I gathered that was the case - it just isn't something I've come across and it seems redundant to use the double option. Is it really widespread enough that it needs mentioning?
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:02 PM Read Weaver via Callers < [email protected]> wrote: > Sorry I was unclear. Because some contra callers say “mad robin” and some > contra callers say “double mad robin,” meaning the same thing, and if > you’ve learned it as “mad robin” and a new-to-you caller says “double mad > robin,” you’ll think it’s a different figure. > > On Sep 28, 2018, at 8:51 AM, Folk Dance <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I don't think the distinction is necessary is it? "mad robin with your > neighbour" is clearly distinct from "1s in the middle mad robin" so why add > double mad robin? It'd be like calling most petronella's double > petronellas because they have four people moving but the original > petronella is for 1s only. > > Bob > > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:29 PM Read Weaver via Callers < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> It’s perhaps worth saying during the teaching “also called a double mad >> robin,” since dancers will sometimes hear that (from callers who know ECD). >> I’ve seen confusion on moderately experienced contra dancers’ faces (and >> feet) at the term “double mad robin” (thinking you go around twice, or that >> it involves more than 4 people) because they’ve only ever seen the figure >> with 4 people moving and they’ve only ever heard it called “mad robin.” >> (In the English country dance “Mad Robin,” only two people are moving in >> the eponymous figure.) >> > > _______________________________________________ > List Name: Callers mailing list > List Address: [email protected] > Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >
_______________________________________________ List Name: Callers mailing list List Address: [email protected] Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
