Talk:Blues dance

message: The name of this article is inconsistent with the names of other dance articles. Shouldn't it be "Blues (dance)"? I thought that this article was missing for that reason and almost created a duplicate. In any case, it does look like this article needs to be cleaned up. Cswrye 02:04, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)
: IMO "blues dance" is the most common term, so I moved the article there. // Habj 09:45, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article name

message: On 01:48, 4 December 2004, an anonymous user (Special:Contributions/68.143.85.178) inserted copyrighted material from this page, with a notice that it had been used with permission. For such material to be used, it must be licensed under the terms of the GNU Free Document License, and permission must be obtained as described on the header of Wikipedia:Copyright problems. 
:As such, I've reverted to the version before the copyrighted information was inserted, and will begin wikifying the article shortly. Jude (talk) 10:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation 

message: I can not agree on the notion that lindy hop is "up". On the contrary, you are constantly told that the bounce should be "down". // Habj 10:23, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Up/down 

message: There are a lot of mistaken things taken as fact about Blues Dancing and Lindy Hop and their realtionship. Lindy Hop is a downward "bouncing" dance. Lindy Hop simply slowed down is not a Blues dance. Blues Dance refers to a genre not a single dance. It shares a number of elements with Lindy Hop since they were developed by the same culture, just as Jazz and Blues are related, and often share elements.
Damon.stone 19:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  misperceptions 

message: I have reworked this article to tidy up the written expression and manage the issue of cultural specificity, adding in references to the international blues dancing community. More work is needed here, and it's probably interesting to explore why blues dancing had didfficulties becoming established in places like Korea or Japan, where there were/re strong cultrual factors discouraging the intimacy of touch demanded by partners in blues dancing. 
I am sceptical of the claim that there is an 'authentic' blues tradition (where? this is not specified) because blues dancing wasn't taken up by the white American mainstream. There is evidence throughout various dance scholars' work that it is not simply a matter of black dances moving to the mainstream - the influence of white media and culture and the very fact that black dances were taken up by the white mainstream has had effects on black dance culture. This is something addressed in work by Jane Desmond, Hazzard Gordon, Dixon Smith, Johnathon David Jackson, Tommy DeFrantz etc etc etc - even in Malcolm X's biography you can read descriptions of  how black dancers felt about white dancers doing 'black dance' and how this then affected what black dancers did on the dance floor.
You need to make a stronger argument for this point, provide clearer references (which is difficult when you're dealing with oral history, of course) or reword the section to account for these issues.
NB Referencing generally: clearer referencing is required - please cite specific articles, books, etc. Page numbers would be even better. Please add full bibliographical information for references - publishers, place published, year published as well as author and title.PlainJane 07:59, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reworking the article

message: I'm not sure what you are refering to re: Authentic Blues Tradition and not being picked up by mainstream White America... and then you cite sources that actually address this very issue... that is to say that media attention brought many Black dances out of the urban and rural Black communities and into Middle and Upper Middle Class White America... as such there were numerous changes made to how those dances were danced in White America which in several cases ended up removing a lot of the Africanist Aesthetic.
As to including more international representation to the topic, it would be nice if you gave some sources for this information. The people I've talked to in different countries seem to be more on the side of playing slow emotive music which is as often not Blues as it is Blues, and the dancing being done often has few or no ties to the traditions and aesthetic of Vernacular dances recognized as Blues.
This is certainly not the case everywhere, but some form of citation, book, website, videoclips etc. should be provided if you are going to include it in this entry.
:I think this was a miscommunication - I've reworded the article to get rid of it. BTW you need to sign and date stamp these comments.PlainJane 13:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ??? 

