Send Callers mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Labor of love ([email protected])
2. Re: Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy (Barbara Groh)
3. Re: Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy (Koren A. Wake)
4. Re: Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy (Charles M. Hannum)
5. Re: Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy (Jack Mitchell)
6. Re: Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy (Bob Isaacs)
7. Re: Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy (Charles M. Hannum)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:54:29 -0500
From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Labor of love
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi Delia
I talked to Gail at the Ralph Page weekend. She mentioned that the
Woodstock
dance is looking for callers. (esp. the Feb. 15th dance)
I gave her my Phone# and e-mail. I have not heard from her as of
Jan. 28
after reading your post I have some Qs
before I agree to do the dance,
mainly because I will be coming quite a distance.
It sounds like your the person to communicate with
my e-mail is [email protected]
Thanks
Gale Wood
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web.com - Microsoft? Exchange solutions from a leading provider -
http://link.mail2web.com/Business/Exchange
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:14:16 -0500
From: "Barbara Groh" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <006f01c861d9$98469860$6400a8c0@Babs>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
I occasionally call dances with a shadow swing, but I would NEVER
call a
dance with no partner swing. Many times in my 35 years of dancing,
I have
had an evening where I FINALLY got to dance with some special
partner, only
to have the disappointment of doing a dance with no partner swing.
What a
letdown!
Any caller in my area who calls dances without partner swings is
either
going to hear about it from one or more dancers, or at least be
grumbled
about behind their backs. It's probably not a big deal in a
roomful of
beginners, but I think that most experienced dancers feel cheated
if they
don't get to swing their partner.
In fact, there has been much discussion in our dance community
(really, all
over the Southeast) as to whether "unequal" dances (where only the 1's
swing) are "acceptable," given that there are so many great "equal"
dances
available. Of course, this would knock out a whole bunch of the old,
traditional contras...
Have I opened a huge can of worms here?
~Barbara
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg McKenzie" <[email protected]>
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 2:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
Friends,
It seems that having folks who really dislike swinging together at a
community dance is bad news...with, or without shadow swings. I know
it happens, but callers can work to create a more gracious and
generous atmosphere. It would feel odd to plan an evening program
while considering the needs of people who wish to avoid contact at a
social dance.
Chris, I wonder; how would you feel about a dance with a shadow
swing, and a neighbor swing, but with NO partner swing? I suspect
that many of us call a dance or two each night with no partner
swing. Would you protest more if there were one partner-swing-free
dance with a shadow swing? (And would that be "rational hypocrisy?)
Also, how many dances a night do you call that have no partner swing?
Just wondering,
Greg
*********
At 02:35 PM 1/24/2008, Chris wrote:
I currently don't have any dances with shadow swings in my
repertoire, by choice.
Part of that is to avoid the situation where you're forcing two
people to swing together who Really Don't Want To Swing
Over and Over. And they'll let you know it, whether it's a
breakup, or one person's someone that they don't want to
dance with. (In my first community I went to, there was
one person like this. It would drive which lines people went
into, people would refuse sometimes to neighbor swing
with said person, and it really corrupted the whole partner-
asking dynamic of the dance. So I'm shaped by an extreme.)
There's the secondary reason that it's not as interesting as
it's the same person over and over and over. And you've
already got your partner over and over and over, with the
partner swing I need to pander to. So that cuts out still more
neighbor interaction. It's why I strongly prefer neighbor grand
right and lefts to shadow grand right and lefts, for instance.
A shadow can be a convenient marker to create the effect
of a lose-and-find partner sequence, so they do have their
uses.
Yet I call a dance with a shadow swing about one night
of every three. They're the four-face-fours where you swing
your corner. So I fully admit to irrational hypocrisy.
-Chris Page
San Diego
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:29:24 -0500
From: "Koren A. Wake" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I've got to say that while I respect the traditional dances and
don't mind
the occasional actives-preferential dance (as long as the contra lines
aren't too long to begin with!), I really like the newer dances
that I've
seen recently where ones and twos alternate being active. I don't
know the
names of these dances (maybe someone can help me out?), but I know
there's
at least one where the ones and twos trade off being the couple who
does
contra corners and then swings in the middle, and I'm a big fan of
that.
Contra corners into a swing in the middle is one of my favorite
moves if the
set is working together well.
I definitely agree with Barbara, though, that it's really
disappointing to
not have a partner swing at all. And I think there's a
responsibility as a
caller to make sure that if you do call a dance where only the ones
swing,
the lines are short enough and the dance runs long enough that
everyone gets
to be a one for a decent amount of time!
- Koren
On 1/28/08, Barbara Groh <[email protected]> wrote:
I occasionally call dances with a shadow swing, but I would NEVER
call a
dance with no partner swing. Many times in my 35 years of
dancing, I have
had an evening where I FINALLY got to dance with some special
partner,
only
to have the disappointment of doing a dance with no partner
swing. What a
letdown!
Any caller in my area who calls dances without partner swings is
either
going to hear about it from one or more dancers, or at least be
grumbled
about behind their backs. It's probably not a big deal in a
roomful of
beginners, but I think that most experienced dancers feel cheated
if they
don't get to swing their partner.
In fact, there has been much discussion in our dance community
(really,
all
over the Southeast) as to whether "unequal" dances (where only the
1's
swing) are "acceptable," given that there are so many great
"equal" dances
available. Of course, this would knock out a whole bunch of the old,
traditional contras...
Have I opened a huge can of worms here?
~Barbara
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg McKenzie" <[email protected]>
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 2:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
Friends,
It seems that having folks who really dislike swinging together at a
community dance is bad news...with, or without shadow swings. I
know
it happens, but callers can work to create a more gracious and
generous atmosphere. It would feel odd to plan an evening program
while considering the needs of people who wish to avoid contact at a
social dance.
Chris, I wonder; how would you feel about a dance with a shadow
swing, and a neighbor swing, but with NO partner swing? I suspect
that many of us call a dance or two each night with no partner
swing. Would you protest more if there were one partner-swing-free
dance with a shadow swing? (And would that be "rational hypocrisy?)
Also, how many dances a night do you call that have no partner
swing?
Just wondering,
Greg
*********
At 02:35 PM 1/24/2008, Chris wrote:
I currently don't have any dances with shadow swings in my
repertoire, by choice.
Part of that is to avoid the situation where you're forcing two
people to swing together who Really Don't Want To Swing
Over and Over. And they'll let you know it, whether it's a
breakup, or one person's someone that they don't want to
dance with. (In my first community I went to, there was
one person like this. It would drive which lines people went
into, people would refuse sometimes to neighbor swing
with said person, and it really corrupted the whole partner-
asking dynamic of the dance. So I'm shaped by an extreme.)
There's the secondary reason that it's not as interesting as
it's the same person over and over and over. And you've
already got your partner over and over and over, with the
partner swing I need to pander to. So that cuts out still more
neighbor interaction. It's why I strongly prefer neighbor grand
right and lefts to shadow grand right and lefts, for instance.
A shadow can be a convenient marker to create the effect
of a lose-and-find partner sequence, so they do have their
uses.
Yet I call a dance with a shadow swing about one night
of every three. They're the four-face-fours where you swing
your corner. So I fully admit to irrational hypocrisy.
-Chris Page
San Diego
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:32:56 -0500
From: "Charles M. Hannum" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I am really not a fan of what you call "unequal" dances. I always
feel like
I should have brought a pillow. This is why I dislike one of the
Great
Classics -- Chorus Jig.
That said, in many cases it's possible to simply alternative the
active role
between the 1s and 2s, and balance the dance better. Some callers
do this.
(I don't think there's a good way to do it with Chorus Jig, though.)
