Talk:Blues dance

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Jazz Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jazz, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of jazz on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JazzWikipedia:WikiProject JazzTemplate:WikiProject JazzJazz articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Dance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance articles WikiProject Dance To-do list: To nominate at WP:FAC: To improve to Featured standard: To nominate as a Good article: To expand: 18th century dance - 20th century ballet - Bolero - Choreography on Broadway - Dance education - English ballet - Indian classical dance - Italian ballet - List of dance companies - Meg Stuart - Opera ballet - Sasha Waltz - Scotch reel - Set dance - Physically integrated dance To cleanup: Contra dance - Salsa (dance) - Dandiya - Lead and follow To unbias: To check for copyvios: To merge: List of dancers and List of dance personalities‎ as per AfD discussion Substubs needing expansion: see /substubs To destub: Amir Hossain Babu - Canada Dance Festival - Dance etiquette - Flash dance - more Needing references: Chorus line - specifically verifying that each girl actually started out as a chorine To create: Broadway dance - Country Western Dance International - Dance and cinema - Dance and society - German folk dancing - Latin swing - Post-structuralist ballet - Push (dance) - Salon dance - Shuffle dance - Swing boogie - World Dance Alliance - Xavier Le Roy - more Wanted Pics/Graphics: Category:Dance articles needing images African diaspora Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

This article seems to be largely discussing the American history of blues dancing, in the 'post-revival' era (ie post lindy revival), which has led to a few generalisations which really don't apply to the wider international swing dance community. It would be worth mentioning the blues dancing parties at Herrang (not sure if they had blues dancing every year at Herrang, or when it started). It's also worth discussing the blues dancing traditions in other contemporary swing dance communties. As an example, certain Australian cities have had strong blues dancing cultures within their rock and roll dancing scenes, or within the live blues music scenes _beyond the lindy scenes. This would need more research.

Could someone add the full bio details for the books referenced (eg dates published, where published, publisher, title, author/editor), 'complete works of blahblah' isn't useful if you're researching that particular point or wanting to support that point.PlainJane 10:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is culturally specific by necessity. Since the term has cultural, historical, and academic meanings the article should discuss these things. IF you want to research all the dances that are done to Blues music but don't qualify as Blues dance from the cultural, historical or academic standard prevelant among dance historians, cultural anthropologists, or ethnomusicologists who specialze in "native dance forms" then feel free to do so, but ensure that you properly identify it as such.

In regards to BDG reference citation... since all three of her major works on the topic address the point specifically and generally it is a valid citation... though if you prefer I could include pages 1-220 for DITD, 12-75 60-94 and 201-236 for BDB, etc. etc. etc.

Dave... it is "highly disputed" only by those who haven't done the research. Until they have actually read the books listed, interviewed ethnomusicologists, dance historians, and social anthropologists who specialize in this kind of thing, their opinions don't stand up to peer review of the academic world... I know a five year old who would highly dispute the fact that green leafy vegetables are good for you because they make him feel "icky"... should I go and delete the health benefits on wikipedia's spinache entry?

IF you want to change the meaning, add or delete statements given, please include citations that support your doing so. Simply saying that the citations aren't exact enough is not appropriate for deletion by Wikipedia's rules. 'citation needed' is the appropriate tag. The fact is every statement in this article can be supported by printed works, and even by video documentries, and interviews with first person sources.

I take the point that this is a discussion of a specific dance and music culture, yet it is not sufficient to assume that every reference to blues dancing today actually applies to blues dancing in every country in the contemporary swing dance world. If this is a discussion only of African American or American blues dancing, then it should be renamed 'blues dancing in the United States'. BTW, could you please sign your comments so we can keep track of who's making which points? Thanks. Oh, and it might be worth remembering that we're all friends here until someone kicks you on the dance floor and doesn't apologise. PlainJane 13:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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).[reply]

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)[reply]

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).[reply]

This is a really interesting article and there are some great minds with lots of knowledge at work on it. It'd be nice if we could play nice and work constructively to make a well-structured, well-researched and really interesting article. I feel that the recent spate of edits/undos are the result of misunderstandings and can be overcome!

