Re: [Callers] What can you do.....?

[jim saxe via Callers]

> On Sep 30, 2019, at 5:09 PM, Bill Baritompa via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Becky, John and all, 
> 
>  I think it is slightly more complex. 
> Have a look at the young dancer here
> https://youtu.be/sFVToeQdCPY?t=385
> She does not look awkward and the flow is good. 
> 
> ...

I still think that turning over the right shoulder would be easier.

I've sometimes tried teaching the direction of a Petronella spin by having 
dancers start out facing the center of their circle, then having them turn 
their heads to look at the person on their right (or the spot they'll be moving 
into), and finally telling them to keep turning their heads further the same 
way and let their bodies follow along as they spin into the new spot.  Some 
people still spin over their left shoulder.

It seems to me that people can get into a mental state where they've discovered 
one way to do the figure and aren't able--or aren't willing or aren't 
ready--even to imagine the idea of traveling the _same_ direction along the 
floor as they just did but spinning around their own body axis in the 
_opposite_ direction from what they just did.  It's just outside the universe 
of possibilities under consideration.

People sometimes dance a Rory-O'More-type slide/spin by spinning in what I 
consider the "hard" direction.   But I think it's pretty darned rare for 
someone to spin ccw on the "slide right" and cw on the slide left and a good 
bit more common for someone to spin the same direction for the"slide left" as 
for the "slide right."  To me that supports the idea that it's more common for 
people simply not to consider one possible direction of spin than for people to 
make a deliberate choice of spinning opposite to the usual (easier, IMO) 
direction.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] What can you do.....?

[jim saxe via Callers]

Becky Liddle via Callers wrote:

> What was helpful to me to begin to feel/notice flow were comments from the 
> caller during the walk-thru that primed me to pay attention to flow: things 
> like “when we dance this to music, you’ll notice that your momentum from the 
> ___ move carries you right into the ___ move, so you naturally know which 
> direction to move." ...

When a caller wants to make the sort of comment Becky os suggesting, I think 
it's generally best to do it as close as practical to the moment when dancers 
are walking through the figure or transition the caller under discussion.  FOr 
one thing it's likely to be easier for people to picture thr action that 
they're doing or that they just did than it is to remember something from 
several moves ago or to imagine some verbally-described future action starting 
from some future position.  For another thing, some dancers seem to have a 
strong tendency to tune out as soon as they sense that a caller is talking in 
declarative sentences about a past or future situation rather than imperative 
sentences about what to do right now.  And sentences of the form "When you get 
to the part where blah-blah-blah, remember that blah-blah-blah", while 
technically imperative, might as well be declarative ("..., you will need to 
remember ...").

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Tempos for Contras (was Re: Tempo for Squares)

[jim saxe via Callers]

I'd expect a contra dance tempo in the 80s to feel not merely slow, but 
excruciatingly slow, especially if in the low 80s.  To get an idea, try playing 
one of the Youtube videos in the slower half of the list I posted on Wednesday 
afternoon, and then use YouTube's "Settings" control (click on the gear-shaped 
icon in the strip at the bottom of the YouTube viewing window) to set the 
playback speed to 0.75.

I don't know whether anyone has done careful systematic testing of liveBPM's 
accuracy on a varied range of contra dance music.  If anyone does, I'd be 
interested in knowing the result.  I have, however, seen liveBPM be seriously 
confused (if you'll pardon the anthropomorphism) about the tempos of waltzes, 
where the beats come in multiples of three.  I wouldn't be surprised if it 
could were sometimes similarly inaccurate about jigs, in which the beats 
subdivide in thirds.  For example, perhaps it would sometimes report a tempo 
of, say, 84 BPM for a jig whose real tempo is 84 * 4/3 = 112 BPM.

--Jim

On Sep 22, 2019, at 7:26 PM, Richard Hart via Callers 
 wrote:
> Sometime over past year someone use liveBPM at the Nelson Monday night dances 
> a few times. It was interesting to see that the beat per minute varied quite 
> a bit depending on musicians, dancers, the caller, and particular dance. They 
> varied from a low in the 80’s up to about 125. 
> 
> And, yes, the music seemed slow with bpm in the 80’s, but it worked well 
> given the dancers on the floor.
> 
> Rich.


