follower-focused weekends, Should we pay for the men? Options

[eyeballs]

I didn't want to make it seem like I was advertising against the followers' weekend, so here's a different thread. I'm intrigued by the concept, but I'm not sure it's fair.

So, my question: has anyone attended one of these follower weekends?

They sound exciting, but I have one negative reaction to this concept - why should the leads get in free?

What I mean is, MOST workshops, especially where there is choreography involved, benefit leads more than follows anyway. And there are usually more follows than leads, so we end up sitting out every few rotations. Yet we pay the same as them.

So why should we now foot the bill for them to attend workshops? I'm curious to see if someone can sell me on this. I think that even if the workshops focus on the follows, the leads should still pay AT LEAST half price. The leads will probably be taught what they need to do to empower the follow. I would want them to learn that, anyway. They should pay for it. If you just need bodies there, I'm sure half price would be enough temptation to fill all the classes.

I mean if you think of it as a 'girl power' kind of thing, I think workshops need to always keep the follow in mind anyway. Every set of instructors should balance how they teach to the leads and follows. That should be the standard. So instead of insisting on it, when we're ALL paying, we're letting the leads in for free so we don't have to feel guity about taking up more instruction time? (and if it's free, do you get good leads?)

I'm possibly way off here, because I don't know what people do at these weekends. Anyone got some first hand experience? Sell me on it, and I'll go to one.

[erinregina]

Well, I've run the Southern Belle Swing Bash in Atlanta for 2 years, which is a lindy hop girls' weekend. So I've been to one of these things.

There's been a whole discussion about the follower weekend phenomenon on Yehoodi if you're interested in what's already been said.

In my own personal reasoning (as an organizer), you offer the leaders free admission because it is a *partner* dance you're trying to work on, and you've specifically said that you're not going to address anything in the workshops towards the leaders. They're just there to act as the necessary other half of the dance, and if they learn some things that make them better leaders along the way, I'm happy for them--and for us followers. Why would they pay money to go to something where none of the classes are directed towards them? (As that is the point of the weekend, that all the classes are directed to the followers.)

I agree that it would be nice if "regular" workshops were more balanced in the material aimed at followers vs. leaders. But the fact of the matter is that right now, in general, they're not. Classes tend to be more lead-focused. So the follower weekends arose as a corrective response to this, in my understanding.

We got good leads at my event, and we asked that only Int. & Adv. leads register. It's a bit hard to police, but for the most part it worked out fine. The guys are psyched to attend a weekend for free that helps improve the level of the followers they dance with, teaches them something in the meantime, and they get to dance with all those lovely ladies in the evenings. They come out as a show of support for their friends who are followers.

I've seen enthusiasm for this sort of thing even at the local level. Kate Hedin's balboa followers' footwork classes have been very popular, for example. So I think there's an interest, and at least in my own personal experience, the events themselves have been successful.

[opie]

What I mean is, MOST workshops, especially where there is choreography involved, benefit leads more than follows anyway. And there are usually more follows than leads, so we end up sitting out every few rotations. Yet we pay the same as them.

(This is the economist in me wondering...) If the material in a typical (non-gal) workshop is geared more towards leads, why are there usually more follows than leads? Why are the follows willing to pay full price, knowing that they're not going to get as much out of the workshops?

[Jennie]

[quote name='opie' date='Dec 17 2006, 12:23 PM' post='20459']
[quote name='eyeballs' post='20454' date='Dec 16 2006, 04:26 PM']
What I mean is, MOST workshops, especially where there is choreography involved, benefit leads more than follows anyway. And there are usually more follows than leads, so we end up sitting out every few rotations. Yet we pay the same as them.
[/quote]

This is something that I have thought about a lot lately. At FBF (great camp, thanks A-H and B) last weekend I learnt three new "things" (=foot variations) in twelve classes. The rest of the time the teaching was focused on the leaders.

I often feel like I spend most classes giving feedback to the leaders. I don't mind doing this every now and then (how would we learn at all if we don't help each other?) but I don't want to it all the time. IF this is what classes are going to be in the future I can only see two ways for me to enjoy bal classes:

1. I will stay with my partner and not rotate in class. At least then I'm spending my time giving feedback to someone who I know appreciates it, understands it and will work on it - and I will be able to dance with this person on a regular basis.* (This feels kind of rude to other people in class and we will miss out on the socialising, so it's not a great option.)

or

2. I will ask my partner to attend classes without me. I can either watch or just ask him to tell me what was was taught. (Which is not really an ideal option either...)

To really change things, I think that followers who teach need to be much more active. They need to think more about HOW to follow in a good way, how to explain this, exercises for follows, footwork, styling aso. This is hard work! I am trying to do this on the very small scale that I am teaching at, and it is not easy. I do believe that we can all benefit from thinking about what we would like to get out of a class and tell our teachers, rather than just suffering in silence

I personally don't think that weekends focusing on followers will solve this problem, I think that we need to focus more on followers in ALL classes. (But I do hope that the followers going to these weekends will benefit from the classes there and spread the word that YES, there are things for followers to learn)


Jennie


* Many leaders I meet in class are great so please don't take this the wrong way!

[Boomer]

I think everyone brings up very good points. I also believe you are not in the minority with regards to this subject. I have a different take on this though.

I think that the challenge in any class or workshop for a follower, is not to learn something particular to the move that was being taught, but instead to learn, practice, and perfect your following skills. True there are cool footwork variations that a follower can add, and I have seen some classes taht address this very well for followers, but this is just a minor part of the value a follower can get from a workshop. This is why it is so important for follows to rotate in class, because your following adjusts with each different leader. Your success in the class should not judged by how well the move went with each leader, but rather by how well you followed what each leader led.

I really think that it is just a difference in expectations. Leaders take classes to learn how to lead. Followers should expect to work on following better. The majority of dancers who take workshops want to be better social dancers. As a leader, I constantly adjust what I lead based on the follow I am dancing with. Even within a class, I have some follows that are very tense or maybe they break their frame, and that inhibits the success of the move being taught. Followers have a new dance with every different leader that they dance with, and have to vary how they match that leader. The challenge for follows, as I see it, is to really focus on what the leader is asking of you. Concentrating on how your body moves based on the lead that is given.

Where I totally agree with you is that this topic needs to brought up more in class by the follower instructors, otherwise it just seems like follows are there for the leaders to practice a move with.

[Hooloovoo]

It's an interesting point.

I've done a lot of follower's classes. In Atlanta I did several 'Balboa Follower's Fancy Footworkshops', and just before I left did a 4 week series on Lindy following (technique, styling, footwork, etc), and most recently I did a 'Follower's Delight' (lindy) class up here in D.C. ... All of which were a huge success, and all of which ran under the same principle of leads get in free. (And usually, it's almost an even match up every time leaders-to-followers.)
Of course, these are just individual classes, and obviously a shorter amount of time than a whole weekend of follower's stuff.



I think the follower's weekends are a cool concept, but I'm not sure if it's giving the ladies what they really want. ... It seems like followers might be craving a weekend where there is more of a balance.

It's something that I try and stress in the classes I teach. I try and talk about aspects of following withing the regular classes that Bobby and I teach, also often times showing follower variations that can be thrown into moves that are being taught. ... In classes that I take at weekends, I would love to see teachers recognize and talk about the different roles that leaders and followers have to play in the dance--not just strictly showing move after move.

Another thing that I've done recently at ABCD and EBC is have one class of the weekend be on follower's styling. And usually, Bobby still teaches some footwork variations for the guys as well in these classes, but they are for the most part focused on follower's styling and how to incoporate following ideas into the dance. At least then, with one/some classes in a weekend being dedicated to follows, the girls come away feeling a more balanced weekend.

[eyeballs]

(This is the economist in me wondering...) If the material in a typical (non-gal) workshop is geared more towards leads, why are there usually more follows than leads? Why are the follows willing to pay full price, knowing that they're not going to get as much out of the workshops?

