Thanks for putting this out there. A couple thoughts from someone who only occasionally puts a square in a program.
I often wonder about pairing breaks with figures. So some quick index system of this figure goes well with these breaks, avoid these breaks, etc. There are some things I think about, like not using a grand right and left in both or such; but I'm sure there are deeper considerations that I'm ignorant of (visiting breaks for keeper figures and vice versa? etc). So there's some meta-level stuff I'd like to hear unpacked. Another meta-level thing; which squares do you want to stay square to phrasing (besides singing), and when does it not matter? A break-out of expected teaching and time it takes: i.e. this is a figure you'll have to walk once, versus this should be walked for heads & sides or everyone. Some of that comes with experience, just calling more squares would make it easier to judge. But I'm personally leery of giving contra dancers a bad square experience, with many groups pre-disposed to grumbling about the time spent teaching (too much time teaching or not enough and it crashes; and sometimes there's not actually a happy middle). A category of "these squares won't take longer than a contra to teach (but are still engaging)" Looking forward to the book. On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Tony Parkes via Callers < [email protected]> wrote: > [Posted to Shared Weight callers’ list and trad-dance-callers list, > simultaneously but separately so replies won’t go to both lists] > > > > This message is for those of you who call squares, or have thought you > might like to call squares. The rest of you may allow your attention to > wander. > > > > I’m writing a book on calling squares in what I think of as > neo-traditional style (the style, borrowing from many regional traditions > but compatible with contra handholds and timing, that callers tend to use > on the contra circuit). It will be at least as long as my contra calling > text (300 pages), but will include more repertoire than the contra book, as > it seems to me that squares in general, and good squares in particular, are > harder to find these days than contras and good contras. > > > > I’ve reached a stage where I know pretty well what I want to cover, but I > want to make sure I haven’t overlooked anything. So… > > > > What would you like to see in such a book (assuming you’d buy and/or read > it)? What aspects of calling squares are you particularly interested / > excited / terrified about? > > > > Public and private replies are welcome. Thanks for your interest and your > feedback. > > > > Tony Parkes > > Billerica, Mass. > > www.hands4.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > -- Luke Donforth [email protected] <[email protected]>