___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Tempo

[jim saxe via Callers]

While looking for more videos of contra dancing in Denmark, I instead came 
across a video in which Danish caller Else Bach Nielsen calls a 
New-England-style square (coincidentally written by Tom Hinds) to the music of 
visiting American band Phantom Power:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJV6_2SWg0s (~116 BPM)

I don't know whether the caller set the tempo or left it the band.

--Jim

On Sep 22, 2019, at 6:55 PM, jim saxe  wrote:
> 
> I looked for videos of contra dancing in Denmark and found these three:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hhxwVuoI2g (119-120 BPM)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4KB-uSWkKc (117-118 BPM)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03ALEBBtUbc (~113 BPM)
> 
> These all seem to be from the same event.  It's possible that a wider 
> sampling of contra dances in Denmark (which may not be available Youtube) 
> would support Tom's recollection of faster tempos.
> ...


___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Tempo

[jim saxe via Callers]

I looked for videos of contra dancing in Denmark and found these three:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hhxwVuoI2g (119-120 BPM)
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4KB-uSWkKc (117-118 BPM)
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03ALEBBtUbc (~113 BPM)

These all seem to be from the same event.  It's possible that a wider sampling 
of contra dances in Denmark (which may not be available Youtube) would support 
Tom's recollection of faster tempos.

The videos do seem to support Tom's observation about the infrequency of 
improvisation.  On casual viewing, without trying to look carefully at each 
visible dancer in each video, I didn't notice anyone twirling out of swings 
much less doing dips, etc., and I noticed only one place where it seemed that 
someone (partially obscured from the camera by other dancers) embellished a 
nominal courtesy turn with a twirl.

In 1992, I attended a conference in Denmark and managed to find my way to a 
couple of dances while I was there.  I don't have a specific recollection about 
the tempos, but if I recall correctly, the events I got to were regular local 
dances with recorded music (probably on cassette or vinyl).  That might have 
meant that the callers were in control of variable-speed players.

--Jim

> On Sep 22, 2019, at 4:53 PM, tom hinds via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> I believe that the tempo for dancing contras in the United States has to do 
> with the style and wants of the dancers.  It’s the desire to improvise and 
> flirt which I think is an integral part of the US contra scene and is the 
> reason for the tempo being what it is.
> 
> If you look at the contra dancing in Denmark, the tempos are much faster.  
> Although I haven’t been there for several years they don’t improvise and they 
> don’t do much if any flirting either.   They dance very straight.  My 
> conclusion from watching them quite a bit is that slower tempos would leave 
> them standing around which they wouldn’t find as much fun.   I’ve never timed 
> the music but I would guess it’s easily at 124 bpm or higher, definitely the 
> same as a tempo for squares here.
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> ___
> List Name:  Callers mailing list
> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Saving myself after a crash

[jim saxe via Callers]

Becky,

I may be off-base about this, and I'd welcome differing opinions from other 
list members, especially if they're based on actual experience, but I expect 
you would find some dancers who seemed *amazingly* resistant to dancing a 
hash-called recovery routine of the sort that you describe.  It's just not the 
sort of thing contra dancers are trained to expect.

Some of the dancers who can most easily remember how the dance was supposed to 
go (if you hadn't muffed a call and sent things of the rails) will want to 
continue doing what they "know" they're supposed to do and try to help their 
partners and neighbors to do the same.  Unless they think you're going into a 
contra medley, they may think the calls for your attempted recovery routine are 
just more mistakes.

The least skilled dancers--the ones who are most dependent on the surrounding 
dancers to get them through the pattern of a dance--may just have their brains 
totally full of stuff like "Uh-oh! Something feels wrong! I'm confused! What's 
going on here? It's probably my fault! Oh, dear; oh, dear; oh dear!" and not 
have any attention left over for listening to your calls. And if they do try to 
listen, they might expect that you are attempting to tell them how to do the 
dance they've just been doing (as opposed to the improvised thing you're 
actually calling) and they may be surprised that what you say isn't putting 
them into a familiar place.  And if they do get to a place that seems familiar, 
they might next try to do the thing they have been habituated to do when they 
get to that familiar place, even if it's not what you call at that point, and 
even if doing that habitual thing won't help them recover because they're at 
the "familiar" place 8 or 12 bars later than they would have been there in the 
original dance.  Moreover, those less skilled dancers may also have 
"experienced" dancers nearby trying to "help" them do whatever those 
experienced dancers "know" should come next, which, as I said earlier may not 
be your recovery routine.