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:53:18 -0500
From: Jack Mitchell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
To: Caller's discussion list <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Well, since one of the other threads on here recently has been "Labor
of Love", I'll share one of my favorite alternating contra corners
dances:
Labor of Love
Kathy Anderson
Improper
A1 N B&S
A2 LL F&B
1's (2's) RH Bal & Box the Gnat
B1 1's (2's) turn Contra Corners
B2 1's (2's) B&S
This is a great dance to teach contra corners because the only thing
at all hard about it is the contra corners itself. Better still, it
doesn't have a half figure 8, which folks frequently have more
trouble with than the contra corners itself. In any event, it's a
fun dance!
Jack
At 01:29 PM 1/28/2008, you wrote:
I've got to say that while I respect the traditional dances and
don't mind
the occasional actives-preferential dance (as long as the contra
lines
aren't too long to begin with!), I really like the newer dances
that I've
seen recently where ones and twos alternate being active. I don't
know the
names of these dances (maybe someone can help me out?), but I know
there's
at least one where the ones and twos trade off being the couple
who does
contra corners and then swings in the middle, and I'm a big fan of
that.
Contra corners into a swing in the middle is one of my favorite
moves if the
set is working together well.
I definitely agree with Barbara, though, that it's really
disappointing to
not have a partner swing at all. And I think there's a
responsibility as a
caller to make sure that if you do call a dance where only the
ones swing,
the lines are short enough and the dance runs long enough that
everyone gets
to be a one for a decent amount of time!
- Koren
On 1/28/08, Barbara Groh <[email protected]> wrote:
I occasionally call dances with a shadow swing, but I would NEVER
call a
dance with no partner swing. Many times in my 35 years of
dancing, I have
had an evening where I FINALLY got to dance with some special
partner,
only
to have the disappointment of doing a dance with no partner
swing. What a
letdown!
Any caller in my area who calls dances without partner swings is
either
going to hear about it from one or more dancers, or at least be
grumbled
about behind their backs. It's probably not a big deal in a
roomful of
beginners, but I think that most experienced dancers feel cheated
if they
don't get to swing their partner.
In fact, there has been much discussion in our dance community
(really,
all
over the Southeast) as to whether "unequal" dances (where only
the 1's
swing) are "acceptable," given that there are so many great
"equal" dances
available. Of course, this would knock out a whole bunch of the
old,
traditional contras...
Have I opened a huge can of worms here?
~Barbara
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg McKenzie" <[email protected]>
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 2:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
Friends,
It seems that having folks who really dislike swinging together
at a
community dance is bad news...with, or without shadow swings. I
know
it happens, but callers can work to create a more gracious and
generous atmosphere. It would feel odd to plan an evening program
while considering the needs of people who wish to avoid contact
at a
social dance.
Chris, I wonder; how would you feel about a dance with a shadow
swing, and a neighbor swing, but with NO partner swing? I suspect
that many of us call a dance or two each night with no partner
swing. Would you protest more if there were one partner-swing-free
dance with a shadow swing? (And would that be "rational
hypocrisy?)
Also, how many dances a night do you call that have no partner
swing?
Just wondering,
Greg
*********
At 02:35 PM 1/24/2008, Chris wrote:
I currently don't have any dances with shadow swings in my
repertoire, by choice.
Part of that is to avoid the situation where you're forcing two
people to swing together who Really Don't Want To Swing
Over and Over. And they'll let you know it, whether it's a
breakup, or one person's someone that they don't want to
dance with. (In my first community I went to, there was
one person like this. It would drive which lines people went
into, people would refuse sometimes to neighbor swing
with said person, and it really corrupted the whole partner-
asking dynamic of the dance. So I'm shaped by an extreme.)
There's the secondary reason that it's not as interesting as
it's the same person over and over and over. And you've
already got your partner over and over and over, with the
partner swing I need to pander to. So that cuts out still more
neighbor interaction. It's why I strongly prefer neighbor grand
right and lefts to shadow grand right and lefts, for instance.
A shadow can be a convenient marker to create the effect
of a lose-and-find partner sequence, so they do have their
uses.
Yet I call a dance with a shadow swing about one night
of every three. They're the four-face-fours where you swing
your corner. So I fully admit to irrational hypocrisy.