Partnered dancing has the inverse problem of club dancing- they can't get enough girls so they let them in for free, while we can't get enough guys, so I guess we're letting them in free. There will always be many more women doing swing dancing, and especially I think in lindy and balboa because the learning curves are a bit steeper. The guys have to learn a lot more to become 'good' dancers so it's harder to get them, plus fewer guys dance anyway in general.

There ARE girls who don't take workshops anymore because of past disappointment, but there will always be hoards more stepping in to take their places so you don't notice their absence.

I don't sign up for workshops from certain people because of bad experiences, but that doesn't really influence people outside my circle of friends because I'm not going to go bad mouthing those instructors publicly, so I don't exert much of a force that way on this market. People will still go to their workshops. And on the other hand it's hard to exert a positive force for good instructurs because workshops often have to cap to fit the space and if there are 5 or 100 follows on the waiting list, that won't affect the size of the next workshop if there aren't a lot of leads on the waiting lists. Also if there's a big weekend with lots of pairs, I'll go to it even of one of the pairs is not that great, because the others are great. And since it seems like most Bal weekends are like this, I think market forces are blocked. If you want to throw a big, yet affordable weekend, you've got to throw in a few less expensive teachers, right?

Maybe we should think about how we can positively affect the market for instructors. Positive word of mouth? Speak up in class? Maybe if follower focused events do well that will be an eye opener for all instructors. Hopefully.

Sometimes asking more questions in class can help pull the focus to the follows. I've at least had success with that. But I've also been in classes where there was no way to help the dire situation for the follows.

This post has been edited by eyeballs: Dec 17 2006, 06:51 PM

[Soupbone]

This is definately something I've put some thought into, because I've always heard lots of follows complain that the instruction was all geared toward the leads. Last year at NWBF we did a "follows only" and a "leads only" class during the weekend, and it was well received. We decided this year to BEGIN the weekend with that class (before the Friday dance) to talk about how to maximize your time in the other workshops. We also added a styling and creativity class that hopefully will help give some balance to who's getting the attention.

[Nikhop]

At the beginning of a class during FBF, I mentioned to the teachers the fact that the followers did not get any "follower focused" information during the first classes of the day, so the teachers decided to teach them some really cool footwork. And it turned out that the followers got the footwork quite easily, but we (leaders) actually spent quite some time seeing how our basic could prevent or help the follower do the footwork well.

And I guess that's where the "learning" curve also comes into consideration: if it is harder for leaders to lead well (including leaving the follower enough space to express herself), then unless we want to end up with a bunch of excellent followers sitting around the dance floor waiting for one of the very few good leaders to be available, then it is probably a good idea to spend more time in class focusing on the leaders. Which does not mean focusing only on the leader, and as Booby said, following well is a lot of work. Eventually, it is probably harder for a teacher to detect a follower's mistake just from looking at a couple than it is to spot a leader's mistake.

I'm 100% in favor of follower's only classes or weekends, and i would attend them if they were close enough to Toulouse that the price of the workshop would anyway be negligible in comparison with the price of the plane ticket. And I wouldn't mind paying for them even if leaders do not learn any variation, but I would expect to get taught how to lead without interfering with the freedom of the follower. Which is a lot different from "no teaching to leaders".

And *please* followers, give us feedback!!! I know it is hard as some leaders do not take this really well, but it is SO useful.

[Marty Klempner]

...and as Booby said...

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!! That brought back some memories from Toulouse! Right Booby? :) LOL

This post has been edited by Marty Klempner: Dec 19 2006, 12:23 AM

[Jennie]

unless we want to end up with a bunch of excellent followers sitting around the dance floor waiting for one of the very few good leaders to be available, then it is probably a good idea to spend more time in class focusing on the leaders.

This is, to me, a strange argument. Followers pay as much as leaders for the classes. More good followers will not sit around the dancefloor and wait, we will be able to "train" more good leaders!

