Yep, I agree..

bill


________________________________
From: Callers <callers-boun...@lists.sharedweight.net> on behalf of Dave 
Casserly via Callers <callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 7:25 PM
To: Neal Schlein
Cc: callers
Subject: Re: [Callers] Pre-existing dance?

Regarding attribution, I like the way David Kaynor puts it on this website: 
"Some of my dances are "compositions" only in the loosest sense of the word; 
they fall into the category of "glossary" contras which basically amount to 
minimally imaginative resequencing of ordinary contra dance elements. Do such 
dances…especially if conceived spontaneously in a teaching/calling situation… 
qualify as "compositions?" Maybe. Maybe not."

I'm in the maybe not camp.  They're not protected by any copyright here (at 
least in my view, which has generally been shared by most people on this list 
when the topic comes up on occasion).  I don't call regularly; most of the time 
when I call dances, I'm doing so late at night after a singing event or at 
somebody's house or at a more-or-less spontaneous outdoor gathering, where I 
don't have dance cards with me.  I know several dances by name and memory, but 
most of the dances at such events are things I've made up on the spot.  I am 
almost certain that every single one of these dances is a progression I have 
danced before at some point in the past, and that somebody has written and put 
their name on Partner Balance and Swing, Circle Left 3/4, Neighbor Swing, Long 
Lines, Ladies Chain, Left-Hand Star, New Neighbor Do-Si-Do.  Good for whoever 
that person is, and if it's a catchy title, that can be a useful way for us to 
refer to that particular glossary dance.  But I wouldn't call it a composition, 
and I certainly wouldn't feel like I need to research whoever wrote that dance 
and the title and attribute it to that person.

Where I differ from Neal is that I don't really want a dozen people to be 
putting their name on that above dance I just made up (after I've danced it 
many times already, after somebody else made it up, etc).  It's just not 
interesting enough of a sequence to be worth attributing at all.

It gets a bit tougher when we're talking about dances that, when written, were 
really compositions, adding something new or fresh to the repertoire, but could 
now be considered glossary dances because of how common those figures have 
become in modern contra dances.  But that's not the case for most of the dances.

-Dave
Washington, DC



On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers 
<callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
As someone with an academic background in the field of Folklore, the way we 
talk about attribution and authorship bothers me.

(NOTE: what I'm talking about here is distinct from trying to track down the 
source of a dance you collected somewhere, or according respect to the first 
person to dream up a sequence.  Both of those goals are entirely legitimate.)

The dance Luke described was created by him, not Mark Goodwin.  The sequence 
happens to be the same as one dreamed up by Mark Goodwin at a previous place 
and time, which is very important to know, but Luke's creation was independent 
and should be attributed to Luke.  If we attribute everything to the first 
person ever to dream up a sequence, we are grossly misrepresenting how dances 
are created and spread.

When we attribute Luke's dance to Mark, we are saying that Luke (and everyone 
else) got the dance from Mark, or from a source tracked back to Mark.  That is 
factually incorrect in this case; Luke can point to when and why he came up 
with the dance.  Legally, it would also mean we are claiming that Mark holds 
the only legitimate copyright claim, which is again both incorrect and total 
nonsense (as copyright usually becomes when applied to folk genres).

As both an academic and participant in our tradition, I want to know if many 
people independently came up with the same dance (making it a FOLK DANCE).  
Otherwise, I am falsely giving credit and responsibility to a single creative 
genius.  The difference between those two is a significant matter in the 
question of how folklore is created and who owns it.  Personally, I feel our 
cultural tendency to accord authorial rights has misled us.

So please...if you came up with a dance put your name on it along with some of 
the details---and then tell me who else came up with it, too.  Don't just stick 
their name on it.

Just my 2 cents.
Neal


Neal Schlein
Youth Services Librarian, Mahomet Public Library


Currently reading: The Different Girl by Gordon Dahlquist
Currently learning: How to set up an automated email system.

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers 
<callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
Thanks. I'll attribute it to Mark Goodwin.

On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Michael Barraclough via Callers 
<callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
I have that exact dance as To Wedded Bliss by Mark Goodwin (2014). I use that 
in my Lesson and then, after teaching ladies chain and right & left through, 
follow that with my dance The Lesson (2009) which is

A1 -----------
(8) Neighbor Do-si-do
(8) Neighbor swing
A2 -----------
(8) Ladies chain
(8) Long lines, forward and back
B1 -----------
(8) Right & left through
(8) Partner promenade across
B2 -----------
(8) Circle Left 3/4
(4) Balance the Ring
(4) Pass through

and yes, I know it doesn't have a swing - it's in the lesson and I want to  
minimize the use of partner swings so that new couples don't get bad habits.

Michael Barraclough
www.michaelbarraclough.com<http://www.michaelbarraclough.com>


--

On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 22:45 -0400, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
Hello all,

I was thinking about what I do at the "welcome to our contra dance" 
introduction, and what dance would easily move in to that. Noodling around with 
moves, I thought of a sequence with glossary moves, but I didn't have it in my 
box. Anyone recognize it?

Improper

A1 -----------
(8) Neighbor Do-si-do
(8) Neighbor swing
A2 -----------
(8) Men allemande Left 1-1/2
(8) Partner swing
B1 -----------
(8) Promenade across the Set
(8) Long lines, forward and back
B2 -----------
(8) Circle Left 3/4
(4) Balance the Ring
(4) Pass through

During the introduction, I often teach the progression with a "ring balance, 
walk past this neighbor", and I wanted something that included that. There are 
lots of great accessible dances with that (The Big Easy, Easy Peasy, etc), but 
I'm not seeing one with a partner promenade (something I also use in the 
introduction; to go from a big circle to lines of couples for a contra set).

If someone already wrote it, I'll happily give them credit. If not, I'll call 
it "If you can walk, then you can dance" (which I'll note is not an if and only 
if statement).


_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net


_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net




--
Luke Donforth
luke.donfo...@gmail.com<mailto:luke.do...@gmail.com>

_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net



_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net<mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net




--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761

Reply via email to