Thanks Mac! On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:24 PM, Richard Mckeever <[email protected]> wrote:
> If I were calling this dance I would not hesitate to reverse the A&B > parts. I would announce the original name and author and mention it is > slightly modified. > > I actually do this quite often. There are some things I especially like > (or don't like) and I have no issues tweaking a dance to add or remove > those items as long as it doesn't interfere with the overall flow or intent > of the dance. > > Ending a Becket dance in a partner swing is one I consider an > improvement. The flow of the dance also seems to make more sense with your > suggested change. > > I would only show the band the version you plan to use - so they pick the > tune they feels works best with that sequence. > > Go for it looks like a fun dance. > > Mac McKeever > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Don Veino <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 7:11 PM > Subject: [Callers] Shifting dance sequences > > I'm still gaining basic experience calling and have been noodling for a few > minutes on this - thought I'd seek others' expertise and experience... > > I'm looking at my program candidates for an upcoming dance and in reviewing > the dance *Seagull* by Erik Weberg (which can be found at > http://www.kluberg.com/eriksdances.html#Seagull) I started thinking it > would be easier to start the teaching at some other point than the A1, due > to having to set up the initial short waves (which otherwise naturally form > out of the B2). And noticing that the dance ends with a G Allem. Lt. 1+1/2, > I started thinking it might be best to start with the B1, which is a very > conventional Cir. Lt. 3/4 and Pass Thru..., which would leave the dance > ending at the existing A2, finishing with a more satisfying P Swing. > > Ok, so this has two implications I see right away: > > 1. the band's music selection may change > 2. the progression moves from the B1 original to the A1 as reshuffled. > > Are there any untoward consequences I'm missing? Why would this not be the > default sequence? > > Thanks, > > Don > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >