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

At this point this article does not discuss regional differences in blues dancing and music in the pre swing dance revival era. It would be really useful to have discussions of: - where people did blues dancing (ie what were the buildings like?) - examples of the music they danced to (particular musicians, the role of bands and record players, etc) - what sort of people did blues dances (was it a teenager thing? were there kids at blues dancing venues? did these factors vary across communities - eg was it ok for kids to be at blues dancing events in New York but inappropriate in Kansas City?), etc.

Is there a relationship with Juke joints that should be explored?

Were there slave dances from which specific blues steps or dances are descended, and how does this slavery affect the way blues dancing is/was regarded (eg there were some slave dances which were taboo for white eyes or for people who were not members of the community - Tommy DeFrantz disusses some interesting examples in his work)?PlainJane 13:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It'd be really great to flesh out the different historical/traditional/authentic blues dance forms in this article, listing specific names and brief descriptions of each. We're also lacking a discussion of solo blues dancing.PlainJane 02:05, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have added a bunch of information that needs to be cited/sourced. Some of it I don't dispute, but at least one source should be named for those who want to grow their knowledge... others I do dispute and if we are going to "play nice" I'll give you a chance to go through and add citation yourself before I mark it up as [need citation].

"Popularity" of Blues did not crest in the 20's though I also have some books that indicate as much but various music industry charts showing top ten lists show songs that fall within the Blues idiom placing highly and sales figure support the idea that Blues was selling more records in the 40's and 50's than it was in the 20's... what is different is the lack of focus as the sole form of popular music for Blacks.

I've already addressed the term Black versus African American... The term is not one I like nor agree with, and there is more than enough academic and social-anthro, not to mention common media that references Black.

How will we address the issue anecdotal evidence? There is so little material published about these issues, a formal 'citation' isn't possible. Yet it would be difficult to 'disprove' many of these points. Constructive suggestions welcome!

There's a discussion of the term 'African American' and its use on the African American entry which you might find interesting. PlainJane 01:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you can tell from the discussion in that article there is very little concensus here in the States on what "African-American" means. There is little dispute about Black refering both to ones ancestory being African and the sub-culture of those of various Black ethnicities mingling in America and combining with European traditions.

Jook Joints like Rent Parties and After Hours Clubs had alot to do with the formation and development of Blues dances. Jookin' is an excellent book to give you some insights into the culture of social dance in rural Black areas. This artilce could be expanded to gigantic proportions, but I really don't have as much time as that would take. I mean just going through my library of books and notes of interviews etc. to discuss anyone aspect in more detail would definitely be months of work. Unless someone is going to be giving me a grant to do so, it is just not overly realistic.

As to how we should handle some of this info that is either original research or oral tradition... I'm not sure. I'm firmly set on the idea that the article discuss dancing that is within the original tradition as being Blues dance(s). I also believe that dances that don't fit within this tradition should either have their own section that refers to dances done to Blues music or left out of this article entirely.

I have no problem with the inclusion of Oral material being included provided that it supports written works, or is not found to be contradictory by the people who read it... and that conclusions based on this information are not included... but even that is probably crossing the line toomuch. What are your thoughts?

I'm hoping to get some of the other big name dancers who have been researching and teaching these dances to add to the material... though most of them seem to hold wikipedia at a hands distance... and the earlier inclusions in this article I'd say easily demonstrate why.

Sorry about that changing of book titles... it was completely accidental, I thought I had made the proper change back and apparently I lost my connection. Not trying to be P.I.A. I had gone through to change references of culture to Black, and leave references to ethnicity Adrican-American, but I wasn't as careful with my word replacement as I should have been. Mia cupla.

The article is specifically about Blues Dancing. While a certain amount of inclusion of things intimately tied or confused with Blues dance makes sense, using sheet music as an indication of what a dance was originally danced to because of name association is flawed. The vernacular dances predate sheet music which calls for the dances, not the Tin-Pan Alley form of creating Sheet Music in hopes of spawning a dance craze.