message: Okay just so we don't go back and forth on this... in the US when the words white and black are used to refer to race they are capitalized. So is Blues when being used to refer to the African-American (read Black) music and dance genre. Just as Lindy Hop and Swing dance should both be capitalized when refering to specific names. The Wikipedia article in question is discussing an artform born and developed in the US, using terms particular to its culture. Stop changing them without something more specific than, "we don't use them this way in Australia." That is not a valid argument.
If you want to discuss Australia's unique contribution to the English language, or how your country dances to Blues music you are welcome to do so... but that does not necessitate or justify changing anything this article, a simple additional paragraph or two or wiki-stub would suffice. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.236.86.163 (talk) 07:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not a uniform convention in American scholarly writing to capitalise 'black', and certainly not 'white'. It might be more appropriate to use 'African American' if it's contentious. There has been an ongoing discussion/debate about capitalising dance names - lindy hop is not a proper noun, unless you're specifically referring to Lindy (Charles Lindbergh, someone called 'Lindy') hop. You don't capitalise salsa or tango, so you don't capitalise lindy. I can't remember where the discussion on capitalising got to over on the lindy hop discussion page, so I figure it doesn't matter so long as it's consistent within the article. PlainJane 13:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: And it isn't a uniform convention in America to not capitalize them. If you can't cite specific sources to back up your changes, just leave them alone. Our Governmental census forms and a number of scholarly works written on race relations and Civil Rights here in America capitalize White and Black. As to Lindy Hop being capitalized, it is a proper Noun, a proper Noun is a name of a person, place or thing. Lindy Hop is a specific thing and properly speaking should always be written as the Lindy Hop. General trends in reducing the formalization of words in writing and acceptance of slang in America has cause things like the Lindy Hop to go out of vogue and be refered to both in writing and in verbal communication as simply lindy hop, or even lindy. However since it is accepted academically as a proper name for the dance, just as Blues is considered a proper name for the genre, capitalization is perfectly appropriate. In this case of Blues it is actually not just appropriate but more correct since lowercase blues refers to the emoition/mood while uppercase Blues is the proper name of a genre of music and dance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.49.221.27 (talk) 20:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate attempts at globalization 

message: This article is largely based on heresay and speculation - or, as I like to think of it - on oral history, anecdotal discussions and amateur sociological and historical field work.
If there are cases (as there certainly are) where we can't cite a published sourece, we should use qualifiers such as "as a social dance with  very little published history or records, much of the blues dance history written here is the product  of collated oral histories, amateur sociological and historical research and other unpublished matter". Wikiepedia has a policy of not accepting unpublished or original research, but I feel that the unpublished stuff in this area is actually far more useful and often far more accurate than many published works... if there are even any serious published pieces discussing these issues. So I would be happy to accept unreferenced points, so long as they are qualified.
I have removed all the 'citations needed' from the main article (replacing them with phrases like 'anecdotal evidence suggests' (can't remember exact examples, sorry)) and suggest that we discuss ways of citing or making clear the fact that much of this information has no published record here on these discussion pages instead. This article needs that tag at the top that lets readers know that this article needs work, and needs to cite its sources, rather than cluttering the article itself with evidence of disputes over citations.
We are still needing full bilbiographic details for a couple of the books/articles/whatever they are in the list of citations.
Using proper bibliographic details for published works is important because it helps readers find these sources again - and then read them! It's in our interest as dancers and dance historians (if not wikipedians) to spread knowledge of swing dances, and this would help. PlainJane 13:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations - let's play nice

message: I have also added an extra subheading - I think it's worth discussing the history of blues dancing in African American communities in one section (in fact, I think it's really, really important - essential - to emphasise the black history of these dances. It infuriates me that many of these dances are read as 'white' dances with their black history neglected), adding a section on blues dancing in African American communities today (does anyone know anything about that? I certainly don't). It's important to use African American rather than black in these discussions as 'black' means something different depending on whether you're blues dancing in London, in Singapore, New Zealand, Australia or America. We are discussing an African American verncular dance, and we should make it clear that this is where the dance's history lies - within an African diaspora, and more specifically, within an African American diaspora.
We should also have a section on blues dancing in the post-revival lindy hop communities - I imagine that this might be a different culture than that of African American communties (seeing as how most American lindy hoppers are white teenagers and students in their 20s!.
And if it exists, the rise of a distinct revivalist blues dancing tradition in America - do people come to revivalist blues dancing today without going through lindy hop? That's not the case in Singapore, Japan, Korea, the UK and much of Europe. PlainJane 13:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Subheadings to deal with issues of cultural/social specificity and context

message: I am unable to confirm the 1892 date for the Handy report that you mention. Handy left Florence, Alamaba in 1892, but moved to Birmingham. Perhaps you mean 1903 in Tutwiler, Miss? Or maybe Ma Rainey in 1902? Both of their desriptions were pretty vague. 
"At the pipe works in Bessemer, for example, back in '92 and '93 the dusky huskies had one that went like this:" lyrics that have nothing to do with St Loius follow P 140 "On the levee at St. louis I had heard Looking for the Bully sung by roustabouts" p 118 Robert Palmer in Deep Blues writes, "He had heard the East St Louis Blues and other jump-ups and one-verse songs as early as 1892." I see that someone has added all of this together to come up with the info written here. But that would be wrong. What this means is that Handy's report of "the weirdest music I had ever heard" (blues?) was a decade later than written here. Perhaps you can tell me where in Handy's autobiography I can find that reference.? Steve Pastor (talk) 17:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's an update, but it substantiates Robert Palmer's account. "While sleeping on cobblestones in St Louis ('92) I heard shabby guitarists picking out a tune called East ST Louis. It had numerous one-line verses and they would sing it all night." page 142 of his autobiography. Still, not blues in 1892. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Handy, blues, and 1892

message: Lots of "dance" names are tossed about regarding "blues dancing". I have been been researching them. I am presenting what I have found, along with references. Most often, the music that was danced to is not mentioned. When music IS mentioned, or when the decade(s) that the dance was described ARE mentioned, the music used may come as a surprise. I welcome input from anyone who has different information, but please bring it here from a substantial, verifiable source. Steve Pastor (talk) 19:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: dances mentioned as "blues dances"