Maybe leaders should pay for all the "normal" weekends while followers get in for free? At least until we get something like 40% of the time in class focused on following and followers issues...

I still think followers who teach need to be much more active in class. And maybe outside class as well, spending time thinking about how to explain following, what followers need to practice aso. Difficult subjects, but very much needed.

Jennie

[opie]

I think that the challenge in any class or workshop for a follower, is not to learn something particular to the move that was being taught, but instead to learn, practice, and perfect your following skills. True there are cool footwork variations that a follower can add, and I have seen some classes taht address this very well for followers, but this is just a minor part of the value a follower can get from a workshop. This is why it is so important for follows to rotate in class, because your following adjusts with each different leader. Your success in the class should not judged by how well the move went with each leader, but rather by how well you followed what each leader led.

I really think that it is just a difference in expectations. Leaders take classes to learn how to lead. Followers should expect to work on following better. The majority of dancers who take workshops want to be better social dancers. As a leader, I constantly adjust what I lead based on the follow I am dancing with. Even within a class, I have some follows that are very tense or maybe they break their frame, and that inhibits the success of the move being taught. Followers have a new dance with every different leader that they dance with, and have to vary how they match that leader. The challenge for follows, as I see it, is to really focus on what the leader is asking of you. Concentrating on how your body moves based on the lead that is given.

Where I totally agree with you is that this topic needs to brought up more in class by the follower instructors, otherwise it just seems like follows are there for the leaders to practice a move with.

Greg I see your point. I think it speaks to some larger issues with the usual workshop classes, which tend to be geared towards presenting some cool new moves for everyone to screw up at the dances, and then forget. Classes like that are a horrible way to learn to follow, aren't they? They seem like they're almost designed to train followers to anticipate and second-guess the leaders.

And as a leader I don't find them all that helpful either, because a lot of the followers are anticipating the movement, and few are giving me reliable feedback on my leading, and the music is often slow, and beyond that I seldom retain more than two new moves per day anyway.

I appreciate that some instructors are trying to move beyond this model for classes - in particular a lot of David Rehm's classes, which often explore larger movement techniques, or are addressed to breaking particular dance habits that are prevelant in the scene. Props to those instructors that are putting serious thought into developing classes that give people a chance to actually learn something. From what I've seen, though, there's still a lot more than could be done. Maybe there are some limits inherent in the format of workshop weekend classes and people should just adjust their expectations, go home and take some private lessons to really work on their dancing. But I don't think those limits have been reached yet.

Organizers and promoters - I personally would gladly pay for a weekend where you gave the instructors leave to teach whatever sort of class they'd like, push beyond the usual dance class paradigm, and experiment with the idea that they might have been holding back for fear that it wouldn't sell. I'd also be content to let the instructors off the hook and not hold any contests that weekend, so they don't have to do anything but teach.

Heck, I might have to organize something like this myself.

[BalBurgh]

Just a few thoughts in no particular order, and from someone who still has huge amounts to learn and just as much to unlearn...

The community as a whole is still learning how to dance these dances, let alone how to teach them. It's not like there's been continuous growth and development for decades or longer like there has been in something like ballroom or ballet. These things are being rediscovered and not exactly codified, but at least widely analyzed and disseminated only in the last few years (beyond just a very few individuals who've been doing it formally for a long time- and even they are still changing and growing). Jeez, it used to be that even the top instructors could only teach the basics in (at least Balboa) workshops because it was so new to everyone. There was precious little time to teach technique. That said, it's also true that since I was new, a lot probably went right over my head.

Several years ago the theory used to be that you mostly got vocabulary in group lessons and you had to take privates to learn the technique if you wanted to go farther. Nobody would be happier than me if we got more technique in group classes but a) it's tough to do and b) the majority of instructors have been going through a long process of learning how to incorporate this. (Conversations like this are a great way to provide feedback and keep the process moving forward.)

