swingandhustle wrote:
> Ron - since it is possible that other readers here have no experience
> with the hustle scene - I need to re-refer you to the first article at
> the top that started this thread.
>
That article comes across to me somewhat similar to what I would expect
if some unknown Salsa-on-1 proponent started blaming salsa-on-2
proponents for the death of salsa in Peoria (except that in reality,
most Salsa-on-1 and Salsa-on-2 dancers seem to get along). Or an opera
singer complaining that American Idol is dominated by Rock and Country
singers and that that's why the show's ratings are dropping.
> Read it - carefully. It appears that you entered the thread from the
> middle - and missed all the salient points.
>
> After reading the first article, re-read what you just wrote, and we
> can start over. I won't have to explain what the disconnects are -
> you'll see them all for yourself.
Based on the cricket response you're getting, the choir you're trying to
preach to isn't here. Maybe some lurkers agree with you, but since
they're not saying anything, instead you come across like the crazy guy
on a soapbox in the park telling everybody about alien abductions.
Seriously, good luck in finding that choir you're looking for. If you're
right, then all the more power to you and in the long run you'll win
because your version will gain popularity.
But while you may (or may not) be right about NY-style hustle being a
dying dance, you haven't provided a lot of proof for your claim that the
style you teach is the dance's salvation. I would expect you would be
getting a lot more adherents following you to hustle conventions than a
handful of followers if your variation was the answer. While you may
have a point about NY hustle being predominant in conventions,
convention promoters do what they think will sell tickets and bring in
money - if your style was sufficiently popular, they would start
catering to it.
Actually, the fact that NY-style is still much more popular after
decades would seem to indicate that it generally has more appeal and
staying power. It's hard to build a good ecosystem to grow a dance: it
requires venues providing dancing space and appropriate music, and
trained leaders as well as followers. In a world where so many
alternative modes of entertainment exist and compete for attention, a
dance form needs to have something that captures people's attention and
holds it through the (varyingly difficult) learning curve. For partner
dancing, it's often the proximity of single members of the opposite ***
and an op****tunity to display some level of physical coordination to
attract them. Once past the bulk of the learning curve, the endorphins
released can keep people interested. If the dance form is too physically
demanding, then injuries will limit its popularity through attrition.
Slower, more complex forms of partner dancing like WCS and Argentine
Tango offer more op****tunities for musical interpretation and continual
learning/discovery. Salsa offers globally widespread communities. Modern
Jive/Ceroc offers a shallow learning curve and a large base of teachers.
Ballroom offers a certain flair/mystique/cachet (spread in the 40's-60s
by movies with notables such as Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers).
What's your angle for Hustle? What's the particular appeal of your style
over all the above? The appeal of doing lifts, given packed dance floors
and an increasingly overweight population is pretty narrow so you better
pick something else. I mean, look at the number of couples competing in
categories with lifts vs. grounded categories, even in Lindy which
itself has a strong lift-oriented subculture. Counting on lifts to
market your dance is seriously limiting its appeal and is even more DOA
than NY Hustle. So what's your selling point?
Anyways when it comes to finding your choir, it seems you'll have more
success by advertising your singing lessons elsewhere, based on the
feedback you've been getting here so far.
P-A
|