Any serious studying of Black music and Black dance will reveal dances that became associated with Ragtime music originated in quarters were the predmoninant music was not ragtime but often predates ragtime. Cakewalk for example which you site as being a ragtime dance (a music which started surging in popularity in the early 1890's and not being written until the mid 1890's) while the dance itself came out in the South amongst slaves in the 1850's. IT is more proper to refer to the Cakewalk as one of the roots of blues dance rather than a blues dance itself. The Slow Drag is very similar in that it's originas do not lie with Ragtime music, but with the rural music of the Southern Blacks the Blues which W.C. Handy reported hearing as early as 1892. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.70.156.69 (talk) 14:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the article on Slow Drag. Please list your reference that the Slow Drag was danced to blues before it was danced to ragtime, as the references indicate. Cakewalk was not a "ragtime dance". Rather, it was a dance that was done to ragtime music. "Snake Hips, another "Dance" that is also often labeled a "blues dance" goes back to plantation times. Earl Snake Hips Tucker didn't create the dance in Harlem in the 1920s. He popularized it. These "Dances" that have been associated with "blues" have been used to dance to music that has changed, including ragtime and jazz, and changed again. Or, in the case of dancing them to rock n roll, such a watusi. They are not specifically associated with blues, other than in the minds of those who don't know, or haven't bothered to find out the history of the dances. Ignoring the history of the dances does a disservice to anyone who comes to Wikipedia for information. I will be providing a reference that states that "African" dance movements have in fact been used over and over again to different music.

I do not accept the argument that the history of a dance is "out of context" just because it inconvientiently was danced to some other kind of music.

A stated above - "Any serious studying of Black music and Black dance will reveal dances that became associated with Ragtime music originated in quarters were the predmoninant music was not ragtime but often predates ragtime." Again, when you find references to these dances being done to pre ragtime music, and, incidently, pre blues music, please list them in the article. While we wait for that "serious study", I have been supplying references from books written by "serious" researchers, most of which have been expunged from this article. Apparently, anything that contradicts the preconceived notion that the cited dances are "blues dance" is not welcome here.

Steve Pastor (talk) 18:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Steve Pastor, one of the editors of this Article, responded with a comment on my Talk page. I am inserting it here, and adding a response, to keep the discussion of this Article in one place. His comment was:

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

And that is the truth of it. None of the first person sources Mura Dehn filmed and interviewed that were alive in 2004, including the social dancers from the Savoy Ballroom could verify that information and highly regarded dancers like Frankie Manning, Norma Miller, George Sullivan, Sugar Sullivan, and people like Coley Wallace actively dispute this statement even if it is a quote from the book (and if it is a direct quote please enclose it in quotation marks), as does her documentry itself. In the section she has subtitled blues she talks about Rent Party Blues, Gut Bucket Blues etc. So she could not possibly be using the term to refer specifically to Ballroom (which is not what dancers named above referred to it as) so despite that it is in print, 1st person sources and previous existing evidence directly contradicts part of this statement. The second half is the assumption that *this* supposed reference of Dehn's was the reason for contemporary swing dancers to refer to all slow dancing to blues music as blues dancing, which is also not likely to be true since we have three other examples of the term being used. As a contemporary Lindy Hopper I know that this documentary was not the source of my use of the term, I know that it was not for a number of other respected dancers and teachers, and early adopters of the term blues dance. So yes, it may be something you took from a printed essay, but that does not make it accurate. We do know and have solid proof that she used the term as a sub-section title. That inclusion is beyond debate so I replaced your quote.

Knowing Terry I suspect there was either an editing error, or you are misinterpreting the statement made, the term Ballrooming was taken specifically from her documentary and used by contemporary dancers to refer specifically to the slow dance styles done in the Savoy Ballroom (the second which the original dancers called "The Walk" which was short for either The Savoy Walk or The Swing Walk (1st person sources appear to contradict each other, or it was referred to as both)). He and I had this conversation in Harlem as we were both interviewing the survivng dancers from this documentary.--Damon.stone (talk) 16:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, Damon, thanks for bringing this to the talk page. You might be aware of the fact that wikipedia is supposed to work on verifiable references. Other than what you were told by your teachers, coneversations, etc, can you substantiate what you are asserting? So, for instance, what WAS the source of the term Blues dancing, in writing, where I can read it for myself? If you would like, I can email you a pdf of that page and paragraph from the book (let me know where to send it). As far as using quotes, I could do that, but that is something that, according to wikipedia policy is frowned upon. It is a near direct quote. At the very least it should be acknowledged. It you want to refute it with other sources. I acknowledge that the author/editor may be in error, but don't think that simply deleting the statement is desirable, and that refuting it would be a better approach. We could make sure that the statement is attributed to the author of that section of the book, rather than in the reference. Is that acceptable to you?Steve Pastor (talk) 19:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CHAPTER TWO: BLUES Rent Party THE ENTIRE ENSEMBLE Shake Blues SANDRA GIBSON Speak Easy LEON JAMES, AL MINNS & GUEST PARTNER Male Shake Blues AL MINNS Gutbucket Blues SANDRA GIBSON & JAMES BERRY (GUEST ARTIST) [1] I don't see the term "Blues Dance" or "Blues Dancing", and have just made an interlibrary loan request to view the dvd myself. Steve Pastor (talk) 22:52, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the point Steve, if the information is untrue or questionable, there is no point in including it. The point of the first part of the article is show that the term Blues was used to refer to the dancing. Each section of the Spirit Moves she uses the name of the dances or dance style not the music it was danced to. She sticks all these dances together and calls the section Blues which is what we are discussing. Dance is added purely to distinguish this article from the one about the music...

But I can not stress enough, multiple first person sources trump a single printed article. With no corroborating evidence leaving the statement out makes far more sense. But if you want to read a more accurate statement from Terry check these threads out[2][3]. What you get is statements about where the term Ballroom and Ballrooming came from, as used by todays dancer's, a bunch of dancers talking about why they use the term Blues dance, and not a single reference to the term being lifted purposefully or accidently through confusion of the documentary. --Damon.stone (talk) 08:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI "These provisional observations are based on discussions with "Sugar" Sullivan, Ruby Reeves, Vicky Gadson, Marthat Hickson, Sylvan Charles, and other former Savoy dancers from the period 1944-2004 to distinguish the different types of slow dancing at the Savoy that have recently been arbitrarily merged as one dance (the blues) by current so-called swing dancers. The latter may have possibly been misled by Mura Dehn's use the the term The Blues in The Spirit Moves (Mura Dehn, 1951), by which she specifically meant the dance called the ballroom but which the swing dancers seem to assume refers to all slow dancing to blues music." A Social and Popular Dance Reader. Edited by Julie Malnig. page 144. ISBN 978-0-252-03363-6 978-0-252-07565-0. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:47, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checking the first yahoodi link, Terry made one post, listed here in its entirity. "terry monaghan Yehoodite Lindy: Joined: 25 Mar 2003 Posts: 67 Back to top Posted: Thu Oct 30, 2003 1:41 pm Post subject: Just like Lindy Hop / Jitterbug had different names and ways of dancing it all over the US, slow dancing varied also. The Stearns Jazz Dance has many instances of this. However at the Savoy Ballroom one of the ways of dancing slow was called "The Ballroom" which is what can be seen in The Spirit Moves. Although the number "Tain't Nobody's Business" was superimposed over the film of the dancing during the editing of the film, it is reasonably close enough to give some idea about how the music and dance worked together, and as has already been pointed out it wasn't always danced to 12-bar blues music. I don't have a copy to hand, but if my memory is accurate there is a particularly fine example of the "The Ballroom" being danced in this section by "Big Nick" (they guy with the sweat patch on the back of his suit jacket) and "Sugar" Sullivan. Last edited by terry monaghan on Sat Nov 01, 2003 2:38 am; edited 1 time in total" Steve Pastor (talk) 20:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

terry monaghan Yehoodite Lindy: Joined: 25 Mar 2003 Posts: 67 Back to top

Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:44 pm    Post subject:    Signet wrote: 

Quote: The style of blues that was commonly danced at the Savoy ("ballroomin blues")....

I’ve come across no reference to the term “blues ballroomin’” in relation to the Savoy. I have heard various references to the same dance being called “The Ballroom” in the Swing Era, and which incidentally probably owed more to adagio than any ballroom dance. Austin and Austin were the classic Whitey’s Lindy Hopper's exponents, whilst Little Nick and Iva were the same for the Third Generation. It was one of two slow dances that evolved at the Savoy, the other being “Walking The Floor.”

Neither is there any record of it being called a “blues” dance back then. That misunderstanding seems to have arisen from Mura Dehn’s at times inaccurate captioning of her film “The Spirit Moves.” Pepsi Bethel taught the Jiving Lindy Hoppers a dance he called “The Blues” in the mid 1980s, which apparently was originally created for his Authentic Jazz Dance Company in the 1970s. On reflection it seemed to have had more in common with “Walking The Floor.”

I have yet to read a plausible explanation as to why current enthusiasts, who are of course rightly dancing in whatever way they choose to, try to generically group together such a wide variety of mostly unrelated dance forms, other than that they are all danced to slow tempos? Why not enjoy and value the original dances under their original names, or specifically change them in the cases where new interpretations have made them look significantly different? Sustaining what appears to be the current confusion, serves to largely wall off newcomers from the actual history of popular dancing to jazz music." Steve Pastor (talk) 21:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, this second post seems to confirm that what is in the cited book is exactly what Terry meant to write. Steve Pastor (talk) 21:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another post "terry monaghan Yehoodite Lindy: Joined: 25 Mar 2003 Posts: 67 Back to top Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:26 pm Post subject: Damon wrote: Quote: Ballrooming and Ballroom Blues (and the other names associated with it) are all various takes on the title of that particular section in "The Spirit Moves." I’m glad we agree then that the terms “Ballrooming” and “Ballroom Blues” derive from Mura Dehn’s mistaken captioning in “The Spirit Moves.” It would not be the first time that new names have arisen from a misunderstanding! I also appreciate your implied agreement with the main point of my response to Signet, that there is no evidence that the term “ballroomin’ blues” was ever used while the Savoy was open. On the other hand there is textual and oral evidence that denotes the use of the term “the ballroom” or just “ballroom.” If someone wants to give whatever they are now dancing a new name, that’s their choice. But I doubt whether anyone can explain the sense in delving back in history in order to alter the terminology originally used, although I think it most likely that Signet did not intentionally mean to do this. Quote: ... for the same reason why the term jazz dance or swing dance is used. Convenient group labeling of dances that use similar elements/aesthetics. I’d go along with a similarity in relation to the terms “Swing Dance” and “Blues Dancing”, but without the “similar elements/aesthetics” proviso. A number of the included dances have hardly anything in common with each other eg elements of “Jazz [Broadway Style] Dance” and “The Grind” in the case of “Blues Dancing,” or “Balboa” and “Ballroom Jive” in the case of “Swing Dancing”. Blues Dancing” like “Swing Dancing” simply denotes a wide variety of dance forms executed to an associated genre/s of music. Thus in the case of “Blues Dancing,” “Slow Dancing” is probably a more useful term, and is at least self-explanatory to newcomers. Exactly what is meant by the term “Jazz Dance” has remained hotly disputed with little if any agreement, especially since Marshall Stearns went on the attack in relation to this subject in the early 1960s. I think thus it is best left out of this discussion. terry monaghan Yehoodite

Lindy: Joined: 25 Mar 2003 Posts: 67 Back to top Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:45 pm Post subject: Hi Signet I've only just caught up with your response. Thanks for the acknowledgement! I would like to point out respectfully that you don't have to be a dance historian to know the difference between one dance and another. Or you could follow your arguement to its conclusion and have two types of dancing Fast and Slow (or if you prefer, "blues" being the latter)? Most people who dance find it more helpful to use distinctive names so they don't have play guessing games as to what their partner might be doing. The other questionable assertion you made is that most slow dances at the Savoy would be the "blues." The US has distinct regional cultural variations as no doubt you know. Out mid-west your would be right, but not necessarily so at the Savoy. Don't forget that Mura Dehn dubbed the music over the dancing clips in The Spirit Moves - which seems to be the sources of most of confusion on this subject - and unfortunately we don't know the precise tunes they were actually dancing to. We do know however that 32 bar jazz ballads were extremely popular there." [4]Steve Pastor (talk) 19:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

== Nowhere in any of his posts does he state that the term Blues dance was used by dancers today because of Mura Dehn's documentary, he says that the Ballroom one of the two slow dances done at the Savoy was referred to as a Blue dance as an unfortunate side effect of her inaccurate titling.

Steve, Blues as this article refers to is a collection of dances, not a single dance. They have an undeniable shared cultural origination, are danced to the same genre of music (or music that is so closely tied to the Blues as to be given a hyphenated name). I have interviewed and studied under Harlem dancers, Savoy Dancers, and specifically Whitey's Lindy Hoppers, some even featured in The Spirit Moves. While my stance was developed directly by my interactions with those dancers, the ones from her documentary were very clear, the music that was dubbed was representative of the style and tempo of which they were actually dancing to. Now if you want to have an argument that Basie, Ellington, Ella, and Webb, never played blues then that is an argument we can have... but as it is you are using an essay to try and prove a thing that a significant number of blues dancers today would be able to refute from their own experience. The statement as you are interpreting it is unprovable. I mean really, how is ANY single person going to determine that what we are referring to as Blues dance is done so because of a misunderstanding of a documentary without interviewing a statistically significant number... which of course would also mean that the examples provided of Albert Murray and the magazine Amateur Dancer must not have had any impact on the dancers. I know I read the book almost a decade before I saw the Spirit Moves.

I must have missed where I said most of the Slow dances at the Savoy were Blues. Please point this out to me so I can correct it. The bands at the Savoy played Waltzes and Foxtrots at a variety of tempo as well as jazz and blues, and I would never state that either of those is a dance that fits the blues aesthetic.--Damon.stone (talk) 04:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Nowhere in any of his posts does he state that the term Blues dance was used by dancers today because of Mura Dehn's documentary, he says that the Ballroom one of the two slow dances done at the Savoy was referred to as a Blue dance as an unfortunate side effect of her inaccurate titling." from Damon's recent post Steve Pastor (talk) 00:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"These provisional observations are based on discussions with "Sugar" Sullivan, Ruby Reeves, Vicky Gadson, Marthat Hickson, Sylvan Charles, and other former Savoy dancers from the period 1944-2004 to distinguish the different types of slow dancing at the Savoy that have recently been arbitrarily merged as one dance (the blues) by current so-called swing dancers. The latter may have possibly been misled by Mura Dehn's use the the term The Blues in The Spirit Moves (Mura Dehn, 1951), by which she specifically meant the dance called the ballroom but which the swing dancers seem to assume refers to all slow dancing to blues music." A Social and Popular Dance Reader. Edited by Julie Malnig. page 144. ISBN 978-0-252-03363-6 978-0-252-07565-0. the exact text from the book with the section authored in part by Terry, which is not contradicted by anything he posted on Yahoodi. Steve Pastor (talk) 00:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, but notice he has ample opportunity to make this same assertion amongst this "group of so-called swing dancers" and refuses to do so. Why not? Because it is pure speculation on his part by which he has no proof to support and stating that on Yehoodi would have certainly caused him to be called out. You are right that his statement was what you said it was... however that does not make up for the the fact it has no supporting evidence, and it isn't even a personal experience put into print. He is guessing about a thing which he could have easily interviewed a number of people on the forefront of the contemporary dance scene that would have supported or refuted his hypothesis. On these grounds I say it should be left out.--Damon.stone (talk) 06:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Neither is there any record of it being called a “blues” dance back then. That misunderstanding seems to have arisen from Mura Dehn’s at times inaccurate captioning of her film “The Spirit Moves.” Pepsi Bethel taught the Jiving Lindy Hoppers a dance he called “The Blues” in the mid 1980s, which apparently was originally created for his Authentic Jazz Dance Company in the 1970s."

I have yet to read a plausible explanation as to why current enthusiasts, who are of course rightly dancing in whatever way they choose to, try to generically group together such a wide variety of mostly unrelated dance forms, other than that they are all danced to slow tempos? Why not enjoy and value the original dances under their original names, or specifically change them in the cases where new interpretations have made them look significantly different? Sustaining what appears to be the current confusion, serves to largely wall off newcomers from the actual history of popular dancing to jazz music."

both statements from his Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:44 pm Post. Steve Pastor (talk) 16:38, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let it go. It is one man's opinion with no facts to back it up with plenty of evidence to the contrary, even if it is not "wikipedia approved." Other than his single opinion you will find no corroborating evidence from any of the main instructors, competitors, of today, nor the Sullivans, who are still alive and dancing. None of them support that statement. The current statement is accurate, provable, and not simply one persons opinion.--Damon.stone (talk) 03:25, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since IMO we've covered all of the reasons why what is in the book is what Terry (and Karen Hubbard, the coauthor of that section) most certainly meant to say, let's move on to how wikipedia is supposed to work. I hope you take some time to look at [5] where you will find the following "Neutral point of view is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles, and of all article editors." Steve Pastor (talk) 18:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Right, which is why the change is better. Rather than making a definitive statement that the term Blues dance comes from Mura Dehn, he says possibly, because there is absolutely no proof to it. Without any verifiable evidence at all, the addition has been dropped from this article. Should I mention that Monaghan's (and believe me I know Terry better than you, this statement is his and his alone) statement of "so-called swing dancers" is a value judgment about them, their dance ability, and their authenticity, which defies Wikipedia's requirement for neutrality.--Damon.stone (talk) 21:39, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you saw the latest episode of So You Think You Can Dance, you would have seen/heard a woman who stated that Frankie Manning created Lindy Hop. You would also have seen some very poor quality "swing dancers" who stated that they were Lindy Hoppers. Those are the people Terry is referring to, I'm sure. Not you or any of the other people who have extensive knowledge of the subject. I do hope, though, that you can help to continue to improve the article, and all of our knowledge about the subject, by putting forth what is supposed to be the cornerstone of wikipedia - things that are "verifiable". I've even acknowledged that I would not object to "unverifiable" personal accounts to balance a smoothed out version of what is in print (which is why I paraphased in the first place). I hate it when people throw around extensive quotes from "the rules", or any of the almost countless pages of guidelines for this "encyclopedia" created by people who are supposed to be co operating with each other, but, I'd like you to consider that if it is "common knowledge", it should be possible to find something in writing that meets the critera. So, if the term "blues dancing" comes from instructors, where did THEY get it, and when did they start using it? And what is the "reference" for that information? Steve Pastor (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did see that, and I did cringe... but Terry is not nor has he ever been a part of the Blues scene. He doesn't know or interact with the vast majority of the movers and shakers and as such he has no basis for his statement at all. As such his statement is hyperbole and offensive as it paints everyone equally in the Blues scene as being ignorant, when the fact is he has no idea what he is talking about. You see this kind of arrogance among academics and specialists all the time. The assumption that because they have a doctorate in Chemical Engineering that they can make absolute statements about Nanotechnology even contradicting someone with a Doctorate in Molecular Engineering. Expertise in one field, no matter how related, does not equate to expertise in another.

Most of the top instructors are too busy actually doing the dancing and instruction to write and have printed treatises on the subject. Researchers and academics should both know when you study a vernacular art a significant portion is going to be oral history and what is written is still oral history simply transcribed by someone else. You'll get contrasting and contradictory statements. It is up to you to determine what the veracity of any given statement is, whether it is someone's opinion (as this so clearly was) and when it is a statement with some factual basis behind it.

So if you are looking for written accounts of where the term Blues dance came from... you aren't going to find much in the way of verifiable information. Most dancers themselves don't really care it is simply what we call it. Now people like Charlie, Heidi, me, Steven etc. who were researching and teaching these dances ahead of the curve of the scene could tell you why we use the term, but again you won't find it in any printed materials that can be referenced. Wikipedia is not supposed to be the source of original content so my saying I called it Blues because that was the music it was danced to when I first was introduced to it in the late 70's and early 80's is immaterial. Quoting statements from web boards is not really verifiable proof of anything.

Creating and maintaining this article needs to be as much about not including things that are unsupported (or statements that can't possibly be statements of fact such as Terry's) as it is about putting forward information.

For example you have included a lot of quotes from biographies that are really only tangentially related. I've left them despite my thinking that they are a distraction, being too tangential, often too concerned with music with just bypassing reference that people danced but no meaningful description of the dancing. Information overload, rather than adding to the knowledge base. I also understand that this is my personal opinion coming from my teaching philosophy, that information be contextual, directly stated, immediately relevant, and without distraction. Others like to provide information for information's sake assuming that every little bit no matter how minor adds something. I'm willing to follow your belief in this though it clearly sets this dance article apart from the others in wikipedia.--Damon.stone (talk) 22:58, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Blues dance

Young African Americans dancing in a juke joint in Mississippi
Genre	Blues music

In 2011 this article had an infobox, I suggest to revive it, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:58, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing a significant benefit of that over the existing image with caption. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Back to the original question. Damon.stone managed to install an infobox in 2011. Why, I don't know. Perhaps to elevate Blues dance to the level of Waltz? I think it was a good-faith effort to improve which should not have been reverted. An infobox should not add to an article but present key facts. I would like to discuss what we can say about time and place, derived from the article. I noticed that other dances don't even use {{infobox dance}} (with limited parameters), but {{infobox music genre}}, compare Tango, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If an infobox does not "add", how does it "elevate"? Those words are to me synonymous. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

All of which are also American forms of music, albeit with African and other roots. Montanabw^(talk) 00:04, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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