It depends a lot on your local dance?. At ours I think a call that implied
the gender of specific dancers ("Ladies star right, around the square
... It’s partner left, then leave him there ... And then you Swing with
that corner guy") would need rephrasing, though that's often practical.
Here's "Just Because" with gender-free lyrics:
https://www.jefftk.com/contras/dances/justbecause
Jeff
On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 11:22 AM Jill Allen <allenjill...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Great discussion!
>
> So, now what do we do with squares? One of my favorites, “Push pa, shove
> ma” (swing the girl from Arkansas) Darn… but I get it.
>
> Should we rewrite the singing squares that don’t comply? It might not be
> too difficult. I would just like to know what some of you have experienced
> with your squares. Are these dances and their poetry part of our tradition,
> or are they dinosaurs? Could they be called with a disclaimer?
>
> Jill Allen
> Lawrence, KS
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 8:17 AM Jeff Kaufman via Contra Callers <
> contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> I went looking for Myrtle Wilhite's "Lullaby of the swing: And other
>> contra dances, tunes, waltzes, and essays" so I could read her "I am not a
>> lady" essay, and found an archived Geocities page
>> <https://www.oocities.org/heartland/1752/contra_books.html> "last
>> updated Mon Jul 14 1997 by William J. Watson". This is the same William
>> Watson who's still active in the community (cc'd) and after writing to him
>> he was kind enough to send me the essay:
>>
>> *Essay 11: I am not a lady.*
>>
>> *Myrtle Wilhite, 1993*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *You may notice that I don't write or call dances with ladies in them.
>> This is distinctly classist language in the fabric of contra terminology
>> which not only implies upper vs. lower class distinctions ('woman' does
>> not), but encourages submission for the women ("now, act like a lady!!!").
>> I preserve the clarity of the call with "women" for ladies and "men" for
>> gents (same number of syllables), and in my calling years I have never had
>> any misunderstandings about it. (As you might guess, I don't call "...and
>> trap that pretty little girl" in square calls either.)To the rejoinder that
>> "the figure is called a ladies chain", I reply that the name of a figure is
>> "chain", and that the gender discrimination only determines who is to cross
>> the set. After all, there are "men's chains".To those who reply that this
>> is "traditional wording that shalt not be altered" (was that the eleventh
>> commandment?), I remind them that this is THE FOLK PROCESS after all, and
>> I'm allowed to try different things, thank you. If the wording didn't work,
>> it wouldn't work, but it does. Of those who spontaneously noticed, I had
>> only favorable comments from men and women alike. (I wonder after writing
>> that how many ruffled feathers there will be--good excuse to make a feather
>> pillow...)So, I'd like to suggest that you refer to the woman's role
>> consistently by the term woman or women, and the man's role consistently by
>> the term man or men. And if you don't think that other choreographers are
>> likely to agree with this editing, I would really like you to at least
>> preserve the terminology in my dances/dance descriptions. If you choose not
>> to do this in your own calling or dance choreography, you make your own
>> choices, and I applaud your right to do exactly that.*
>>
>> While she explicitly requests that people keep her dances with women/men
>> role terms, reading the rest of the piece I think if she were still
>> involved in the community she wouldn't be telling people they couldn't use
>> Larks/Robins for her dances.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 10:54 PM Jerome Grisanti via Contra Callers <
>> contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Kat,
>>>
>>> Nice observations.
>>>
>>> I'll note that your symmetrical version of California Twirl into "Tug
>>> and Turn" is almost exactly the definition of "Trade By" in club squares
>>> for dancers who are facing out of the set. (For dancers facing in, trade by
>>> is functionally the same as "pass through."
>>>
>>> I like your tweaks toward symmetry, particularly as you're in a position
>>> to encourage it across an entire community.
>>>
>>> I fear a splitting of dance communities as some dancers favor certain
>>> terms while others prefer a different set without some consensus.
>>>
>>> Jerome Grisanti
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023, 12:23 PM Katherine Kitching via Contra Callers <
>>> contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello from Halifax, NS, Canada!
>>>> I'd like to add to this convo by saying that for many years (as both a
>>>> dancer and then a caller), I've had the desire to cultivate the roles as
>>>> equal, rather than the Larks having more of a leader role.
>>>>
>>>> I wasn't sure that that was an ok thing to want though, so I kept it
>>>> to myself at first. I'm thrilled to now read that there are others also
>>>> consciously pushing the roles in that direction.
>>>>
>>>> Our group was doing gents and ladies when i started to dance, and there
>>>> were definitely many gents in our group who wanted to lead me around. I
>>>> didn't particularly enjoy being relegated to the follow role because of my
>>>> gender. (and yes, there was in theory the option to dance the other role,
>>>> but as I was easily confused back then, I preferred to stick with the role
>>>> I was slowly getting used to). At the same time, as I started to learn
>>>> more, I noticed there were many "gents" who had no sense of leading, and I
>>>> began to enjoy as the "lady" being able to "back-lead" them to help them
>>>> feel the wonderful centripetal and balancy forces at play. I became quite
>>>> the expert back-leader in the ladies chain! But I always hated the term
>>>> "back-lead" as I felt it had a negative connotation. (That pushy lady is
>>>> back-leading the gent, just like a back-seat driver!). I even remember
>>>> once, an experienced dancer from the US telling me it was totally
>>>> inappropriate to desire to "back-lead" and I still feel annoyed by that
>>>> today ;)
>>>>
>>>> Anyhow, we've now switched over to a non-gendered dance with Larks and
>>>> Ravens (with beautiful bird-labels that the dancers wear, which is why we
>>>> haven't evolved to Robins here) and it is working wonderfully for us.