message: Somebody coming to this Article to find out about blues dancing as it's done today will find a lot of history, and a lot of vague talk, but no real information about blues dancing today.
The "Blues dancing today" section ought to be about blues dancing today. But all I found in it is vague language with no real information.
E.g., "Blues music is about common experiences. It is a sharing of human condition that is accessible to all." This idealistic slogan describes about a million other things too, including the entire Wikipedia which is, after all, a globally accessible collaborative work that includes a lot of information about the human condition. So is blues dancing synonymous with the Wikipedia? Obviously not, yet the assertion allows for that possibility.
E.g., "There are now blues dancing communities throughout the international swing dancing community.... The spread of blues dancing has been largely a result of individual dancers traveling between local communities and establishing blues scenes." Other than the reference to "swing", this statement applies to many types of dancing.
E.g., "There are ongoing debates within blues dancing and swing dancing culture today about what constitutes 'authentic' or 'true' blues dancing." True of many types of dancing (and many types of many other things).
Once you ignore all of the non-specific fluff, almost nothing in the Article in any way distinguishes blues dancing today from other types of dancing.
A person reading this Article will know something about the history of blues dancing, and he will know that it involves traveling dancers who debate a lot, but little else.
What types of movements does blues dancing involve that are different from other types of dancing? Not stated.
Is it a partner dance? Implied, but not directly stated.
Is there a specific type of dance frame or dance hold between partners (if they are partners)? Unclear.
Is it a lead-follow type of dance?  Not stated. The Article mentions both freestyling and partner connection, which can only leave the reader guessing about exactly what type of lead-follow, if any, the dance involves. Does the freestyling occur when partners separate? Are the partners, if they are partners (unclear) freestyling together? Unclear.
Does the music have some specific rhythms? Not stated. We are told that in the 1980s a dance camp introduced slow dancing to blues, jazz, and early rhythm & blues. It's 2008 now; is this what blues dancers do today? Unclear.
How would one recognize blues dancing if one saw it done? Impossible to tell from this Article.
Rahul (talk) 18:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have yet to find any direct mention of "blues dance" in any book that covers either blues or African American dance. I am endeavoring to include in the article information about both subjects. Readers can draw their own conclusions about the validity of the term. Web sites discussing the subject contain similar, nebulous information that was here when I became interested in the subject. This leads me to think that it is what someone wants it to be. Neverthless, I will present the historical context as best I can.
So my response is that we should not take non-information from other web sites and put that into the Wikipedia. If we have no clear information about Blues dancing today, it should be enough to say so. Some day, when we have authoritative information available, we can fill it in. But it doesn't make sense to me to fill in fluff into the Wikipedia with "sharing of human condition that is accessible to all" type of vague language that sounds more like a political slogan than a description of any type of music or dance.
Perhaps the section on Blues dancing today should simply state something like this: "No authoritative descriptions can currently be found that describe contemporary Blues dancing with enough detail to distinguish it from other types of dancing." Then the Article will remain one mostly about the history of Blues dancing, and will not have a long section about Blues dancing today which contains mostly non-informative fluff that reads like a marketing flyer. Later on, when we have any concrete information available, the Blues Dancing Today section can be expanded to include such information.
Rahul (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me. In general when venacular dances are described, such as Slow Drag and Fish Tail, music is not mentioned. When it is mentioned, or when you put it in historical context, it begins to look like there are no dances that were specifically associated with blues. Rather, older dances or dance movements were danced to what we now call "blues". I've been reluctant to take out the non-info fluff stuff, (although I've already taken some out) out of respect to whoever put it in the article to begin with. "Blues dance" is a more catchy phrase than "dancing to blues". But as the amount of authoritative, verifiable, historic information increases (W.C. Handy's autobiography, Jazz Dance, etc), I am more open to doing it. Would you like to start? Steve Pastor (talk) 19:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I will be happy to contribute some edits to improve this Article. But first, I will wait a while to see if anybody else adds any other comments to this discussion. Rahul (talk) 00:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Article fails to describe blues dancing today 

message: I have removed this sentence "As with blues music, blues dancing finds its origins in West African rhythms and movement combined with Western European structure and partnering concepts ref Emery, Lynne Fauley. Black Dance in the United States from 1619 to 1970. California: National Press Books, 1972 ref." This book does NOT contain any such statement, and note that there is no page number listed. "Blues" occurs only once in the index, in a decription of a number performed in a show. Jazz, on the other hand is listed about a dozen times in the index. Steve Pastor (talk) 19:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Black Dance as reference

message: I've written 12 Blues Dancing Tips.  If you like them, please consider adding this link to the article.  I can't add such a link because I'm the person who wrote them. VoteFair (talk) 19:35, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Blues dancing tips

message: Damon: What you removed from this article is a statement made in the listed reference. Because it can be seen clearly on the listed page in the listed book, I have restored it to the text. If you have information that contradicts the information from this book, feel free to add it to the article. Steve Pastor (talk) 16:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Verbatim statement from a book, clearly referenced that was deleted

