Bachata

Godric, Saket:

Bachata is 'easier' than salsa, I think. The music is a lot slower, and the leads fairly easy. The videos are both of show pieces -- hence the 'complexity'. It's a simple dance, really.

Chindu

Bachata is "easier" in the sense that it is less focused on turns and moves than salsa is (traditionally). The lyrics are actually very similar to the blues. The focus is supposed to be on the connection and is usually danced closer than salsa. However, salsa and merengue have had a major influence on the bachata, and many of the same turns and footwork are being incorporated into bachata now. And Chindu is correct, there is a big difference between performance and social dancing. Bachata is generally not performed very often because it is not intended to be a flashy dance and does not usually lend itself to being very showy. But again, lots of borrowing from other dances, so this is changing quite a bit. Many salseros dislike bachata at first because it lacks the flashiness and excitement of salsa, but usually enough exposure to the dance and the music is enough to change their minds.

Joy:

Agreed: Bachata is being salsa-ised. And therein lies the rub. :-)

I am all for dancing outside the box, and integration, but I am not sure the way Bachata is developing -- rather, the way it is developed by a section of salseros -- is particularly positive. I love the dance -- I am old, you see, with creaky joints, a palpitating heart, and wisdom enough to enjoy the romance of a slow dance *grin* -- and so has been watching it over the last three-four years with growing consternation.

I mean, here's a gorgeous dance, distinct, earthy, beautifully simple, and what happens? People 'develop' it so that it loses its character and evolves into a characterless step-sister of salsa. Not saying that it has all been negative, the development, but by and large (from what I see on youtube on your side of the world and on floors on this side of the Atlantic), I don't think it does any justice to the soul of the dance.

For instance, the original hip action has now been diluted and contained into a lazy foot-tap. Turns patterns have become so prominent that the dance ends in open hold half the time making it all 'army' and 'footy' rather than a predominantly 'body' dance in close hold. Not to mention the fact that some of those patterns are too complicated and arm-twisty.

Even the music. It used to be slow and 'bluey', but now you see it becoming faster and faster, 'hip-hoppy' even! One of the few positive things that happened to it is the leg flicks (instead of the tap and borrowed from Tango, I think), which has come into vogue in the last year or so (and which actually can look elegant). But mostly it has all been misguided and overzealous. Poor Bachata!

Here are some more vids of Bachata:

Chindu wrote:Joy:

Agreed: Bachata is being salsa-ised. And therein lies the rub. :-)

I am all for dancing outside the box, and integration, but I am not sure the way Bachata is developing -- rather, the way it is developed by a section of salseros -- is particularly positive. I love the dance -- I am old, you see, with creaky joints, a palpitating heart, and wisdom enough to enjoy the romance of a slow dance *grin* -- and so has been watching it over the last three-four years with growing consternation.

I mean, here's a gorgeous dance, distinct, earthy, beautifully simple, and what happens? People 'develop' it so that it loses its character and evolves into a characterless step-sister of salsa. Not saying that it has all been negative, the development, but by and large (from what I see on youtube on your side of the world and on floors on this side of the Atlantic), I don't think it does any justice to the soul of the dance.

For instance, the original hip action has now been diluted and contained into a lazy foot-tap. Turns patterns have become so prominent that the dance ends in open hold half the time making it all 'army' and 'footy' rather than a predominantly 'body' dance in close hold. Not to mention the fact that some of those patterns are too complicated and arm-twisty.

Even the music. It used to be slow and 'bluey', but now you see it becoming faster and faster, 'hip-hoppy' even! One of the few positive things that happened to it is the leg flicks (instead of the tap and borrowed from Tango, I think), which has come into vogue in the last year or so (and which actually can look elegant). But mostly it has all been misguided and overzealous. Poor Bachata!

Chindu,

I completely agree with you there. There always exists in every dance this tension between staying true to the roots of the dance and allowing it to evolve with the times and adapt to the new cultures that it finds itself in. I too very much enjoy the sensual hip movements and the deep partner connection that comes from focusing on body movement and rhythm instead of incorporating fancy moves and shines. It is great that the dance and the music are receiving more recognition and popularity, but inevitably this always entails watering down the dance or giving it a marketing makeover so that more people are drawn to it. In its more subtle forms, many people wouldn't take a second look. But I find that when I stick to the rolling hip motion and the rhythmic syncopations in place instead of traveling the dance and doing a bunch of turns and shines, I notice that people watch me and comment on how beautiful and distinctive the bachata is when I dance it. So that validates for me that the simplicity of the dance - or, rather, focusing on more elemental qualities such as connection and quality of movement - is enough to draw people in for the right reasons.

