" known for writing and advocating difficult sequences, " My "difficult sequences" are mostly difficult for callers to visualize (and thus teach), than for reasonably experienced dancers to dance.
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> Virus-free.www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 10:14 AM Tony Parkes via Contra Callers < [email protected]> wrote: > Bravo, Michael! (I’ve bolded, below, the point on which I want to agree > wholeheartedly.) I’ve believed this for years, and had no way of knowing > what percentage of active contra callers agreed. I dare to hope that, as > Michael is known for writing and advocating difficult sequences, his > opinion will carry added weight. > > > > Over the decades, I’ve seen the number of contra “basics” increase > dramatically – from about 12 in the 1960s, when many groups got started, to > at least 36 today. I’ve worried that the modern contra world has been going > down the same path as modern “western” squares did. There’s always a gap > between what a first-timer can grasp in one night and what a dancer needs > to know to be comfortable at a dance series. But if “basics” are > continually added, the gap gets ever wider, until a lesson or a series of > lessons is needed. Western squares started with 6 lessons in the late > 1940s; currently the Plus program (the prevailing club level in most parts > of the US) contains 97 “basics” and (coincidentally) is recommended to be > taught in 97 hours, or about 50 lessons. (Most clubs insist that their > callers take less time, which results in new dancers not learning the calls > adequately.) > > > > We contra and trad square callers are nowhere near the excesses of MWSD. > But even 36 “basics” are too many for an activity that supposedly anyone > can join in without lessons. Some sequences – maybe even some moves – > should be reserved for workshops. I’m glad to see an influential modern > contra caller speaking out on this. > > > > Tony Parkes > > Billerica, Mass. > > www.hands4.com > > New book! Square Dance Calling: An Old Art for a New Century > > (available now) > > > > > > *From:* Michael Fuerst via Contra Callers < > [email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, September 14, 2023 4:11 AM > *To:* Helle Hill <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Shared Weight Contra Callers <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [Callers] Re: New Terminology Question > > > > Jeff's suggestion of "facing star" works perfectly, and merits becoming > the standard term used for discussions about and written descriptions of > dances. However, *such occasionally used figures must always be explained > during walk-throughs*, so the caller can designate, for the duration of > the dance, any appropriate name. (I think I have used "funny" or "silly" > star in the past.) The point being that *dancers should need to > understand the names of a dozen or so basic figures* (such as F&B, > allemande, promenade, star, chain, right and left, circle, shoulders round, > hey, and maybe several more) and that callers should need only basic > figures to teach any dance. > > > > On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 8:58 PM Helle Hill via Contra Callers < > [email protected]> wrote: > > With all the changes to the "old" terminology, I am wondering what a > "Gypsy Star" is now called. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Helle Hill > > > > _______________________________________________ > Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected] > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >
_______________________________________________ Contra Callers mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