If the dance is fairly straightforward, with no out-of-minor-set interactions 
(so that, for example, there are no interactions with "shadows" and you don't 
temporarily progress to new neighbors then revisit previous neighbors before 
progressing for good) a possible recovery method would be to admit that you 
goofed and then, as the end of the tune approaches say something like "OK.  
Just look for your next neighbor somehow.  WAIT for the music. ... Ready ... 
set ... Balance and swing" (or some other appropriate thing if the dance begins 
a different way).

Then you may still have to deal with couples that somehow get stranded between 
two foursomes.  The usual rule in this case is that the stranded couples should 
go to the bottom of their set.  If they don't know to do that on their own, you 
could tell them: "If you're left out, go to the bottom" or  "If you don't have 
another couple to dance with, go to the bottom" or "Left-over couples, just go 
the end of the line."  And they might do it.  Or they might react as if 
somebody had just turned off your microphone and erected an inch-thick 
plexiglas wall in front of the stage.

There might also be some people who have found a new neighbor to start the next 
round of the dance but who are somehow in a different foursome from their 
partner.  If they can't sort that out on their own, I can't think of anything 
the caller can say over the mic that will help, short of bringing the dance to 
a stop and getting everyone to regroup.

Here's a story that comes to mind, not about a recovery routine but about a 
different attempt to get dancers to do something on the fly that I hadn't 
explicitly taught during the walk-through:  I was calling to a small group of 
mixed-skilled (but on average not very skilled) dancers in small city a few 
hours away from the nearest "hot" contra dance scene and for some reason I had 
just picked a dance in which only the #1 couples go down the hall and return.  
I guess I hadn't taught the role of the #2 dancers in maintaining the position 
of the set, and I saw that the sets were stretching and drifting further down 
the hall with each repeat.  So next time I sent the 1s down the hall, I said 
something like "2s move up". No effect. Hmm. Maybe the 2s weren't used to 
identifying themselves as such. So next time after sending couple 1 down the 
hall, I tried something like "The rest of you, take a step up." No effect. 
Maybe they weren't used to interpreting "up" in that context. So ... "Couple 
one go down the hall. [Loudly and clearly:] The rest of you take a step or two 
toward the stage." I might as well have been whispering into my sleeve.  I'm 
not sure even one person got the message. So I just let the dance run a few 
more times, drifting gradually down the hall until I decided to end it. As I 
said: Completely unexpected call == Mic off; plexiglas wall up.

--Jim

> On Sep 21, 2019, at 5:11 PM, Becky 

[Callers] Tempos for Contras (was Re: Tempo for Squares)

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Sep 21, 2019, at 1:14 PM, I (jim saxe ) wrote, in 
response to Rich Sbardella's question about tempos for (New England) squares 
vs. for contras:

> My impression, though I don't have solid data to back it up, is ...

To illustrate the difficulties of gathering solid data on such matters, here's 
a report on an attempt I made back in 2012 to gather some data about tempos for 
contra.  I'll first give a rough description of my methodology, as best I 
remember it, then a tabulation of the data, and finally some comments, 
including speculation about possible flaws, limitations, and unanswered 
questions.  I think it will be obvious that the similar comments might apply to 
any proposed attempt to gather information about square dance tempos.

 * * * * * * * * * * * *
Methodology:

To gather some data on contra dance tempos, I decided to time a bunch of 
YouTube videos of contra dances.  I typed "contra dance" (in quotes) into the 
YouTube search box and looked at the results in the order they we presented, 
but excluding some for various reasons, as described below.