message: The section on Blues dancing in the contemporary swing dance community is weird. Why have we singled out Lindy Hop as a style that's accommodated "blues dancing"? It seems like what the section is actually about is some new style of dance that doesn't fit what would traditionally (as in the rest of the article) be considered blues dancing, but is referred to it by the same name. Either way, it's impossible to tell, because there are no references. Any help? Let's decide what that section is supposed to be about, pick an appropriate title, and prune it to verifiable statements. Sancho 16:35, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My contributions to the article were the result of finding out about any relationship to dancing to blues. I think that's an important part of the article. SOME of what people do today is related to those historic forms, it would seem, depending on who is teaching what. I am pretty sure that the popularity among the broader population of dancers started with the Lindy Hop scene, and spread from there. And I also think this stuff has been going on in the broader population, but under different names.I have resisted the urge to post info from a dance journal, the movie "Urban Cowboy", and a Swing dance book by Craig Hitchinson that uses the term "sleaze dancing", which to me seems about the same thing as much of what passes as "blues dancing". Often what we see here in Wikipdeia are articles that were started years ago by "enthusiasts" who seem most interested in an article about "the scene". Note that all of the historic forms have refereneces. Maybe Damon will come around. And, um, now that I reread some of this discussion, I can see why I moved on to other things. Steve Pastor (talk) 00:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Steve. One huge help would be to find some reliable sources for this section, otherwise, it might make sense to trim this section down a bunch. I'll browse around, but I haven't found much yet. Sancho 19:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sleeze dancing is not blues dancing, any more than the freak dancing going on in this years HS proms were. There is simply no discernible relation from any kinesthetic or musicality analysis. I opposed the inclusion of current dance trends that could not be directly linked to the original dance traditions either by direct influence or by continuation of aesthetic for precisely the reasons Sancho stated, there is no direct connection, it was just something that came up along side, which for the most part has moved past the calling itself blues and now refers to itself as Fusion expressing the idea that is not a single dance so much as a fusing of multiple dances with their technique, music, and aesthetic as a platform by which to express themselves in their own way... which clearly puts itself outside of the blues genre by pretty much every identifying element.
Damon.stone (talk) 22:23, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blues dancing today 

message: Removed WeBluesDance.com since more than 2/3 of the site appears to be devoted to Fusion and not blues. In it's place added Blues-Dance.com, I Choose Blues.com, and Confessing the Blues Podcast. If there are any other sites devoted specifically to blues dance please feel free to include them. If there are sites which are devoted to multiple dances but have a page that is specifically for blues please include them as well, but link directly to the blues dance page rather than the general site.
Damon.stone (talk) 22:31, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: In 2011 this article had an infobox, I suggest to revive it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:58, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Not seeing a significant benefit of that over the existing image with caption. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it will help the article significantly. I favor the additional information an infobox will provide Montanabw(talk) 23:45, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The only significant differences between the proposal here and what is currently in the article are (a) a title over the image and (b) more whitespace around the image - not really a significant help. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

text: If an infobox does not "add", how does it "elevate"? Those words are to me synonymous. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Add" and "add". What I questioned was only "additional information", - it should contain no additional information but information from the article. Waltz does that well, and the key facts add to the article - at least for me. Even more so for Tango, but we will not be able to use that more detailed box here, because Blues in general is the music genre. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:49, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to me the infobox template needs to be tweaked (why "signature" in there ?) in addition to adjusting it for this article.  But I favor adding it.  Montanabw(talk) 07:38, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think more generally some documentation for the infobox would be useful (signature likely refers to time signature as opposed to written signature). In this particular case though, your additions are not correct - blues dance as a form is not limited to either the blues genre of music or the United States. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:31, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, the lead says, "developed alongside and were danced to blues music, or the contemporary dances that are danced in that aesthetic.'  So yes, it is the blues;  just because someone might use ballet moves at a rock concert doesn't mean the dance genre isn't still classical music.  And the style clearly developed in the post- Reconstruction American south, so is that not "United States"?  Seriously.  Fix it, don't whine about it. Montanabw(talk) 19:36, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That's oversimplifying, IMO. The parameter is "country", not "country of origin" (and even if it were, US would be too simplistic, given the strands from which the genre emerged and how it has subsequently developed). And as the article goes on to say, the dance involves not only the blues genre of music but related genres like ragtime and swing, and even more distant ones; if you read the last paragraph of the article, it gives a sense of the complexity of this issue, though it certainly warrants improvement. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:11, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: All of which are also American forms of music, albeit with African and other roots.  Montanabw(talk) 00:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

text: Support infobox. It now also emits microformat metadata. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:48, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox?