I went to another milonga (Argentine Tango social dance party). This time many things were different from last time I described in this blog, so let me describe again.
First of all, this time there was a performance. A typical performance during a milonga is done by a couple who are usually professional tango teachers and performers at the same time, often out of town. Performance takes place in the middle of the night, everyone stops dancing, the space is cleared, the light turns on, and the couple performs, that is, dances to two or three or four songs.
What was different this time compared to the last time I was watching such a performance, which was some time ago, without binocular vision? This time watching was easier. It was easier to pay attention, and I did not want so much to close my eyes, or to blink, or to shift my gaze away from the performing couple. I still wanted to do something like that, but much less, and I enjoyed watching quite a bit, which didn't happen that often in the past.
The perception was more continuous, more like I was watching a river, as opposed to a sequence of discrete observations or a sequence of 1-second video clips, which is what my previous tendency was. The fine motion detection is also a great thing for watching dance. Fine motion detection was certainly enhanced by binocular summation, since I had sometimes the same feeling as when I first started noticing subtle motions after gaining stereopsis. Also, I feel that a different kind of attention is more appropriate here, the one that I described in the post on safety. Dance is, after all, motion. Watching motion, particularly with binocular vision, is probably best done with calm attention, instead of the mode in which all the details of the picture are scanned as quickly as possible.
Even more surprising was that sometimes I was able to notice more than one thing at a time, in a seeming contradiction with the very notion of focus. For example, I was able to notice the mood of the performers without trying to notice it or looking specifically on their faces to check it. This awareness just came to me, of course, through seeing their faces, but I was not asking for this information. This kind of awareness is very much in the style of Peter Grunwald's philosophy, however, I was usually hesitant to believe him that such things were possible. Returning normal vision without glasses to most people seemed and seems to me quite possible, however, the importance of vision for one's emotional state is something I will have to further discover for myself before I can fully embrace and accept it.
I also paid attention to the audio-visual integration and noticed at times how I was more aware of the agreement of the music with the dancers. However, at other times I was not so sure. Did I miss their interpretation, or are they slightly off music? Previously such questions did not arise that often since I was not able to notice movements with such subtlety. Now that I am thinking it, can it be that my new calibration between audial and visual input still cannot perform temporal integration, so even at small distances that 1/20 of a second that passes after the light waves come in but before the sound waves come in actually creates a feeling that something is wrong? How does it work in general - how are people watching dance in huge theaters, where the difference in time between the moments when the light waves come in and when the corresponding sound waves come in can have an order of magnitude of a second? Does it take some experience on part of a spectator to perform the temporal integration, perhaps having seen some performances from comparable distance? If there is just one performer who is a little bit ahead of the music, does it mean that the audience will still perform audio-visual integration as if the performer was on the music? Does it depend on the audience's previous experiences? - perhaps someone exposed to a lot of jazz is more likely to perform the integration with the performer being slightly before or after the music? Then, if we have a dance critic who is always watching certain styles, he or she will see the same timing when watching other styles, even if this timing is not there? Of course, this only applies if the distance is large enough so the distance estimation is only approximate. I am not actually sure if the audio-visual temporal integration takes the actual distance into account or not. Probably it does, if it helps to do the integration, - and it should help.
I have heard that after many years in the tango subculture in the U.S., one of the most satisfying experiences is being a D.J. at a large tango festival. As I recall, this person explained what you are trying to achieve: to play such music so you can see the whole room moving together, as one, stopping as one at some moments, moving smoothly at other moments, and sharply at other moments, sensing, picking up from and sharing the interpretation of the music with each other. I am still not quite sure how to see the whole room in this way. It is possible that as the room harmonizes and becomes more of a unity, it becomes easier to see the room as such. In other words, when everyone is moving together, you notice it, but when everyone is doing their thing, you just cannot take the whole room in, you just see that there is chaos.
It would be interesting to hear from a D.J., not necessarily one specializing in tango music, what is it like to apply the Eyebody principles to his or her work.
