Dynamic roles

At the picnic in the park after class I remarked to Cacu, thinking aloud really, how hard it would be for such a free spirit to go to the traditional milongas - someone whose idea of connection in movement was so different. He said yes, that when he wanted, in the milonga, to be himself, to take off his shoes and socks for example, people would look at him strangely.  At first he got angry, now he lets them be.

This is of course, the right approach. As far back as Epictetus, there has been a philosophy that says there are many things we cannot control and that will perturb us if we let them. It is better to focus on the things we can control, which, largely, is our own attitude. This is very similar to the view that Victor Frankl (previously mentioned), psychiatrist and holocaust survivor, wrote about in 'Man's Search for Meaning'. We feel loss, sadness, regret, envy, anger and we suffer. All these things are towards things outside ourselves said Epictetus We should recognise that we cannot control things outside ourselves. But Stoicism is not an easy path, least of all for this society today. Yet Cacu's approach of dealing with feeling angry and frustrated at the way things were was to forge a different way. His choice was practical and refocuses the mind on something helpful, positive and constructive.

But all this I thought later. In the park, I said:

- At least in the milongas you go as a man 

- But I'm not a man. This, I should add, was said to anyone in the circle within earshot.

It drew me up and yet if I was surprised, it was less at the statement, but at the refreshing frankness.

- OK, but to the people in the milongas you present as a man.

That seemed to be the issue and also a point not to pursue. Perhaps it still rancoured. I had sensed though in the workshops - an ambiguity of role, a sensitivity that accompanied it.

I had wanted to say - the men have it better, meaning because they are not prey, the way women so often are but I had lost the thread.  Instead this new point struck me: that in his role, swapping roles seemed as important and binary divisions as having much less import as was so in mine.

That sensitivity was openly stated when he asked if a different friend I wanted to bring to the practica was "sensitive" - could he slot in to the group that was already established? Things were starting to connect.

I had come expecting a class, worried about alternative music, “free” exploration, not understanding but had encountered similarities in our approaches that bridged those apparently insurmountable gaps. Strangest of all was the correctness of the intuition about the importance of this event, despite, on the surface, appearing to be everything I don't believe in. People asked, and I asked myself, why go to dance class when I don't believe in it? Why dance to music I never dance to? Why associate with people I wouldn't normally? It was a counter-intuitive intuition yet it was correct.

Correspondence to an Argentinian friend: If you are looking for a tango teacher, I would start there and I have never recommended a teacher before.  I regret we did not dance because you can get a good sense of who someone is that way but I did not put myself forward nor look for an approach.  

Everything I saw is along the same lines of responding to a dance partner that I believe in and that we don't usually find in traditional classes: listening, respect, permission, no force, exploration, the fluidity of roles and a constant dynamism in roles and in initiating and receiving movement.  It is not about moves, the ocho, the cross, still less the horror of the "eight step basic" but about a way of relating to people in movement through guided activities.