Were people really better dancers by and large 6 or 10 years ago? And, does this have to do either with the prevalence of exchanges over instruction or with the idea that many followers, once they get to a certain point, feel they don't need to take classes any more? I was at an event last summer when two of the world's top instructors noted that they wanted to teach material that was aimed at "advanced" dancers in an upper-level (but not top-level) track but that the students didn't have the skills they needed to execute the material. Again, I recognize that many organizers feel they have to provide certain things in their events to meet expectations (either they must provide fancy-schmantzy moves or if they teach technique they're afraid they'll chase people away) but at some point don't they need to do what's best for the students? Either that or the students' expectations must be changed. I pretty much figure that if I'm paying to attend a major event that I want the experts to give me what I need, not what I think I want (I've certainly come to appreciate this much more as time goes by). By the way the best instructors do this in private lessons but are sometimes under pressure to do other things in group settings. Even they gotta do what they're being paid for...

Last but not least, where are there scenes where there are all these super-talented follows waiting for all their lame leads to catch up to their amazingly superior abilities? I haven't danced in a scene like that yet. I'm not saying they aren't out there, but it seems to me that leads and follows generally can't dance at a much higher level than the people they generally dance with.

This post has been edited by BalBurgh: Dec 19 2006, 02:42 PM

[Boomer]

Greg I see your point. I think it speaks to some larger issues with the usual workshop classes, which tend to be geared towards presenting some cool new moves for everyone to screw up at the dances, and then forget. Classes like that are a horrible way to learn to follow, aren't they? They seem like they're almost designed to train followers to anticipate and second-guess the leaders.

There are some classes like this. I gennerally see three types of classes being taught in workshops today, Beginner classes, Move centric classes, and Technique driven classes. Beginner classes are pretty self explanatory. I usually see move centric classes being taught at the intermediate levels, because that is (in general) what intermediate dancers ask for, to add more moves to what they know. Technique driven classes usually happen at the more advanced level. Again for the same reason, it's what these dancers ask for. They generally have a huge arsenal of moves, but are working on clear leads, smooth transitions, and relaxed following. In smaller workshops I think it can be difficult to give the intermediate and advanced crowds everything they are looking for because the classes have a pretty wide range of skill level. Intermediates sometimes feel bored working on technique, unless it is disguised as a move. Advanced dancers that I know usually want to refine basics, and don't care to work on new moves as much.

Following is probably one of the hardest skills to learn (in my opinion, whew...glad I'm a leader), and as such I cut alot of followers slack in rotations if they anticipate, or lead themselves through movements. It's a skill that has to be practiced alot, with alot of different leads to do it well.

Organizers and promoters - I personally would gladly pay for a weekend where you gave the instructors leave to teach whatever sort of class they'd like, push beyond the usual dance class paradigm, and experiment with the idea that they might have been holding back for fear that it wouldn't sell. I'd also be content to let the instructors off the hook and not hold any contests that weekend, so they don't have to do anything but teach.

In my experience, most if not all instructors, are given the freedom to teach what they want to teach. The organizers usually give the instructors a bare framework to use in planning their classes (ie how many classes, skill level of the classes, length of the classes etc). As far as letting them off the hook from competitions, I don't know if that's an accurate assessment. Instructors normally get paid to judge a competition, so it's extra dough for them. Or on the flip side if they decide to compete, it can help them to get future teaching gigs (look at instructor bios from almost any major workshop, they all list placements at different competions). So I don't know if eliminating competitions are something that instructors find favorable. But you are right in that the organizer can choose to have or not have competitions over a weekend. I believe that many events have them as a draw to bring in dancers that otherwise would not attend for workshops alone.

[ScotAF]

...I'd also be content to let the instructors off the hook and not hold any contests that weekend, so they don't have to do anything but teach.

