Ok, so, I have to speak on some stuff. I'm no expert, but I've been locking for about 3 or so years, and I love it, so I know some stuff. But more than anything, what I have to say has to do more with easily observable things, so here goes...

First off: Funkstyle dancing is back. It's no longer thought to be an "old school" phenomenon, but rather, much like Bboying, funkstyle dancing now has a sizeable global community of people progressing the styles and aiding their evolution, as well as preserving their roots...

But my main issue is: why is it that Locking seems to be looked at as the "red-headed step-child" of the funk dances? Everyone and their mother seems to be a popper. But only a handful of people, especially here in the United States, are "seriously" dedicated to locking. Sure, you've got your Japans, your Frances--enclaves where locking seems to be more of a larger-scale thing. But mostly, everyone is a popper and locking is just sort of, "that thing you do when you're done popping, or bboying, and you feel the need to put on a floppy hat, some baggy pants, a pair of striped socks and Chucks and go out and point at things with a stupid grin on your face."

Don't get me wrong: I'm not bagging on popping and all its various sub-styles nor am I bagging on poppers (since I consider myself one as well). But I guess what I'm interested in is not only figuring out why locking has seemingly not evolved (whereas popping has) but how can we change the situation?

First off: why locking hasn't evolved as much as popping?

several reasons: first, since it really was the first funk dance, it's also the oldest of the funk dances. Therefore it was the most exposed and probably the "most quick to reach 'played-out' status" on both an underground and mainstream level.

2nd: locking has more of an ethnocentric and specialized foundation. What do I mean?: I would consider the foundation of all styles of popping something related to mime. Mime has been around for thousands of years and in almost all cultures around the world. Locking, on the other hand, has its foundation directly and specifically in the African American dance tradition, going all the way back through the soul/Motown era to tapping and hoofing in the Vaudeville era. The principles of mime (isolations, illusional movements) are things that many people across many cultures have both discovered independently of each other and are found universally impressive due to their illusional nature. Since locking has an origin tracing back more specifically through a particular people group, its appeal and its techniques are, GENERALLY speaking, a bit more limited and not so universally and independently discoverable.

This is a hypothesis of mine. I don't really have the official studies nor the ability to back up presently, but based on what I know of the dances, those are my conclusions. HOWEVER, that reason is not my "main point" as to why locking hasn't evolved...

Third: Locking movements are very prescribed and the whole locking vocabulary is very small. Popping on the other hand has a vast, VAST array of concepts, ideas and techniques that go into it. Poppers can be poppers and still look drastically different in every aspect. Most lockers are identifiable if not for their dress and mannerism, by a basic vocabulary of movements which, when incorporated into their dance, makes their dance "locking", and not something else.

However, why do these reasons, IF THEY ARE TRUE, mean that locking is somehow "less" interesting or "less" worthy of attention/progression than its sister style, popping?

For example, consider some of the strengths of locking:

First: due to its dearth of techniques and vocabulary (compared to popping styles), Locking really allows the locker to DANCE. As Suga Pop says, "Locking really is the dance that shows if you can dance. If you bboy or pop, you can hide behind tricks. But in locking, you're naked. There's no place to go--if you can't dance, people are gonna know real quick when you're locking."

Locking forces you to really use the music to move because if you do certain moves off-beat (e.g. the lock), it's going to look really, really bad. Whereas let's say you're waving--You don't have to throw a wave on a beat. A wave can just kind of go--or it could be on beat. But as if to second the quote above: that just shows that one can hide their lack of dancing ability behind a trick or illusion.

Second: locking really focusses on the character of the dancer. If you lock without character, you are not going to be locking well. This doesn't necessarily mean you have to have the "dancing clown" character--look at Rei and Yuu of the Go Go Brothers. They have a straight Gangsta type character and their locking is probably the best on the planet right now. But basically, the best lockers have always had eye-catching character when they danced. It was never just about moves--locking is a dance that has character acting and entertaining built into it! Locking makes you be a character.

Third: locking is explosive! Part of the reason that locking was so different looking was that you saw people doing these explosive, out-there movements (dives, splits, gymnastics, kicks, claps, points, locking into frozen positions, butt drops, etc.). It was a big dance--not a little weenie "I'm lame and I'm lockin'" dance. The best lockers today have explosive style in addition to technique and character. Even smaller moves can be explosive if you put enough energy into them in the right way...

But in terms of answering the main question of "why hasn't locking evolved at the same rate as popping?", these strengths are also part of the double-edged sword of the answer: Locking really requires you to dance, really demands character and is explosive. If people don't have those things, then that might be why locking hasn't blown up--it demands "too much" of people...

However, I'm not sure myself if that's the best reason, though I believe it is a part of the answer. I think another large part is that people have largely become ignorant of locking for several reasons.

Ignorance of locking is probably the foremost cause of the lack of large-scale progression.

First, the media confusion of "Breakdancing" began the obscuring of locking. This obscuring continued locking's being eclipsed by bboying and popping due to their also explosive and mind-bending natures. Lastly, the progressive de-funkifying of contemporary music probably is one of the last nails that almost were hammered down onto Locking's coffin.

I believe locking, more than bboying, is probably the biggest victim of the media "Breakdance" muddle. Chief evidence: there were two entire movies made in the 80's called "Breakin'" that had more locking than anything in them (due to OG Locker Shabbadoo's starring role in the movies...) "Breakin'" should have been called "Lockin' & Poppin'" in my opinion because that's really the majority of what you see in the movie besides the occasional shitty six step by one of the main actors.

When Bboying started to make its comeback in the 90's, it was quickly associated with Breakin' and the other Bboy movies (which did feature straight Bboying, i.e. Wild Style, Beat Street, Krush Groove, etc.). Therefore the bboying foundation got more exposure, and lockin' just got more muddled up.

Last, the progressive de-funkifying of contemporary music has led to locking's being considered "old school" or out-of-date. Locking had a soundtrack of straight soul and funk, maybe even involving some electro-funk in the early 80's. But generally, once urban and black music started to move away from live funk in the mid-80's and then away from funk samples in hip hop records in the mid 90's, locking becomes viewed as "old school" because its soundtrack is no longer current, but "retro". Locking is no longer "cool", but rather that retro clown-dance done to your Uncle Joe's old record collection.

So, how do we combat the lack of progression and innovation in locking?:

First: through knowledge. If the knowledge of the dance is preserved and passed on, then it will not be lost, but it will also have the ability to progress. After all, innovation of ANYTHING is only possible once you've got an established foundation, plan or technique, whether you're talking Stop-n-Go's or Staple guns. If more people learn how to lock, then more opportunities for innovation and progress exist.

Also, this has to be education aimed at eventual progress, and not just "here's the 'correct' way to lock, JUST LIKE the OG Lockers did it!" That kind of education KILLS progress. Trust me.

Second: lockers have to show what they can do in terms of showcasing the strengths of their dance. Lockers have to be able to show their musicality and dance ability; they have to show their character; they have to be as explosive as they can within the style. This will attract more people and in turn, keep evolving the dance. You don't want to dance the same way every time, rigth? Evolve!

Third: we must find a way to both a.) adapt the locker style to a contemporary style and b.) we must bring the funk back into the contemporary urban music scene. Now, I know about adaptation of locking style. That's the easy part. You don't have to wear knickers, striped socks and shirt, crossed suspenders, a cumberbund, apple cap and marshmellows to be a locker. Practice locking in "hip hop" clothes. Practice locking in suits. Practice in casual clothes. Practice it in your freakin' pajamas if you want!!! Or, take elements of the old school style and mix it with new items. For instance, I really enjoy wearing knickers to lock. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to be in full locker costume whenever I'm locking.

And with bringing the funk back--well, we need talented musicians and producers to figure that one out. Locking funk is a little bit different than alot of popping funk, but you can still usually make one work for the other. But still, lets have a neo-funk era!!! Let's get music that actually fits the style of locking. Or we can adapt to what we have--which also provides its own challenges, but is another way to bring it back. Maybe instead of "lean wit it, rock wit it", we could have "lean wit it, LOCK wit it" Razz .

At any rate, I'm heartened to see that the evolution of locking seems to be on an upswing, what with all the global talent, and attention at jams and OG's coming out to teach. But at any rate, it's still a really small group of people. But it's a nice challenge for us to try and take it somewhere new.

Article written by "Boogie Walker"