To measure tempos, I used a stopwatch capable of taking multiple "lap" (a/k/a 
"split") times.  My procedure was to start timing at the last beat of A2 in the 
first repeat of the dance/tune (or the earliest place I could identify a "last 
beat of A2" in videos that started partway through a dance) and then to press 
the lap/split button at the last beat of A2 in various later repeats of the 
tune.  Given the time interval between two such corresponding beat in different 
rounds of a 32-bar (64-beat) tune, it's a matter of simple arithmetic to 
estimate the tempo.  By starting and ending my timings at end of A2, I avoided 
timing the ritards that bands sometimes play near the end of B2 on the last 
round of a dance.  I also avoided dealing with the question of whether bands 
really play the first beat of A1 just one beat-time after the last beat of a 
four-beat intro.

Because I wanted to get accurate tempos despite inevitable slight inaccuracies 
in the timing of my button pushes, and because I wanted to investigate whether 
bands tend to speed up or slow down over the course of dance, I excluded short 
videos.  In particular, I didn't include any video where I couldn't time an 
interval of at least 10 x 32 bars. If I recall correctly, I also excluded 
videos of total length under seven minutes.  As a result many of my timing go 
from the middle of the very first round of a dance to the middle of the very 
last round.

There were a few other videos I exclude besides ones that I decided were too 
short.  I don't have a complete record of the reasons, but I think there were 
some that had cuts instead of being recorded in a continuous take, and there 
was at least one and maybe more where the sound quality and/pr the nature of 
the music was such that I couldn't feel confident of taking accurate timings.  
If I came across something like an hour-long documentary about some festival or 
dance camp, I would not have bothered listening to the whole thing on the 
chance that it would include a 10+-round continuous segment of a dance.  I may 
also have excluded additional videos from Concord, MA, after including five of 
them.

 * * * * * * * * * * * *

Tabulation of timings:

I timed a total of 40 contra dane videos before I ran out of steam.  I list the 
reuslts below in increasing order of averqge tempo.  Each line of the list has 
the form:

AV_TEMP (START_TEMO, END_TEMP) YT_ID LOCATION; STAFF

where

 AV_TEMP is the average tempo over the full interval timed
 (at least 10 x 32 bars)
 START_TEMP is the average tempo of the first 4 x 32 bars timed
 END_TEMP is the average tempo of the last 4 x 32 bars timed
 YT_ID identifies the YouTube video.  Prepending
 "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=; will give the full URL.
 Note, however, that some videos may have become unavailable
 since 2012.
 LOC identifies the city (if known to me) and state or province
where the event in the video occurred.  It occasionally also
includes a parenthesized note identifying a special event.
 STAFF identifies the band and caller (if known to me)

111.2 (112.4, 110.1) 8_x0P1q3Ef8 New Bern, NC; Core Sounds w/ Margie 
Misenheimer (sp?)
112.2 (112.1, 112.3) 7NKP-7axG0A Pasadena, CA; Perpetual e-Motion w/ Susan 
Michaels
112.5 (106.3, 118.1) OktHlZjB1h0 Beaufort, NC; Spalding(s)/Trobley(s)/Edwards 
w/ Margie Meisenheimer (sp?)
113.0 (112.0, 113.6) uj5Q3vi9aWI Glen Echo, MD; Elixir w/ Nils Fredland
113.9 [113.1, 113.5] I4bqYv5md4k Pikesville, MD (advanced session);  Taylor 
among the Devils w/ Gaye Fifer
114.1 (112.0, 115.0) whWbNuiEPlc White Springs?, FL (FL Folk Festival); ??? w/ 
Andy Kane
114.1 (114.4, 113.9) -dkbaXztbKc Carrboro, NC; Swallowtail w/ George Marshall
114.4 (113.1, 115.3) NyUZ-UpliBI 

Re: [Callers] Tempo for Squares

[jim saxe via Callers]

Rich,

My impression, though I don't have solid data to back it up, is that in 
communities where it is (or was) common to mix contra with New-England-style 
phrased squares, the tempos for the squares tend(ed) to run pretty similar to 
tempos for contras in the same community, or perhaps just a little faster.

