Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
If confronted with that bias again, one could always point out that many improper dances if started in the b section instead, become Becket dances and vice versa. On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Actually, I can see this. > > As others suggested, it is probably a matter of the couple's prior poor > experiences with dances in Beckets. That said, there are two fairly common > tendencies in Becket formation choreography which are somewhat aggravating > and another which absolutely drives me up a wall. Other callers and > dancers don't seem to mind so much, but were it possible I would completely > avoid the dances which have the last one. > > 1. The first tendency has to do with diagonal figures, even though I like > them myself. They are often scrunched and uncomfortable, particularly > right and left throughs; people run into each other. Add to this the > slight disorientation for someone not used to diagonal figures, and it can > be unpleasant. In a nice open hall, they're perfectly fine. Not a problem > so much with the formation as with the fact that everyone is in the middle > all at once and it's confusing. > > 2. The second is what I like to call the "DeBecketize Manuever." How many > beckets start with, "Circle left 3/4 (and usually swing your neighbor" and > end with "Partner swing on the side!" (answer: TOO MANY) If all you are > going to do with the first move is take the dance out of Becket, it seems > like a cheap trick done just to make the dance "different." Again, not an > inherent problem of the formation, just a problem of choreographic > selection. > > 3. The third choreographic tendency is often tied to dances which feature > swings at the end of the dance: *partial or non progression*.This > problem, unlike the others, is actually made possible because of the > formation: such a difficulty isn't possible in a regular duple minor, and > it drives me absolutely NUTS. I have experienced a number of dances in > which the caller instructs the dancers to "fudge" or "maneuver" or "sludge" > or some such to make the dance work. The contra doesn't actually progress > the couples down the line, but leaves them 1/2 progressed or > non-progressed--usually swinging partners on the outside, but not always. > Sliding up the outside from a circle is one thing; swinging on the outside > and fudging down the hall is another. > > The annoyance of a non-progression can be mitigated if the caller teaches > it well (end facing across, look left and...), but to me the partial > progression problem always jars and simply seems to be excessively lazy > choreography. > Beak > > 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 Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:26 PM, John W Gintell via Callers < > callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> My favorite progression requires Becket formation: circle left and then >> slide up/down and circle with the next pair. >> >> >> > On Dec 10, 2015, at 6:43 PM, Greg Allan via Callers < >> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > >> > That is a somewhat familiar story from my point of view. I dance in a >> number of different folk dancing communities - a varied program here in >> Winnipeg. It's quite common, as people from one group attempt to get >> interest from other dancing groups, that some people know what they like >> and what they don't like, and that's that. For example, people who English >> country dance often don't like contra because of the increased exertion and >> tempo. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of triple minor dances. Everyone's >> got their thing. But there's always a reason for it. It could be a bad >> experience, or it could be a stylistic feature of a region, where everyone >> does a figure in a way you find unpleasant. Hard to say. To leave an event >> because someone programmed something you didn't like? ... I'm not sure to >> make of it. You don't like it you don't like it, I suppose. >> > >> > We don't do Becket formation here at all, really. If someone left at >> the end of a night because of Becket formation, I would assume they didn't >> want to start learning new things late in the evening. >> > >> > Greg >> > >> > >> >> ___ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > > > ___ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