-Chris Page
San Diego
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:01:43 -0500
From: Bob Isaacs <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
To: Caller's discussion list <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
That said, in many cases it's possible to simply alternative the
active role> between the 1s and 2s, and balance the dance better.
Some callers do this.> (I don't think there's a good way to do it
with Chorus Jig, though.)
Yes there is - when sets are long enough, I've been using this
version for a few years;
1A1. 1's down the outside, turn alone and return
1A2. 1's down the center, turn alone, return and cast off
1B1. 1's turn contra corners
1B2. 1's balance, swing
2A1. 2's up the outside, turn alone and return
2A2. 2's up the center, turn alone, return and cast off
2B1. 2's turn contra corners
2B2. 2's balance, swing
As we all know, it has been customary for the inactives to cheat
and swing during the A1. When the actives are done with B2 in this
version, they can start cheating by simply keep on swinging -
they're already there. Then after about a 28 beat swing they'll
appreciate being inactive for a while.
On the subject of shadow swings, the best dance I know of with one is;
Ten Strings Attached Improper, Jim Saxe/Charlie Fenton
A1. Neighbor balance, swing
A2. Gents allemande L 1 1/2 - give R to partner to form wave/4
Balance, walk forward
B1. Shadow swing, partner swing
B2. Partner promenade across, ladies chain
Unlike swing-swing with different neighbors, the roll from shadow
to partner can get better with repetition as all know who they are
going to. Another B2 here that gives some needed partner
interaction is circle L 3/4, balance, California twirl.
I call shadow swing once in a while, and agree that they are best
reserved for experienced audiences and dance camps. I have yet to
write a dance with one in it, partly due to their limited use and
partly because it isn't easy to find sequences like Ten Strings
Attached that have a shadow swing and enough neighbor and partner
action.
Bob
_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:06:54 -0500
From: "Charles M. Hannum" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Shadow swings and Irrational Hypocrisy
To: "Caller's discussion list" <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
That's the obvious way to alternate Chorus Jig. It exacerbates a
problem
that already exists in the dance -- if the set gets too close to
the bottom
of the hall, then the 1s get bunched up near the bottom. Since
most sets
align at the top of the hall, you now have that problem all the
time in the
opposite direction.
On 1/28/08, Bob Isaacs <[email protected]> wrote:
That said, in many cases it's possible to simply alternative the
active
role> between the 1s and 2s, and balance the dance better. Some
callers do
this.> (I don't think there's a good way to do it with Chorus Jig,
though.)
Yes there is - when sets are long enough, I've been using this
version for
a few years;
1A1. 1's down the outside, turn alone and return
1A2. 1's down the center, turn alone, return and cast off
1B1. 1's turn contra corners
1B2. 1's balance, swing
2A1. 2's up the outside, turn alone and return
2A2. 2's up the center, turn alone, return and cast off
2B1. 2's turn contra corners
2B2. 2's balance, swing
As we all know, it has been customary for the inactives to cheat
and swing
during the A1. When the actives are done with B2 in this version,
they can
start cheating by simply keep on swinging - they're already
there. Then
after about a 28 beat swing they'll appreciate being inactive for
a while.
On the subject of shadow swings, the best dance I know of with one
is;
Ten Strings Attached Improper, Jim Saxe/Charlie Fenton
A1. Neighbor balance, swing
A2. Gents allemande L 1 1/2 - give R to partner to form wave/4
Balance, walk forward
B1. Shadow swing, partner swing
B2. Partner promenade across, ladies chain
Unlike swing-swing with different neighbors, the roll from shadow to
partner can get better with repetition as all know who they are going
to. Another B2 here that gives some needed partner interaction is
circle L
3/4, balance, California twirl.
I call shadow swing once in a while, and agree that they are best
reserved
for experienced audiences and dance camps. I have yet to write a
dance with
one in it, partly due to their limited use and partly because it
isn't easy
to find sequences like Ten Strings Attached that have a shadow
swing and
enough neighbor and partner action.
Bob
_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
End of Callers Digest, Vol 41, Issue 18
***************************************
