In a conversation, no one's the boss. When either person speaks, the other listens. It's a lousy conversation if one person dominates; that's a lecture. Partner dancing can be a conversation.
Conversational dance is collaboration: 2 partners work and play together to create a work of art, sharing power and creative control, letting the music rule. They work together to embody the music as fully as possible; that embodiment is the art of partner dancing, the thing that makes it more than just a workout.
Partner dancing has to be all about the music because the music gives both partners something to surrender to equally. Deep musicality balances the power between partners: whichever partner's more in the zone with the music at that moment leads the way. Being in the zone with the music gives your dancing a delicious, irresistible authority.
Collaborative partner dancers move toward conversational dancing by refining the traditional roles to make all the dancing voluntary, respectful, and mutually creative. Some core refinements:
Collaborative leading is inviting, rather than ordering, pushing, pulling or cranking my partner around. Collaborative following is responding freely to the invitation without being limited by it: as a collaborative follower I'm free to accept, decline, or creatively move the dance in a different direction.
Responding is not the same as interpreting. Interpreting is expanding on something given. A response, by contrast, is free to go in any direction, including "yeah, I got a better idea..." That kind of response is pretty standard among collaborative dancers; it's indicative of the kind of playfulness and equality that collaborative dancing engenders.
Collaborative following is active, creative, and free of submission;
collaborative leading is sensitive, responsive, and free of domination.
To follow collaboratively, I don't obey my partner, and I don't struggle with my partner. Instead, I receive my partner's idea and do everything I can to dance with it, actively and creatively. My default is to take my partner's invitation and run with it; give it extra oomph. I follow with power steering, amplifying and extending what my partner has initiated. But if I don't like how it's going, or have a different idea, I'm free to refuse or redirect.
I love to be interrupted & redirected when I'm dancing as a leader. I've found that my partner's interruptions almost always make the dancing more musical; dancing the following role naturally encourages deeper listening. Dancing the leader role requires thinking and planning, at least in the early stages of learning to dance, and that can become a nasty habit. I'm no fun to dance with if I'm all up in my head thinking about moves.
To lead collaboratively, I never try to move my partner. I move myself, and that movement contains an intrinsic invitation: my movement invites a response from my partner. I dance with whatever response I get. I never insist on something I was expecting.
My movements as a leader don't push or pull my partner, however gently; they're simply invitations. I cultivate the equivalent of shear pins all over my body: if my partner moves unexpectedly, I give way immediately, and fully. Whatever my partner does, I follow that: I respond in a way that keeps the dancing going.
Collaborative leading requires following. Ordinary good leading requires knowing where your partner's weight and balance are, and what kind of step will be easy and natural. Collaborative leading is suggesting movement like that, and then following whatever actually does happen in response without resistance, fluidly adapting, always ready to offer support to make the movement easier and more musical.
Embrace and frame are two contrasting words that are used to describe the physical connection between dance partners. An embrace is a hug: you and your partner draw close and gently hold each other; an embrace is a gesture of love. Framing calls to mind two by fours and steel beams: the necessarily rigid framework that supports a structure.
Different dances and schools of dancing have tended to go one way or the other: the basic stance or starting point is either a gentle hug, or holding your partner firmly away. Framing generally indicates a separation between you and your partner; an embrace can be either open or closed. Collaborative dancers move fluidly through many degrees of open and close embrace.
Overusing arms & giving weight. Beginning dancers have a tendency to overuse their arms anyway; being taught to have "good strong frame" can compound this bad tendency. I still have chronic arm and shoulder pain from poor use/overuse of my arms as a beginner. I was taught to be very firm indeed; "arms like steel bands" were words I heard spoken admiringly in class. Not a happy memory. My partner and I were also supposed to settle back into each other's arms and counterbalance, to give weight to each other. That was really hard on my shoulders; I don't think shoulders were meant for that kind of stress.
Dynamism yes! However, there can be plenty of dynamism - compression and elasticity - in even the closest of embraces. Zydeco and balboa are dynamic close embrace dances. Tango is full of dynamism, but it's generally brief - just a dynamic moment for a specific purpose, then back to a neutral embrace, each partner balanced of their own axis.
Three uses for embrace. A collaborative embrace is not for moving my partner or being moved by my partner. It has 3 purposes: communicating ideas and suggestions back and forth, stabilizing the spatial relationship between the 2 dancing bodies, and offering support for my partner's voluntary movements.
The leader makes a suggestion; the best leading come from the core. The follower feels what's happening in the leader's core via the arms, and simultaneously sees the leader's movement, grasping the intent of that movement and moving in response. The embrace helps coordinate and stabilize the partners' independent but connected movements; each partner offers the other firmness and support, when asked for, to make the movement easier. "When asked for" is the key phrase here: there's no pushing or pulling. Instead, each partner is ready and willing to offer responsive support.
When my partner asks for responsive support, there can be a lot of strength and intensity in the embrace, for that split second. But for the other 99.9% of the dance, I want my embrace to be featherlight. A light touch is much more conducive to collaboration than a heavy one.
Beginning dancers typically use a heavier touch, with more muscular exertion in the embrace. This make coordination more predictable, and helps with balance; beginners have to rely on each other for help with balance and coordination. Skilled dancers learn to use a lighter touch, to maintain their own balance, and to initiate their own movement.
A heavy touch is fatiguing, and can easily feel overbearing. Common sense dictates using no more force or pressure than necessary to communicate back and forth and dance together; unnecessary pressure just wears muscles out, and eventually joints. Best to err on the light side, using just the amount of strength needed to communicate and keep the dance going. Be especially happy if the dance goes in unexpected directions! Creativity is always unexpected, it's always something new, something you couldn't predict. That's the essence of creativity.
I use my strength to move myself, not my partner. Moving myself at the right time to the right spot with the right shape creates a delicious somatic invitation when I'm leading, and an equally delicious response when I'm following.