiving) foot and ankle. But an untrained body can probably initially assert control more readily via friction of the moving foot. If training a student to perform in a few weeks time (a TV show comes to mind) this might make sense. If really training someone to dance for the long run, I think it's an inefficient and inelegant solution compared to building strength and expertise.

Training amat. for TV productions is virtually a non sequitor, and really has no comparative analysis in this discussion of " Ballroom " technique.

What "we" teach beginners, is never the finished product. That would be the end result of yrs of training .

I would agree with your comment about the " balance ".. like Irvine said.. " Lose balance control" and you lose everything " one of his " 3 " musts.
Once mastering that, then the nuances may start to be applied .

"I would agree with your comment about the " balance ".. like Irvine said.. " Lose balance control" and you lose everything " one of his " 3 " musts.
Once mastering that, then the nuances may start to be applied ."

One must be careful to note the difference between "loss of balance control" vs. "loss of balance"

The important skill is to move in and out of balance without deviating from your intent - to depart balance by intention, with a clear idea of when and where it will be regained rather than to have it accidentally disturbed.

The people who actually try to retain balance are those who are sliding their weight on the moving foot - they must do so, or hold the body stationary while placing the moving foot - because balance is only present while the center of mass is over or between points of support. To dance or even to walk in an ordinary fashion requires this to be untrue during a substantial fraction of the duration of each step.

When skilled dancers speak of maintaining balance, they do not literally mean it, because while they may not be aware of the fact, they do not do so. Rather, what they mean is making only intended movements; not allowing themselves to get into situations where they are physically forced by gravity or momentum to do something which conflicts with their artistic goals. Balance "control" is maintained, not by maintaining balance but by choosing precisely how and when balance will be lost and regained.