Looks, Moves and Connection
By Laureano Ralon Facchina*

On this occasion, I would like to examine the interplay between looks, connection and moves. Last week, I was watching Roger Chen teach one of his beginners salsa classes. At some point during the lessons, Roger posed a compelling, open question to his students: “Salsa is all about looking good, right?” There was irony in his voice; people laughed instinctively, yet I'm not entirely sure how many of them really grasped the significance of such a powerful statement.

The question poses an interesting philosophical problem: What's the nature of a partner dance? Is salsa dancing solely about looking good – and showing it to the world – or is it about interpreting the music and connecting with your partner? Perhaps it's a little bit of everything; perhaps it's meant to be all of the above - each variable interacting with each other in a dynamic, constant flux: How does my dancing differ on a Friday night as opposed to a Monday night for example? How do I adapt my style to the different settings and environments I find myself in? Dancers can't seem to agree on a straightforward answer to these questions, as exemplified by the fact that different styles emphasize different possibilities of the dance.

Now, an irony always contains a certain element of truth: in this case, the undeniable fact that looks aren't completely unimportant in dance. Generally speaking, solo dances usually have an aesthetic, visual component, and to some extent the same applies to partner dances. Moreover, in salsa, it is often said that it isn't so much “what” one does but “how” one does it that makes all the difference. That said, a partner dance which is all about looks is a sort of counter-statement, an oxymoron. If that was the case, whose looks would we be talking about – the woman's? The man's? The couple's? Again, different dances, different styles, and different people reveal different aesthetic possibilities in relation to this question. The only universal statement I can think of is that good looks often derive from being relaxed, enjoying yourself, connecting with your partner, and interpreting the music.

From this universal statement it follows by logic that the same principle which underlines salsa's aesthetic possibilities must also be present in the 'feel' of a couple who's truly connected in dance (because, yes, in a partner dance looks must be weighted against other concerns, such as good connection). What I mean to say by this is that good connection must also be about “how” more than about “what” (the moves themselves). Good connection has little to do with moves. In fact, good connection is what enables communication between partners, while moves are structures that can sometimes get in the way of a good connection. That's why some instructors don't teach combinations, but emphasize instead all the possible ways of getting in and out of a given move. This is, in my opinion, a very interesting approach to teaching, because combinations can sometimes lead to a situation where the dancer becomes 'captive' of his moves. (Incidentally, in Swing, the term “high jacking” is often used to label a situation where the woman breaks with that often pre-determined structure imposed by the man, which, in turn, forces the man to reconsider the sequence of moves. From this point of view, Swing is less rigid than salsa – where moves happen to fast for high jacking to take place.)

In summary, good connection, like good looks, is all about spontaneity and freedom. A good connection “frames” the physical conversation between two dance partners in such a way that virtually any message can be communicated. By contrast, pre-determined moves or combinations based on sloppy connection can, like poor language, get in the way between the dancer and the objects of his or her experience (the music, his partner), thus limiting the conversation substantially. So, even though connection and looks share the same underlining principle (“how” as opposed to “what”), they respond to different motivations: good connection and good looks are all about freedom and spontaneity, whereas bad looks and the constraining, pre-determined moves which engender them are – much like counting – the artificial structures that get in the way of our natural experience.

Perception steeped in poor language and dancing based on rigid combinations poses a problem which we may not even recognize: it is a perception which is always too quick to make familiar the strangeness of the world. Perhaps only for moments do we come face to face with that which is truly other (like when we make a mistake and new moves, new possibilities arise as a result), but then we give it a name, domesticating it into our constant interpretation which centers us in the world: “that was supposed to be a cross-body lead, and this is THE way a cross body lead should be executed. Anything other than that is NOT a cross-body lead; anything other than that does not exist.”