>>>>
>>>> With so many new dancers coming in and old ones fading away over the
>>>> years, I think the majority of our dancers don't have any idea there even
>>>> *were* gender roles in our type of dancing. (We are quite an isolated
>>>> community out here, so for many people, we are the only thing they know
>>>> about contra dancing). I think that is so cool! When you look around the
>>>> room at our dances, we have reached the point where there is no correlation
>>>> between visible gender and bird-role - everyone randomly assigns
>>>> themselves. For us, it's been an amazing change - and we've heard directly
>>>> from both the queer community and from many women that they feel more
>>>> comfortable at our dances now. And the cisgender men keep coming so I
>>>> presume they are having an ok time too :)
>>>>
>>>> As I've become more confident in my calling and am now the defacto
>>>> caller for our group (nobody else is currently available though I'm going
>>>> to train some new folks this spring), I've felt more bold to cultivate the
>>>> roles as I'd like to see them.
>>>>
>>>> I never mention a notion of leading or following, and instead I talk
>>>> about the delightful "push-me-pull-you" feeling of contra, where each
>>>> dancer feels an "elastic connection" to the other, and how (in my view)
>>>> this special shared connection, along with a feeling of never-ending
>>>> movement, is what makes contra magical.
>>>>
>>>> We get a very large proportion of beginners each month, and also many
>>>> repeat dancers who don't become particularly skilled (they perhaps attend
>>>> once every 2-3 months on average, so their learning curve is slow, and they
>>>> forget a lot after our 3-month summer break).
>>>>
>>>> As such, we do a lot of dances without swings (I try to get at least
>>>> halfway through the dance without introducing a swing), and I'm trying
>>>> Larks chains as well as Robins chains prior to swinging these days.
>>>> Post-covid, we've been doing swings with a modified ballroom hold (Larks
>>>> left hand in Robins' right, but other hands cupped on each others' elbows),
>>>> which creates more space between the dancers -- both for personal comfort
>>>> for any gender when dancing with a stranger--and also less germs-in-face
>>>> feeling during these covid times.
>>>> (Though I plan to try the Scottish Swing that Ridge suggested at our
>>>> next dance, just out of interest! :) )
>>>>
>>>> I find the swing in this modified ballroom position feels symmetrical
>>>> to me and to our dancers- both dancers are supporting each other by the
>>>> elbow, and one does not feel more inherently "lead-y".
>>>>
>>>> I've also replaced "California Twirl" with what I call "tug and turn" -
>>>> I tell the dancers to tug off the hand they are holding (i.e inside hand)
>>>> to pass by the right shoulder - then catch by the new inside hand facing
>>>> the other way. When this happens with partners, sometimes they end up
>>>> doing a cali-twirl as an embellishment - but the base move is symmetrical.
>>>>
>>>> So I feel I'm close to achieving my personal vision for a no
>>>> leads/follow dance. :D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have always loved contra as a way for two dancers or 4 dancers or a
>>>> whole line of dancers to feel these interesting connections and forces at
>>>> play, while never stopping moving. I personally have never been interested
>>>> in contra as something that resembles "couples dancing", so the approach we
>>>> have in our group is emphasizing the elements of contra that I
>>>> personally love best. As our dances are well attended and growing, it
>>>> seems to be working for our group. Which is gratifying for me for sure :)
>>>>
>>>> All that said!
>>>> One of the most interesting parts of this discussion is to read about
>>>> all the diverse approaches that callers are taking throughout the world,
>>>> and how different approaches seem to work super well in different
>>>> communities. I am totally intrigued by positional calling. I don't forsee
>>>> trying it myself any time soon, only because what we have going for us
>>>> right now is working really well and it's taken many years to get here...
>>>> but I'm super keen to try it out at a dance elsewhere, and maybe in the
>>>> future I'll give it a try in Halifax.
>>>> And while I LOVE our non-gendered dances here in Halifax, I could see
>>>> myself as a cisgender person getting a kick out of going to a dance
>>>> somewhere far away with my sweetheart on a date night, where they call with
>>>> men and ladies and the gender roles are quite rigid, and getting into that
>>>> vibe for the evening. And though I am personally terrified of the idea of
>>>> dancing at one of those fusion events where the contra dancers do some
>>>> red-hot swing/blues type dancing with their partners, I *adore* watching
>>>> videos of it, it's amazing!
>>>>
>>>> So I wanted to say that I hope everyone continues to contribute to this
>>>> discussion in the spirit of "Here is what works for me/ here is what works
>>>> for my group in case it interests you" rather than in a critical or
>>>> prosthelytizing fashion :)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers from Halifax!
>>>> Kat Kitching
>>>> https://halifaxcontra.ca <http://www.halifaxcontra.c>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> contracallers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>> contracallers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Contra Callers mailing list -- contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
To unsubscribe send an email to contracallers-le...@lists.sharedweight.net