...As far as letting them off the hook from competitions, I don't know if that's an accurate assessment. Instructors normally get paid to judge a competition, so it's extra dough for them. Or on the flip side if they decide to compete, it can help them to get future teaching gigs (look at instructor bios from almost any major workshop, they all list placements at different competions). So I don't know if eliminating competitions are something that instructors find favorable. But you are right in that the organizer can choose to have or not have competitions over a weekend. I believe that many events have them as a draw to bring in dancers that otherwise would not attend for workshops alone.

As someone who would never have even considered competing a little over a year ago, I would now be hard pressed to go to an event (other than an bal exchange) just for the workshops. For me, the competitions drive me to improve my dancing ability so that it is better socially (J&J), technically, and visually. Why visually? Because I can talk Balboa till I'm blue, but the only way I can inspire people to learn it here in my local scene, is to dance well enough to get them excited enough to come to Balboa practice regularly. And as Boomer said, it also gives some credibility to what I'm teaching them if I've placed at competitions. I also love competitions for the adrenaline rush and the sensation that my stomach is floating.

btw...if anyone's in/around Dayton OH on a Thursday night, There's a Bal practice/dance at my place:
http://www.swingoutdayton.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=736

[Jennie]

Last but not least, where are there scenes where there are all these super-talented follows waiting for all their lame leads to catch up to their amazingly superior abilities? I haven't danced in a scene like that yet. I'm not saying they aren't out there, but it seems to me that leads and follows generally can't dance at a much higher level than the people they generally dance with.

I wouldn't call our leads here in Uppsala "lame", but for some reason we seem to have a reasonable number of good or very good follows and a shortage of good leads (this is the same for lindy and bal). Maybe all the good follows are scaring the leads away??

The problem seems to be the same in many small swing dance communities.

Jennie

[opie]

There are some classes like this. I gennerally see three types of classes being taught in workshops today, Beginner classes, Move centric classes, and Technique driven classes. Beginner classes are pretty self explanatory. I usually see move centric classes being taught at the intermediate levels, because that is (in general) what intermediate dancers ask for, to add more moves to what they know. Technique driven classes usually happen at the more advanced level. Again for the same reason, it's what these dancers ask for. They generally have a huge arsenal of moves, but are working on clear leads, smooth transitions, and relaxed following. In smaller workshops I think it can be difficult to give the intermediate and advanced crowds everything they are looking for because the classes have a pretty wide range of skill level. Intermediates sometimes feel bored working on technique, unless it is disguised as a move. Advanced dancers that I know usually want to refine basics, and don't care to work on new moves as much.

I'm sure you see a wider variety of events than I do, so I'll buy this. Seems about right.

Following is probably one of the hardest skills to learn (in my opinion, whew...glad I'm a leader), and as such I cut alot of followers slack in rotations if they anticipate, or lead themselves through movements. It's a skill that has to be practiced alot, with alot of different leads to do it well.

I agree with this too. I'm not complaining in the slightest about the lovely followers that dance with me during workshop classes. I'm just wondering whether there's not a better way to run classes to help follows improve their dancing.

[saracynthia]

Last but not least, where are there scenes where there are all these super-talented follows waiting for all their lame leads to catch up to their amazingly superior abilities? I haven't danced in a scene like that yet. I'm not saying they aren't out there, but it seems to me that leads and follows generally can't dance at a much higher level than the people they generally dance with.

I wouldn't call our leads here in Uppsala "lame", but for some reason we seem to have a reasonable number of good or very good follows and a shortage of good leads (this is the same for lindy and bal). Maybe all the good follows are scaring the leads away??

The problem seems to be the same in many small swing dance communities.

Jennie

While I agree that it is not common for people to dance at a much higher level than the people they generally dance with, there are many lovely ladies I know who travel to workshops a lot, take privates with international instructors, and really do become better than the leads in their home scene. Or like me, they moved from a different area to a scene that is new to them (this is not to say that leads don't move either) and brought their skills with them.

Like Jennie, I will say that the leads here in Chicago are not "lame" in any way, but opie will tell you, the follows here seem to be a bit better than the leads. At least that's what he tells me. I mean this mostly for lindy but especially balboa.