Actually, I can see this. As others suggested, it is probably a matter of the couple's prior poor experiences with dances in Beckets. That said, there are two fairly common tendencies in Becket formation choreography which are somewhat aggravating and another which absolutely drives me up a wall. Other callers and dancers don't seem to mind so much, but were it possible I would completely avoid the dances which have the last one. 1. The first tendency has to do with diagonal figures, even though I like them myself. They are often scrunched and uncomfortable, particularly right and left throughs; people run into each other. Add to this the slight disorientation for someone not used to diagonal figures, and it can be unpleasant. In a nice open hall, they're perfectly fine. Not a problem so much with the formation as with the fact that everyone is in the middle all at once and it's confusing. 2. The second is what I like to call the "DeBecketize Manuever." How many beckets start with, "Circle left 3/4 (and usually swing your neighbor" and end with "Partner swing on the side!" (answer: TOO MANY) If all you are going to do with the first move is take the dance out of Becket, it seems like a cheap trick done just to make the dance "different." Again, not an inherent problem of the formation, just a problem of choreographic selection. 3. The third choreographic tendency is often tied to dances which feature swings at the end of the dance: *partial or non progression*.This problem, unlike the others, is actually made possible because of the formation: such a difficulty isn't possible in a regular duple minor, and it drives me absolutely NUTS. I have experienced a number of dances in which the caller instructs the dancers to "fudge" or "maneuver" or "sludge" or some such to make the dance work. The contra doesn't actually progress the couples down the line, but leaves them 1/2 progressed or non-progressed--usually swinging partners on the outside, but not always. Sliding up the outside from a circle is one thing; swinging on the outside and fudging down the hall is another. The annoyance of a non-progression can be mitigated if the caller teaches it well (end facing across, look left and...), but to me the partial progression problem always jars and simply seems to be excessively lazy choreography. Beak 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 Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:26 PM, John W Gintell via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > My favorite progression requires Becket formation: circle left and then > slide up/down and circle with the next pair. > > > > On Dec 10, 2015, at 6:43 PM, Greg Allan via Callers < > callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > That is a somewhat familiar story from my point of view. I dance in a > number of different folk dancing communities - a varied program here in > Winnipeg. It's quite common, as people from one group attempt to get > interest from other dancing groups, that some people know what they like > and what they don't like, and that's that. For example, people who English > country dance often don't like contra because of the increased exertion and > tempo. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of triple minor dances. Everyone's > got their thing. But there's always a reason for it. It could be a bad > experience, or it could be a stylistic feature of a region, where everyone > does a figure in a way you find unpleasant. Hard to say. To leave an event > because someone programmed something you didn't like? ... I'm not sure to > make of it. You don't like it you don't like it, I suppose. > > > > We don't do Becket formation here at all, really. If someone left at the > end of a night because of Becket formation, I would assume they didn't want > to start learning new things late in the evening. > > > > Greg > > > > > > ___ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >
Re: [Callers] Contras with a Hey
Here’s To Us - Duple Improper, Becket Formation (Clock-wise Progression) A-1 Ladies Pass R. then dance around Neighbor - passing L. with Him (into the other Lady’s place), Long Lines Dance Forward and Back A-2 Gents Pass R. then dance around Partner - passing L. with Her, Gent’s Pass R. again and Balance Neighbor B-1 Swing Neighbor (short swing), Half R. & L. Thru B-2 Gents Pass Thru while Ladies Alle. L. 1x, Swing Partners (and Slide Left to Progress…) Notes: Relative to Half Hey and Teaching of the Full Hey, I wrote this dance some years ago…don’t have the note on a specific date…just to isolate the movement across and and around another dancer. It’s based on the notion that most Full Heys begin with the Ladies passing Right shoulder. Of course it’s a beginners dance mostly. The last figure, prior to Swing Partner, begins just as with Pass Thru but the Ladies catch hands and “turn back”. All end swinging on Original side of set and simply slide toward a new couple for the Ladies to Pass R. . . . Enjoy!