When I danced in Pittsburgh, PA, in the early-to-mid 1980s, there was a 
thriving "traditional" (maybe "revival" or "neo-traditional" would be a more 
accurate term) square dance scene that focused more on southern and traditional 
western squares, but some of the callers also included a few contra in their 
programs.  Again, I don't have solid data, but my vague impression of a memory 
is that the square dance tempos ran around 128 BPM and that the contras tended 
to be slower, maybe more in the 120 range.  In 1994, I made a return visit to 
the Pittsburgh area to attend what turned out to be one of the last years of 
the Coal Country Convention, a (trad-)square-centric dance weekend.  If memory 
serves, there were just a few contras included in the program, the band for 
that session played at similar tempos to what they'd been playing for the 
squares, and those tempos stuck me as inappropriately fast for the contras.

For what's worth, here's a video from 1992 of "The Route" as danced at the 
Concord Scourt House, with music by Yankee Ingenuity plus guest musician Steve 
Hickman and calling by Tony Parkes:

 https://squaredancehistory.org/items/show/267

By my reckoning, the average tempo is around 119 BPM at the start, but speeds 
up to around 123, for an average of about 122.

By contrast, here's a 1986 video of an Appalachian-style visiting-couple square 
dance called by visiting caller Dolores Heagy of Pittsburgh at Tod Whittemore's 
Thursday evening dance series, then held at the VFW hall in Cambridge, MA:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Q6mUypeRZA

The tempo is in the low 130s, which I'm sure is quite a bit faster than typical 
for contras at that series.  By the way, if you pay *careful* attention to the 
timing of Dolores's calls, you may be surprised to discover how closely and 
consistently they are matched to the musical phrasing.

--Jim

> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:51 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> I am asking about phrased squares as in the New England style.
> 
> -- Forwarded message -
> 
> Folks,
> I am curious.  Tempo for contra is often below 120 bpm.  I learned to call 
> squares at about 128 bpm.  
> Is this significant difference the norm, and if so why?
> Rich Sbardella
> Stafford Springs, CT
> ___
> List Name:  Callers mailing list
> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Roll Away Square

[jim saxe via Callers]

The March 1975 issue of _Sets In Order_ magazine has this on page 39;

 CHEROKEE ROAD (42)
 By Ken Down, Scotia, New York

 Heads right and left thru
 Cross trail thru
 Separate go around two make a line of four
 Just the boys roll a half sashay
 Just the girls roll a half sashay
 Just the centers roll a half sashay
 Everyone roll a half sashay
 Left allemande

You can see it in context by going to Sets In Order index  at

 http://newsquaremusic.com/sioindex.html

and clicking on the thumbnail of the March 1975 cover.

I believe the parenthesized number 42 indicates the routine's highest numbered 
call in the recommended teaching order at the time.

As usual for routines published in MWSD sources, no information is included 
about the timing.  The routine above differs from the one in Sue's query in 
that it lacks occurrences of "forward and back", has the "boys" doing the first 
roll away, and has the last roll away followed by left allemande with corner 
instead of partner swing.  But it clearly uses the same gimmick and even has 
the same way of setting up the lines of four.

I happened to find the routine above via a Google search for "just the girls 
roll" that turned up a hit on the SIO Double Square Dance Yearbook of 1976.  So 
far, I haven't found an earlier example of the "one gender roll; other gender 
roll; centers roll; all roll" gimmick.  Such an earlier example, if one exists, 
might have been notated with "ladies" or "women" or even "gals" instead of 
"girls" or have "rollaway" instead of "roll" or lack the word "just" or have 
"TWO girls/ladies/..." instead of "THE girls/ladies/..." etc.  Or it might have 
been published in some source that hasn't be put online and found its way into 
Google's full-text index.