I think also it is worth mentioning that it is important to understand and appreciate the differences between the Latin dances. I know initially as a beginner it is easier to emphasize the similarities and overlaps to aid learning and memory, but merengue, bachata, cha-cha-cha, etc. each have distinctive qualities in the music and the movement that make them valid dance forms in their own right. Too often I hear complaints that merengue is just a dummed-down salsa because the basic step is not as complicated, or that cha-cha-cha is just salsa with a triple step thrown in. I think we are taking too much of the flashy moves and trying to put them into every dance, and in the process we are losing our celebration of and focus on the music and the distinctive movements that it inspires.

Joy in Motion wrote: I think we are taking too much of the flashy moves and trying to put them into every dance, and in the process we are losing our celebration of and focus on the music and the distinctive movements that it inspires.

Yes, I see that around as well.

Not sure whether you are familiar with the British dance scene, but there's a very popular TV programme called Strictly Come Dancing (a similar one's happening in the US now as well) in which celebrities try ballroom dancing and compete on live TV. This has made Cha Cha quite popular and in the last two years, almost all salsa venues have begun to play -- and teach -- the dance.

Trouble is, like you correctly pointed out, it is taught as salsa-with-a-chasse, utilising almost all the same figures (thus, we have the fan unceremoniously -- and sadly -- becoming an LA crossbody). Thankfully, there's a vibrant Latin ballroom this side, so it is not going to take much abuse. But that's not the case with Bachata, which is completely at the mercy of salsa instructors.

All of this boils down to the point you have touched upon obliquely in some of your past posts: there's more to dance than complicated turn patterns and flashy moves (dips and drops, may I add)...

Well said, Chindu. You're my bachata soulmate.

I actually went out dancing last night, and one of my biggest frustrations is when the bachata basic is danced side to side and travels a lot. I only see non-Latinos dancing it this way, and I think it is the influence of the ballroom world. The bachata is meant to be danced pretty much in place, allowing for the hip action and musical footwork and a deeper connection with your partner. It does travel in the sense that the man and woman move around each other, and a few turns added in can be nice, but the steps are small with the feet remaining underneath the body as the center is moved instead of reaching out for a large step. It does not frustrate me when beginners dance this way, because sometimes traveling the basic step can keep them from losing the beat when they are still learning. But for those that have been dancing for a while and continue to dance it in this way, to a certain extent I think it shows a lack of interest in the culture and character of the dance. They seem to prefer to dance it in ballroom style and add in a bunch of turns, and to me it makes the dance stiff and unenjoyable. I understand we all make our choices when it comes to style, but at the same time there are certain features in bachata that make it unique from any dance and that make it truly express the music. Doing the above really takes away from that, in my opinion.

I dont know, maybe I'm just too picky!

Joy in Motion wrote:Well said, Chindu. You're my bachata soulmate.

I actually went out dancing last night, and one of my biggest frustrations is when the bachata basic is danced side to side and travels a lot. I only see non-Latinos dancing it this way, and I think it is the influence of the ballroom world. The bachata is meant to be danced pretty much in place, allowing for the hip action and musical footwork and a deeper connection with your partner. It does travel in the sense that the man and woman move around each other, and a few turns added in can be nice, but the steps are small with the feet remaining underneath the body as the center is moved instead of reaching out for a large step. It does not frustrate me when beginners dance this way, because sometimes traveling the basic step can keep them from losing the beat when they are still learning. But for those that have been dancing for a while and continue to dance it in this way, to a certain extent I think it shows a lack of interest in the culture and character of the dance. They seem to prefer to dance it in ballroom style and add in a bunch of turns, and to me it makes the dance stiff and unenjoyable. I understand we all make our choices when it comes to style, but at the same time there are certain features in bachata that make it unique from any dance and that make it truly express the music. Doing the above really takes away from that, in my opinion.

I dont know, maybe I'm just too picky!

:-) Brilliant! I do like a bit of travelling, I must confess, once in a while, that is, but I see your point. I must also confess that I love the flicks borrowed from Tango, which has come into vogue in the last year or so. But these are variations, not the main part of the dance. What I personally hate is Bachata being turned into a kind of line dance (one-two-three-tap).

Not sure how much ballroom has influenced it. At least in England, I have run into very few ballroom dancers doing Bachata. Over here the major influence is what they call the Italian style of Bachata Tony Lara's creation. To be fair to the man, he doesn't travel much and has remained true to the soul of the dance (I watch on youtube a gent named Jorge, and I think I have a fair idea of your frustration!). Plus it helps to have a fantastic dancer like Daniella who makes him look great!