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
My favorite progression requires Becket formation: circle left and then slide up/down and circle with the next pair. > On Dec 10, 2015, at 6:43 PM, Greg Allan via Callers > wrote: > > Hi, > > That is a somewhat familiar story from my point of view. I dance in a number > of different folk dancing communities - a varied program here in Winnipeg. > It's quite common, as people from one group attempt to get interest from > other dancing groups, that some people know what they like and what they > don't like, and that's that. For example, people who English country dance > often don't like contra because of the increased exertion and tempo. > Personally, I'm not much of a fan of triple minor dances. Everyone's got > their thing. But there's always a reason for it. It could be a bad > experience, or it could be a stylistic feature of a region, where everyone > does a figure in a way you find unpleasant. Hard to say. To leave an event > because someone programmed something you didn't like? ... I'm not sure to > make of it. You don't like it you don't like it, I suppose. > > We don't do Becket formation here at all, really. If someone left at the end > of a night because of Becket formation, I would assume they didn't want to > start learning new things late in the evening. > > Greg > >
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
:04 PM, jill allen via Callers < > callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > > > Here's something new: > > > > Signs of Life > > duple improper contra > > by Jill Allen > > > > A1 circle R X1, M allem L 1 1/2 to face P > > A2 hey for 4, start by passing R > > B1 gypsy and swing P (or B & S) > > B2 circle L 3/4, balance the ring, calif twirl to face the next.. > > > > Also: > > > > Columbia Contra > > duple improper contra > > by Gene Hubert > > > > A1 Allem R N aprox 1 1/4, W allem L 1/2, allem R P X1 ending with Women > facing each other in the middle > > A2 hey for 4, W pass L to begin > > B1 B & S P > > B2 W chain, star L > > > > I call both of these quite frequently. Both have timing which is > forgiving for beginners. > > Jill Allen : ) > > > > > >>> Hello Folks, > >>> > > >>> > I am relatively new at calling contras and I am looking for some asy > to intermediate contras to introduce the hey to a group that includes many > beginners. and/or club square dancers. > >>> > > >>> > "Butter" by Gene Hubert is my go to dance, but I am looking for a > few more. I like Butter because the flow from ladies chain into a RH hey > is great, and because all the other calls are introduced earlier in most > evening. > >>> > > >>> > I love simple, but different choreography, so I am open to most > suggestions. > >>> > > >>> > Rich Sbardella > > ___ > > Callers mailing list > > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151209/600f919f/attachment-0001.htm > > > > -- > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500 > From: Rich Sbardella via Callers > To: "Caller's discussion list" > Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation > Message-ID: > redta1ysblw_5buy...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Folks, > > I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited > dancers to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in > Becket formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for > the last dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that > they do not like Beckets. > > Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% > Beckets in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket > formation among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason? > > Rich > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151210/a3a9491e/attachment-0001.htm > > > > -- > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 20:20:27 + > From: Bill Olson via Callers > To: Caller's discussion list > Subject: Re: [Callers] Becket Formation > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Wow, maybe that couple didn't actually know what Becket Formation was? > > bill > > Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500 > To: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation > From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net > > Folks, > I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited > dancers to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in > Becket formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for > the last dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that > they do not like Beckets. > Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% > Beckets in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket > formation among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason? > Rich > > ___ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > -- next part -- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151210/51766206/attachment-0001.htm > > > > --
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
As Mac pointed out, becket dances can be more complex/confusing. Removing a need to separate you from your partner at the end of the dance, allows for some choreographic flexibility. All the same, most beckets are not notably more complex/confusing than most improper contras. My guesses are: 1 - this couple had a bad experience that they associate with 'becket formation' rather than whatever confounding factors go into making a dance experience pleasant or unpleasant 2 - was this a contra event (all duple-minors all the time) or a more varied program? Maybe the couple doesn't like contras much? 3 - Maybe they are confusing it with some other formation (sicilian, 4 face 4, squares, triplets, etc.) --Ryan Smith
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
Sorry, I meant Rich. On Dec 10, 2015 3:54 PM, "Ron Blechner" wrote: > Whoa. Weird story, Mac. Baffled > On Dec 10, 2015 3:30 PM, "Mac Mckeever via Callers" < > callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> The only thing I can imagine is that many Becket dances leave the minor >> set - making them slightly more complex. Perhaps they had some bad >> experiences with a couple dances and haven't given them another chance. >> >> They seem to be different - even though they really aren't - maybe they >> are just more comfortable with what they are used to. >> >> I would think a Becket is a good choice for a final dance because they >> can end with a partner swing - an nice way to end the last dance. >> >> Mac McKeever >> >> -- >> *From:* Bill Olson via Callers >> *To:* Caller's discussion list >> *Sent:* Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:20 PM >> *Subject:* Re: [Callers] Becket Formation >> >> Wow, maybe that couple didn't actually know what Becket Formation was? >> >> bill >> >> -- >> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500 >> To: call...@sharedweight.net >> Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation >> From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> >> >> >> Folks, >> >> I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited >> dancers to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in >> Becket formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for >> the last dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that >> they do not like Beckets. >> >> Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% >> Beckets in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket >> formation among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason? >> >> Rich >> >> ___ Callers mailing list >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> ___ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> >> ___ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >>