--Jim

> On Sep 16, 2019, at 6:58 AM, Sue C. Hulsether via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know the source for this square?
> 
> Roll Away 
> A1:  Heads* forward and back
>  Heads right and left thru
> A2:  Heads pass thru, cross trails; go around 2
> Make lines at sides (gent, gent, lady, lady)
> 8 go forward and back
> B1:  Ladies roll away*
> Gents roll away
> Centers roll away
>  Everybody roll away
> B2:Swing Pt
> *Note:  roll away is right-person rolls to the left, no matter the 
> gender-role.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> sue


___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

[Callers] Empowering people to say "Yes" while also empowering them to say "No"

[jim saxe via Callers]

In discussions among dance callers and organizers, online and off, a variety of 
topics come up from time to time that might be grouped under the heading of 
empowering people (especially new dancers) to say "No".  Some examples:

 * Assuring new dancers that it's ok to decline an invitation
   to dance as someone's partner, and that doing so doesn't
   oblige them to give a reason nor to sit out the dance.

 * Telling people that if they're not comfortable making eye
   contact, they can look at, for example, the forehead or
   ear of the person with whom they're swinging as a way to
   avoid getting dizzy from looking at the walls.

 * Teaching how to decline a partner's or neighbor's attempt
   to lead a twirl or other embellishment.

Without downplaying the importance of empowering people to say "No", I'd like 
to know if anyone has ideas about empowering people to say "Yes" (while still 
empowering them to say "No").  For example:

 * While I agree that nobody should feel compelled to dance
   with any particular partner, I think it's nice to be in a
   community where most dancers are comfortable dancing with
   a variety of partners and where a single person arriving
   with no regular partner of group of friends doesn't face
   the prospect of being an involuntary wallflower for most
   (or all) of the evening.

 * While I agree that nobody should feel required to make
   eye contact if they find it uncomfortable, I rather like
   dancing in a community where people generally do enjoy
   making more eye contact on the dance floor than they do
   with random passing strangers on the street. I wouldn't
   want to emphasize teaching avoidance of eye contact to
   point of developing into a community where everyone
   habitually looks at or past their partner's ear.  (And
   no, that doesn't mean I think it's ok for dancer A to
   gaze at dancer B as if he meant to fall through her eyes
   into her very soul while dancer B very obviously is not
   responding in kind.  [Stereotyped gendered pronouns
   intentional, but the same point applies with any other
   pair of pronouns.])

 * I've sometimes heard the action borrowed from "Petronella"
   described with words such as "move or spin one place to
   the right."  To me that seems to suggest that just walking
   to the next spot around the ring is the standard version
   of the figure and that spinning is an embellishment.  I'd
   rather suggest that the spin is standard and the leaving
   it out is an adaptation for those with limited mobility,
   energy, or balance.

Perhaps some of you can think of other examples.

When someone makes two remarks--call them P and Q--that seem to suggest 
different courses of action, it's tempting to read them as being connected by a 
"but" ("P but Q") and to assume that the person means to imply that whichever 
remark came second (that is, the one after the explicit or implicit "but") 
thoroughly overrides the one that came first.  That's not my intention here.  
I'd really like to get some conversation going about helping people feel 
empowered to say "Yes" and ALSO helping them feel empowered to say "No".  As an 
illustration that those need not be conflicting goals, let me mention that IMO 
one of the things that can most empower someone to say "Yes" is confidence that 
they'll be respected when they want to say "No".

Thoughts, anyone?

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Including Mobility Challenged Dancers

[jim saxe via Callers]

There are some adjustments that people can make to compensate to inability to 
move quickly, for example allemanding just halfway instead of once and a half; 
swinging just halfway around instead of once and a half or twice and a half (or 
zero times instead of once, twice, or more); skipping a move like do-si-do 
instead of rushing to catch up if you arrive late to start it; faking arches if 
a nominally arching dancers can't comfortably raise their arms or nominally 
ducking dancers can't comfortably duck.  Recognizing opportunities for such 
adjustments may be easy for someone who is familiar with the dance form and 
generally mentally sharp, but not so easy for someone who is unfamiliar with 
the dancing or who has challenges besides limited mobility, such as 
difficulties with spatial orientation.  It can be helpful if the caller points 
out opportunities for adjustment, both for the benefit of the challenged 
dancer(s) and for the benefit of other dancers who may be in position to offer 
gu
 idance.  The caller might also say explicitly that it's ok for someone to drop 
out if they feel their stamina flagging, even in the middle of a dance and even 
if there's nobody ready to step in and take their place.

At some point--and obviously I have no idea whether the people Don's been told 
about are at that point--people can be so slow-moving and so unsteady and have 
so little ability to compensate or to accept assistance from other dancers, 
that they become a danger to themselves, and possibly to others, on the dance 
floor, on account of increasing likelihood of falls and increasing likelihood 
of serious injury if a fall occurs.  I'm picturing, for example, an unsteady 
dancer suddenly grabbing at another dancer for support in a situation where the 
second dancer happens to be moving quickly away from the place where the 
unsteady dancer is reaching, or where the second dancer is completely not 
expecting to be called on to provide such support, or where the second dancer 
is someone nearly as unsteady as the first dancer.

--Jim

> On Sep 11, 2019, at 2:37 PM, Don Veino via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> I've got clarification back from the organizer and there's no specific 
> challenges over slower and potentially unstable movement. Thanks for the 
> ideas shared! I'll likely be well sorted for the event.

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Using music in the pre-dance lesson

[jim saxe via Callers]

Thanks to all who have offered comments, on-list and off, about using music 
during a contra dance newcomers' orientation.

I have follow-up questions to some of the things people have said.  I also 
welcome anybody's additional comment on any aspect of the subject, whether or 
not they relate to my specific questions below.

Since a lot of this discussion is about using music to help teach dance skills, 
I want to acknowledge a couple points to keep things in perspective.  First, it 
may be urged with much merit that a contra newcomers' orientation should be 
more about attitudes and social skills than about dance skills.  We want to 
help newcomers have the confidence to get into the first few dances, to have 
them understand that they needn't be mortified about mistakes, to keep them 
from being surprised at the level of eye contact, to have them understand that 
it's not a show of displeasure when a partner thanks them for a dance and then 
goes off to seek a different partner for the next dance, etc.  Any teaching of 
dance skills that can be added in the available time is a bonus.  Second, I 
don't imagine for a moment that most new dancers will fully latch on to all 
dance skills taught in the newcomers' session, learning them thoroughly and 
retaining them forever, ready to apply as needed.  Rather, I fully e
 xpect to see situations where, to give just one example, a dancer has to work 
so hard at understanding or remembering a bit of choreography that the stuff 
they seemed to have learned about dancing to the phrase of music just goes out 
the window.

Now, to return to peoples' earlier comments and to my follow-up questions ...

 * * * * * * * * * *

John Sweeney wrote

> The only thing I focus on with respect to music is getting them to hear the
> eights and be ready for the next "one".

John (or anyone who cares to reply), do you say anything in particular about 
the structure of the music or have new dancers do any particular exercises to 
practice awareness of "the eights" (for example, having everyone listen to a 
tune and clap on the first beat of every eight)?

> ... So I always spend most of the time on
> the swing.  Then [Circle Left, Into the Middle & Back (with a stamp on four
> so that they get used to working with the music ready for Long Lines Go
> Forward & Back), Swing your Neighbour]. Repeat until ...

Do I correctly understand that this is an exercise you have them do in big 
circle formation?  Do you say or do anything in particular to teach them hear 
the end of a phrase approaching and recognize when they don't have enough music 
left to swing another time around?

 * * * * * * * * * *

Rich Goss wrote

> I will often ask the fiddle player to come out on the floor and play for a 
> short circle dance.

and Adam Carlson wrote

> ... I'll usually do two dances. First a circle mixer to teach phrasing, build 
> confidence and introduce the idea of progression (although with a person 
> progressing, not a couple). Then I do a simple contra or contra-like dance 
> maybe with some improvised steps to teach them progression, listening to the 
> caller and resetting themselves. I enlist the musicians to play for these.

Rich or Adam (or anyone else who incorporates teaching of a complete easy dance 
into your newcomer's session), would you care to share examples of the dances 
you use?

 * * * * * * * * * *

Woody Lane wrote:

> ... during the last 4 minutes or so of the lesson, I ask the band to play a 
> single tune -- whatever the band likes, reel or jig. I want the tempo at 
> regular dance speed -- 112-118 or so. The dancers are still in their 
> foursomes. Then I call those moves to the music -- hash call so no one knows 
> what move is next. The dancers dance to the music, do the moves at speed in 
> the right tempo, finish the moves on time, and learn to listen to the caller. 
> ...

