I mostly like to sit these kind of conversations out but, not for the first time, I am provoked. First let me say that I have been dancing contras and mostly traditional New England squares since the 1970s. Secondly I devote a great deal of time to either dancing or calling or preparing to call. And yet I must remind you, in fact we must remind ourselves, that it is only a dance, no more, no less, and not a reason for acrimony in a world beset by so many painful and unnecessary divisions. Secondly as perhaps everyone who has danced at such events as I did in the 1970's in Burlington Vermont can tell you an evening normally included 4 squares. At that time they were strictly New England Squares and as such strictly matched to the phrases of the music. Over the last several years I have been privileged to dance where a different tradition of squares was rooted. Dancing traditional southern squares is a different experience. Why would I want to choose between them? In the 1970's, when I started, Modern Western Square Dancing appeared to be done by a different group of dancers. We did not mix. And I am therefore not in a position to say much of substance about it, although I do notice that several figures from Modern Western Squares have entered our vocabulary and enriched us, as have several from the English Country Dancing tradition. Folks, we are in a time of enrichment - just look at the music played by many of our most popular contra dance bands - and I hope we broaden our sources of enrichment further. Much further. Yes, we do this without much sense of the traditions that have come before and that we come from. When I was "coming of age", as my father might have put it, many of us loved folk music for the feeling of connecting with the ancestors of our shared cultures that it gave us. This is not part of the experience in contra dancing for me. That is a shame. But throughout we have been part of a public, evolving tradition, that once included both contras and squares. Please be careful too about assumptions about what any of us is familiar with. Many on this list, and even in this discussion, have a great deal of experience with all of these traditions, and have contributed greatly to their enrichment. Whatever their opinions they sure know of what they speak. And, at the very great risk of alienating everyone, I ask you to remember it is only a dance. Not a movement for social change, nor a real source of oppression. Enjoy. Rickey Holt, Fremont, NH
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg McKenzie Sent: Monday, March 19, 2012 3:08 PM To: [email protected]; Caller's discussion list Subject: Re: [Callers] Contra / MWSD parallels? David Millstone quoted Don Coffee as writing: Modern contra dancing has become a mass "movement" with the energy of a > greight train, but most of the young people who so love contras?and > contras > only-- have no idea it is but one component of a larger, very > wonderful, tradition. This horse-blinder focus rather reminds me of... > Oh dear! Here we go again. The square enthusiasts are putting forth another tome-complete with graphs and historical references- about how contra dancers are "limited", "short-sighted", "narrow-minded" or just plain ignorant in their views about the dance tradition that they have loved for so many decades. This annual tradition of denigration would be humorous if it were not so insidious and insulting to people who have dedicated so much to building a new tradition that has made called dancing available to so many people who would not have otherwise ever tried it. Instead of repeating the old saws about how bad contra dancers are, our square dance calling friends might consider educating themselves about this new tradition that they seem to know so little about. For those of us dedicated to holding open, public, contra dances for our communities this movement is much more than merely a "component of a larger, very wonderful tradition." It is, in fact, an evolution of even older traditions and, perhaps, an alternative to the square dance tradition that has become so moribund and unavailable to the general public. For many of us, introduced to contras as our first social dance experience, one of the defining factors that drew us to contra dancing was the fact that it was NOT square dancing and it did NOT require that we attend separate classes to learn it. The fact is that contras are attended by a wildly eclectic crowd of people with varied dance experience and interests. Yes, about half of those in the hall frequent contras almost exclusively (43% attend contras only), but almost 40% of those in the hall are enthusiasts of some other dance form and attend other dance forms at least six times a year. About 20% of those in the hall are not enthusiasts of any dance form. (Note that only 3% of those in the hall attend square dances regularly.) Square dance calling enthusiasts should consider that the contra dance tradition might be something different from what you are familiar with, or from what you *assume* it is. These open, public social events attract a different mix of people, have a different purpose, and require a different set of calling skills than many other forms of dance. When callers-unfamiliar with the contra tradition-insist on presenting square formations while presuming to tell the dancers what they *ought* to enjoy, it is not surprising that many folks will decide to sit out. It would be better to first educate yourselves about who is in the hall before calling one of these events. Here is one place to start: http://santacruzdance.org/drupal/node/114 I look forward to an ongoing discussion about the evolution of social dance and the great contributions it can make to our world. That discussion will be most productive, however, if we start with a clear understanding of what it is that we do NOT know. Regards, Greg McKenzie _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list [email protected] http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
