Stating the problem: What the heck is 'swing dancing' anyway?

A favourite quotation of mine comes from the jazz critic, Garry Giddins who features in Ken Burns' 'Jazz' documentary series:

"[Jazz] is the ultimate in rugged individualism. It's going out there on that stage and saying, 'It doesn't matter how anybody else did it. This is the way that I'm going to do it.'"

And another, from the great Duke Ellington:

"Put it this way. Jazz is a good barometer of freedom... In its beginnings, the United States of America spawned certain ideals of freedom and independence through which, eventually, jazz was evolved, and the music is so free that many people say it is the only unhampered, unhindered expression of complete freedom yet produced in the country."

The great irony of jazz is that its central tradition is innovation. The greatest jazz musicians and dancers, past and present, rose to fame not by doing what had been done before but by doing something new, their own way, stretching the frame provided by history. I'm not claiming that any old thing qualifies as jazz, provided it's different. I'm claiming that good jazz - both music and dance - is about putting a few new brushstrokes on the giant fresco, which has grown at the hands of many before you, rather than just going over the same old strokes again. I am no jazz connoisseur but I think there might be something in this idea as a guiding principle for getting to the heart of good jazz dancing. In my experience the most common definitions that people seem to have for 'swing dancing' are something like the following three:

1) History: 'Swing dancing' is an umbrella term for the various vernacular jazz dances of the original jazz era. The exact dates and dances included tend to be controversial but the general idea is understood. It follows that the highest goal of any modern would-be swing dancer should be to recreate the dancing that was done 'back in the day', tiny snippets of which can be watched in old videos.

2) Moves: This is an extension of 1). Swing dancing consists of a large list of predefined moves and routines, which have either been handed down from the original swing era or have been created since, 'in the spirit' of that era. According to this definition, a dancer's goal should be to learn and remember these patterns, as well as how to mix and connect them in ways which feel natural, look impressive and reflect whatever music is being danced to.

3) Rockstars: Good dancing is whatever is done by the people who win the most competitions and/or get the most teaching gigs. An aspiring dancer's goal should be to emulate the dancing done by those people.

Predictably perhaps, I think these definitions all miss the point because they focus on doing what someone else has already done; they forget the innovation. I think that all three of the above are kind of 'grades in swing school', phases that dancers progress through as they improve. But in order to graduate, a dancer has to move beyond these and find his/her own style.

But what does that mean?

Good dancers do what they do for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes it's about fancy moves or aerials, which are athletically difficult. Sometimes it's about dancing to the level of a partner, deliberately going easy so that a dance can be fun for someone of a lower skill level. Sometimes it's about being silly and not taking things too seriously, or it could be about taking things very seriously and trying to win competitions. The list goes on. But in my experience there's one universal across all these situations: No matter what the circumstances or goals, good dancing will be improved if it's also musical.

So, what is musicality? It seems to be something that is generally understood - everyone knows musical dancing when they see it - but difficult to break down and explain. So then, if this blog is to focus on picking apart in a scientific way the fundamentals of jazz dancing, this seems like a good place to start...