First of all, this time there was a performance. A typical performance during a milonga is done by a couple who are usually professional tango teachers and performers at the same time, often out of town. Performance takes place in the middle of the night, everyone stops dancing, the space is cleared, the light turns on, and the couple performs, that is, dances to two or three or four songs.
What was different this time compared to the last time I was watching such a performance, which was some time ago, without binocular vision? This time watching was easier. It was easier to pay attention, and I did not want so much to close my eyes, or to blink, or to shift my gaze away from the performing couple. I still wanted to do something like that, but much less, and I enjoyed watching quite a bit, which didn't happen that often in the past.
The perception was more continuous, more like I was watching a river, as opposed to a sequence of discrete observations or a sequence of 1-second video clips, which is what my previous tendency was. The fine motion detection is also a great thing for watching dance. Fine motion detection was certainly enhanced by binocular summation, since I had sometimes the same feeling as when I first started noticing subtle motions after gaining stereopsis. Also, I feel that a different kind of attention is more appropriate here, the one that I described in the post on safety. Dance is, after all, motion. Watching motion, particularly with binocular vision, is probably best done with calm attention, instead of the mode in which all the details of the picture are scanned as quickly as possible.
Even more surprising was that sometimes I was able to notice more than one thing at a time, in a seeming contradiction with the very notion of focus. For example, I was able to notice the mood of the performers without trying to notice it or looking specifically on their faces to check it. This awareness just came to me, of course, through seeing their faces, but I was not asking for this information. This kind of awareness is very much in the style of Peter Grunwald's philosophy, however, I was usually hesitant to believe him that such things were possible. Returning normal vision without glasses to most people seemed and seems to me quite possible, however, the importance of vision for one's emotional state is something I will have to further discover for myself before I can fully embrace and accept it.
I also paid attention to the audio-visual integration and noticed at times how I was more aware of the agreement of the music with the dancers. However, at other times I was not so sure. Did I miss their interpretation, or are they slightly off music? Previously such questions did not arise that often since I was not able to notice movements with such subtlety. Now that I am thinking it, can it be that my new calibration between audial and visual input still cannot perform temporal integration, so even at small distances that 1/20 of a second that passes after the light waves come in but before the sound waves come in actually creates a feeling that something is wrong? How does it work in general - how are people watching dance in huge theaters, where the difference in time between the moments when the light waves come in and when the corresponding sound waves come in can have an order of magnitude of a second? Does it take some experience on part of a spectator to perform the temporal integration, perhaps having seen some performances from comparable distance? If there is just one performer who is a little bit ahead of the music, does it mean that the audience will still perform audio-visual integration as if the performer was on the music? Does it depend on the audience's previous experiences? - perhaps someone exposed to a lot of jazz is more likely to perform the integration with the performer being slightly before or after the music? Then, if we have a dance critic who is always watching certain styles, he or she will see the same timing when watching other styles, even if this timing is not there? Of course, this only applies if the distance is large enough so the distance estimation is only approximate. I am not actually sure if the audio-visual temporal integration takes the actual distance into account or not. Probably it does, if it helps to do the integration, - and it should help.
I have heard that after many years in the tango subculture in the U.S., one of the most satisfying experiences is being a D.J. at a large tango festival. As I recall, this person explained what you are trying to achieve: to play such music so you can see the whole room moving together, as one, stopping as one at some moments, moving smoothly at other moments, and sharply at other moments, sensing, picking up from and sharing the interpretation of the music with each other. I am still not quite sure how to see the whole room in this way. It is possible that as the room harmonizes and becomes more of a unity, it becomes easier to see the room as such. In other words, when everyone is moving together, you notice it, but when everyone is doing their thing, you just cannot take the whole room in, you just see that there is chaos.
It would be interesting to hear from a D.J., not necessarily one specializing in tango music, what is it like to apply the Eyebody principles to his or her work.
No comments:
Post a Comment