Ric, The ECD confusion is a result of our often using corners to refer to people, but not 100% of the time. I propose that we never refer to corners as the people, only use those words to refer to the position. In any hands four no matter where anyone lands, someone is in the top first corner, someone else in too second corner, etc. you can swap, the dance can move you around, but that position is forever. Andrea
Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > On Jun 2, 2015, at 3:43 PM, Ric Goldman <letsda...@rgoldman.org> wrote: > > Apologies if this has been mentioned already, but even in ECD the terminology > for corners is subject to confusion. If folks have shifted from their > original positions (for example after a “trade places with partner” move), a > reference to “1st corners do such-and-such” is often met by a question from > the dancers “is that people or places?”. For example, if you’re facing > across the set, and during a fwd-and-back, there’s a rollaway with a half > sashay, would you call the person on the right the 1st corner (right diagonal > based on the facing direction) or the 2nd corner (left diagonal based on > where they were facing at the beginning of the dance). Therein lies the > potential confusion. > > I wonder what the impact of this would be on chaos contra with the additional > position or role swappring mid dance. Of course, that’s the dancers’ > conundrum, not the callers. J > > Thanx, > Ric Goldman > > From: Callers [mailto:callers-boun...@lists.sharedweight.net] On Behalf Of > Perry Shafran via Callers > Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 7:42 AM > To: Andrea Nettleton > Cc: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling > > After thinking about this I think I am starting to agree with Andrea in that > corners (first & second) just might be the perfect term to use. In ECD, > where most dances are proper, the first corner is gent 1 and lady 2, because > in proper dances there are different genders on the diagonal. In an improper > dance (most contra dances), there are same genders on the diagonal. So > therefore the ladies would be in the first corner positions (same positions > as in a proper English dance), and the gents are the second corners. In a > swing, first corners end up on the right. I think by thinking about it this > way you could do any dance, easy to challenging, with the corner terminology > in place. Just substitute any incidence of "gents" in your choreography with > "second corner" and "ladies" with "first corner". > > Perry > > From: Andrea Nettleton via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > To: Michael Fuerst <mjerryfue...@yahoo.com> > Cc: "call...@sharedweight.net" <call...@sharedweight.net> > Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2015 2:31 AM > Subject: Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling > > Hey Michael, > I think you mean that those who began the dance as first corners, will always > end swings on the right, just as they are standing relative to their partner > in the hands four. > > The dance is obscure to the dancers only to the degree the caller is unable > to elucidate it. It may take effort for callers to learn to teach as > effectively this way, but that doesn't make it less clear. When I called to > the SFQCD, ninety percent of the dancers were men. Even with bands and bare > arms, so as clear an indication of role as they could achieve, they struggled > with who ends where after stuff. What if I could have given them the tool of > knowing their corners, and in addition, the clear instruction to note > carefully which hand they held when standing next to their partner? That > would always be their connector hand when standing as a couple after swings, > chains, and R&L thrus. The twofold active attention might have served them > far better than the arbitrary labels. Understanding that the pattern of the > dance depends on knowing your geography makes sense. Adding into that the > need to remember a label doesn't improve the odds the geography will stick, > at least it didn't there. In my opinion, looking for a person is less > reliable than knowing your place in the dance. People mess up, but the place > is always there. > > AN > > > Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > > > > On Jun 2, 2015, at 4:05 AM, Michael Fuerst via Callers > <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > Consider this dance > > E.J.M.J.F. in Cincinnati Duple Improper Michael Fuerst > March, 1991 > > A1 Balance and swing neighbor. > > A2 Men allemande left 1 1/2 and swing partner. > > B1 Long lines forward and back. Women chain to neighbor. > > B2 Women allemande right (4). > 1/2 hey, neighbors start passing left shoulder, until > neighbors on the side they started the dance (8). > Neighbors pass left shoulders and turn sharply left along set to > meet new > neighbors (4). > Using this thread's suggestions, I think this becomes (as long as dancers > understand that those starting as second corners always end the swing on the > right) > E.J.M.J.F. in Cincinnati Duple Improper Michael Fuerst > March, 1991 > > A1 Balance and swing neighbor. > > A2 First corners allemande left 1 1/2 and swing partner. > > B1 Long lines forward and back. Second corners chain to neighbor. > > B2 Second corners allemande right (4). > 1/2 hey, neighbors start passing left shoulder, until > neighbors on the side they started the dance (8). > Neighbors pass left shoulders and turn sharply left along set to > meet new > neighbors (4) > This makes the dance obscure to beginning and intermediate dancers. Seems > best to have names corresponding to the men's and women's roles, rather than > to have dancer's determine which corners they are at any point in the dance. > > > Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217 239 5844 > > > > On Tuesday, June 2, 2015 2:26 AM, Andrea Nettleton via Callers > <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > > Actually Alan, because we dance improper most frequently, and becket almost > as much, I think I really don't want the labels applied to people so they > stick. I'm just using the word corner the way Brooke and Chris use diagonal. > In contra, we already have a use for the word diagonal, meaning the next > pair along across the set to the right or left. The corner reference we have > is actually close to right, probably having grown out of triple minor dances. > Right diagonal is first corner, Left diagonal is second. Make it fit in a > hands four and you have pairs of corners along opposite angles. It's a place > not a person. Then I can write a dance beginning with a second corner chain, > and it will be those formerly identified as gents, but will work totally > fine. If the dance were proper, you could still have a second diagonals > chain and it would be one of each 'role'. A direct transfer of the system to > contra is not as useful as adapting, IMHO. > Andrea > > Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > > On Jun 2, 2015, at 3:07 AM, Winston, Alan P. <wins...@slac.stanford.edu> > wrote: > > I'm not Andrea but as someone who's appreciated the value of global calling > since Chris and Brooke proselytized our West Coast English caller self > improvement group about it in 2000 and who regularly uses it even in not > gender free English as well as for gender free English I think I can answer. > > The Heather and Rose style (which they didn't invent but have published the > most in) is designed for proper longways. Men's line is left file, ladies > line is right file. In a square or Becket formation gents place are first > diagonals, ladies are second diagonals. Corner is reserved for contra > corners and the immediate neighbor in a square. > > However, mainstream English gives us first corners (in a proper set, first > gent and second lady) and second corners (first lady and second gent). If > you apply that to a typical improper contra, as Andrea was suggesting, the > ladies are on the first corners, the gents on the second corners. > > The answer to each of your questions about how she'd indicate what we now do > with gender is to substitute a corner reference. First corners make a wave > in the middle of the set. They back up and second corners come in. > > > You'd have to decide whether the same positional reference applies to becket, > where it would be the gents, or have the corner assignments apply before you > becketize, which would be my preference. > > Does that clear it up ? > > Alan > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Jun 1, 2015, at 9:12 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers > <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > Andrea, how would you handle the following: > 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to > Lambertville, et all? > 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? > 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, > Jurassic Redheads, etc. > 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. > 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? > 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't mentioned? > Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? > None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. > Ron > On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" > <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at > Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of > global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, > everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most > unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of > first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same > role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to > gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for > example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in > those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to > refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But since > we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems > unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are > trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. > Cheers, > Andrea > > Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > > On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers > <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in > gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis using > gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a great > success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. At > the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some > were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual about the > dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were more dances > that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. No one I talked > to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. > > It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but it is > certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to call > gender free. > > If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of > gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, > arcadia...@gmail.com. > > Thanks, > Jim Hemphill > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >
