Wow Jan! Lots of good ideas there! I knew the one about pleating up the cloth and the marbles - but several of the others were new to me. The fact that they are non-weight bearing is also great.<P>AHallMars- you bring up a very good point. So many students seem to be absolutely consumed with the shape of their arches rather than how the feet are working within the shoes.<P>I have a rather low arch. There was one pair of shoes I tried, Woesner's, that suddenly made my feet look incredibly wonderful - it was a breathtaking change. However, very shortly I discovered that those particular shoes were in danger of giving me a very severe injury - so sadly - but without hesitation I threw the shoes (still brand new) out. <P>How the shoes fit, how the feet react, how one works within the shoe is much, MUCH, more important than how the foot looks within the shoe. <P>Pulling up out of the shoe is not only important to the use of the feet, but also to the entire aspect of the dancing. It will lend a lightness to the entire body. Each part of the body must lend its support to the whole. And that cannot happen if the foot is not properly supported by the shoe, and the weight is not descending into the shoe.<P>A great point you made AHallMark.<P>And great ideas, Jan.<P>Thanks to both of you.

I'm sorry Basheva, but I'm not understanding you when you say that the weight shouldn't be decending into your shoe. Are you suggesting that our body weight isn't put onto our feet, rather stregnth for other areas of our body? Or am I completely wrong??

SalimaC - of course in the final analysis all of our weight in on our feet. We can't alter that - but we can alter the "quality" of it. It's like holding a child - a sleeping (dead weight) child seems to be much heavier than a child who is awake - albeit wiggling - LOL.<P>Each part of the body can aid in supporting itself. For instance the head held erect rather than lolling about. The head seems to us to have very little weight, however, when we allow it to fall about, it is quite a heavy object. So with the entire body.<P>There is also a difference in the impetus of the weight. Modern dance, for instance has a tendency to get its energy by going down to go up - whereas ballet's entire reach is upward. And if you look at two dancers, one ballet based and one modern dance based, doing the same steps at the same time, you will see the difference in the emphasis and impetus. I have done that with a modern dancer.<P>So, what I mean is that each part of the body has to do its share to aid and support the weight, not with a downward feeling into the shoes - but up and out of the shoes. Instead of feeling the weight descending - feel the weight ascending.<P>One way to test this easily is in a piqué pas de bourrée. It can be done with a downward almost stamping movement - or a light as air upward reach of the knee. Same step, same timing - much different look. And a lot easier on the feet.<P>I hope I was able to make it a bit clearer, SalimaC.<P><BR><p>[This message has been edited by Basheva (edited July 15, 2001).]

I am going to ask a very dumb question question now . . . what is 'the box'? I really have no idea - and why do you jump over it?<P>Sorry this is probably something everyone should know but could someone tell me? Thanks

THERE ARE NO DUMB QUESTIONS!!!<P>The box is the part of the pointe shoe where the toes are (on top and along the sides) - it is the stiff part that encloses the front part of the dancer's foot and allows her to go up on pointe. <P>The flat part on the end of the box is called the platform. The part of the shoe that is from the toenails to where her toes connect to her feet (actually a little further up) is called the vamp. The sides of the shoe are the wings. <P>The lining inside the shoe is called the sock. The stiff part underneath her foot, giving her support to stand on pointe, is the shank. <P>The dancer doesn't jump over the box - she springs up onto the platform at the end of the box, or rolls up onto it, or steps up onto it. But sometimes when not properly placed or fitted, a dancer especially with a very highly arched foot, will almost spill out of the shoe and be way over the platform of the shoe instead of directly over it. <P>Remember the platform is the flat end of the box....so sometimes the word box is used and sometimes the word platform. Confusing, I know. <P>See, it's not simple - it is quite complex. And I am very glad you asked Bagspussmiaow.

I think I have a different approach to weight than you do, Basheva. I do teach "down to go up" in ballet class. How to release, the extent of involvement of different body parts, what you do after the release may be different from modern dance, but I do teach the release. <P>In the pique pas de bourree example, I don't teach stamping. That would indeed give a very heavy look. But I do teach that a strong, decisive push down onto a prepared pique foot is what initiates the quick "up" of the other knee, and that is what creates the quick, light look.<P>Re: the weight of the body being supported by the foot on pointe, I think the example of the sleeping child is a great one. Similarly, you can make the job of the feet a lot easier by distributing the effort throughout the body. Here I absolutely agree that the idea is to take energy up out of the shoes and up through the body. <P>And the foot must be active in the pointe shoe, whether on full pointe, or preparing to go up to full pointe. Lots of beginners prepare to pique, for example, without fully working their foot before the step up onto it. Then they knuckle down or slouch down in their shoe, which is what we are trying to avoid.<P>Great thread -- lots of good information and discussion. Thanks, everyone!

Hmmmm - very interesting Nancy.....<P>I would agree that when one does a demi-plié as a preparation for a jump (like a changement for instance) then one does indeed "go down to go up". But, as I see it, the plié is not so much a downward movement as a bend. And with no corresponding contraction in the body.<P> A common error among students that I saw (especially beginners) was to allow the center of the body to contract along with the plié. So that is why I guess I never called it "going down to go up".<P><BR>Could I ask you for an example of "going down to go up" other than a plié?<P>I can think of a penché, with an added breath at the bottom before reascending to arabesque - but again, I suppose I think of that as a breath rather than a "going down". I also taught the penché as a "lifting downward". <P>I think your explanation of the piqué pas de bourrée, is a new view on this for me.

Basheva, here is another example of "down to go up." Let's take grand battement. I teach that there is an impulse, a dropping down of energy through the leg, before the foot initiates the ascent. It is very subtle, but it is there. I liken it to the old carnival game, where you have a big hammer, like a sledge hammer, you strike a pad at the base of a pole, a ring rises to the top (if you're strong enough) and rings a bell and maybe you win a prize. Well, the hammer is like the impulse, and the ring is the kick. The result is a fully lengthened leg that often kicks higher than its owner thought possible, easy hip placement, and less overuse of the quads.<P>I use a similar dropping down to initiate a pirouette en dehors. Sorry I don't have time for details right now, but more later, if you are interested.

Always interested, Nancy. No rush - when you have time and inclination.