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
Whoa. Weird story, Mac. Baffled On Dec 10, 2015 3:30 PM, "Mac Mckeever via Callers" < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > The only thing I can imagine is that many Becket dances leave the minor > set - making them slightly more complex. Perhaps they had some bad > experiences with a couple dances and haven't given them another chance. > > They seem to be different - even though they really aren't - maybe they > are just more comfortable with what they are used to. > > I would think a Becket is a good choice for a final dance because they can > end with a partner swing - an nice way to end the last dance. > > Mac McKeever > > -- > *From:* Bill Olson via Callers > *To:* Caller's discussion list > *Sent:* Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:20 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Callers] Becket Formation > > Wow, maybe that couple didn't actually know what Becket Formation was? > > bill > > -- > Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500 > To: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation > From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net > > > > Folks, > > I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited > dancers to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in > Becket formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for > the last dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that > they do not like Beckets. > > Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% > Beckets in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket > formation among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason? > > Rich > > ___ Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > ___ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > > ___ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
The only thing I can imagine is that many Becket dances leave the minor set -
making them slightly more complex. Perhaps they had some bad experiences with
a couple dances and haven't given them another chance.
They seem to be different - even though they really aren't - maybe they are
just more comfortable with what they are used to.
I would think a Becket is a good choice for a final dance because they can end
with a partner swing - an nice way to end the last dance.
Mac McKeever
From: Bill Olson via Callers
To: Caller's discussion list
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
#yiv5824956374 #yiv5824956374 --.yiv5824956374hmmessage
P{margin:0px;padding:0px;}#yiv5824956374
body.yiv5824956374hmmessage{font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri;}#yiv5824956374
Wow, maybe that couple didn't actually know what Becket Formation was?
bill
List-Post: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500
To: call...@sharedweight.net
Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation
From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Folks,
I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited dancers
to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in Becket
formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for the last
dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that they do not
like Beckets.
Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% Beckets
in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket formation
among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason?
Rich
___Callers mailing
listCallers@lists.sharedweight.nethttp://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
Or maybe they were confusing Becket with gypsy Michael Fuerst 802 N
Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217 239 5844
On Thursday, December 10, 2015 2:20 PM, Bill Olson via Callers
wrote:
#yiv5709207139 #yiv5709207139 --.yiv5709207139hmmessage
P{margin:0px;padding:0px;}#yiv5709207139
body.yiv5709207139hmmessage{font-size:12pt;font-family:Calibri;}#yiv5709207139
Wow, maybe that couple didn't actually know what Becket Formation was?
bill
List-Post: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500
To: call...@sharedweight.net
Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation
From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Folks,
I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited dancers
to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in Becket
formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for the last
dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that they do not
like Beckets.
Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% Beckets
in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket formation
among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason?
Rich
___Callers mailing
listCallers@lists.sharedweight.nethttp://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
Re: [Callers] Becket Formation
Wow, maybe that couple didn't actually know what Becket Formation was? bill List-Post: callers@lists.sharedweight.net Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 14:45:17 -0500 To: call...@sharedweight.net Subject: [Callers] Becket Formation From: callers@lists.sharedweight.net Folks, I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited dancers to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in Becket formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for the last dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that they do not like Beckets. Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% Beckets in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket formation among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason? Rich ___ Callers mailing list Callers@lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
[Callers] Becket Formation
Folks, I was at a dance not too long ago, and as the caller (not me) invited dancers to join the last dance of the night, he also declared it to be in Becket formation. One visiting couple, who had been waiting eagerly for the last dance , put on their jackets and left disappointed, stating that they do not like Beckets. Perhaps because I am a square dance caller, I tend to program about 40% Beckets in a contra evening. Is there a negative sentiment about Becket formation among many dancers? If so, can someone explain the reason? Rich