Woody, could you give an example of part of a sequence you might hash call to 
music in this exercise?  Also do you ask dancers to put their foursomes in any 
particular orientation (e.g., couples facing each other with backs to the side 
walls as in a Becket contra)?

 * * * * * * * * * *

While several of you wrote about wanting new dancers to learn to hear the 
phrasing of the music, I've only gotten one reply so far (off-list) that 
mentioned dancing with the _beat_ of the music, and that reply didn't go into 
much detail about how to teach dancing with the beat.

On the dance floor, I occasionally encounter new dancers who are not stepping 
to the beat.  Perhaps they think that in order to be "dancing" they have to do 
some kind of fancy footwork, and it wouldn't even occur to them to do something 
as simple as just taking one step to each downbeat. Perhaps they hear a highly 
ornamented/notey tune and think its telling them to take 

[Callers] Using music in the pre-dance lesson

[jim saxe via Callers]

I'd like to hear from any of you who can share experience or advice about 
making use of music during the introductory lesson (a/k/a "new dancers' 
orientation", "beginners' workshop", etc.) that often precedes a regularly 
scheduled contradance.

What source of music do you use? (Recorded music played on a device that you 
control? Live music played by a musician assisting with the lesson? Music that 
you yourself can play on some instrument while leading the session? Your own 
singing of song lyrics, nonsense syllables like "la la la", or dance calls? 
Music that may happen to be coming from the evening's band doing their sound 
check at the other end of the hall?  ..)  How--in as much detail as you care to 
supply--do you use that music in your teaching? What do you think/hope your use 
of music contributes to the effectiveness or fun of the lesson?

I tossed out a few ideas on this topic, with much uncertainty about which ones 
were any good, in a message I sent on September 2 in the "Brain Dead - Need 
Suggestions" thread.  I'm re-raising the topic here under a more descriptive 
Subject line in hope of getting responses from people who can offer comments 
based on actual experience.

Thanks.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Brain Dead - Need Suggestions

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Aug 29, 2019, at 9:22 PM, K Panton via Callers 
 wrote (re teaching about the relation of dance 
figures to the music):

> As it happens, I'm calling a regular contra evening in a few weeks and I'm 
> going to experiment, right off the top of the beginner session, by playing a 
> tune (i.e. start music, then say "welcome")
> 
> ...
> have the dancers listen for phrasing and then (repeating) in a big circle 
> holding hands:
> 
> L/R 8
> 
> F/B 8
> 
> L4/R12 
> 
> F2/B2/R4
> 
> L OR R 6/2 the other way. 
> 
> i.e. introduce them to a few ways of slicing up a musical phrase in ways they 
> will encounter with contra figures.
> ...

I think that phrase divisions like the last three--"L4/R12", "F2/B2/R4", and "L 
OR R 6/2 the other way") are unusual for contra dancing and also  lot to expect 
new dancers to deal with, especially if you want them to memorize a sequence of 
several different such things (as distinguished from one repeated over and 
over).  Yeah, the timing of "F2/B2/R4" is similar to the common sequence of a 
balance followed by a Petronella twirl, but I think dancers generally deal with 
that by first learning to think of the balance as a single chunk rather than as 
"F2/B2".

I've sometimes started a new dancers' session by getting people into a circle 
and leading the following sequence, directing the actions by body English while 
singing _a capella_, something like this (with capitalized syllables indicating 
downbeats, and "-" indicating a downbeat with no lyric):

Circle Left (8 beats): MARy HAD a LITtle CAT, LITtle CAT, LITtle CAT.
Circle Right (8): MARy HAD a LITtle CAT.  it ATE a BALL of YARN -.
Forward (4): and WHEN the LITtle KITtens CAME,
Back (4): KITtens CAME, KITtens CAME,
Forward (4): WHEN the LITtle KITtens CAME,
Back (4): they ALL had SWEATers ON -.

Then I talk a little how the moves of each dance fit particular bits of the 
tune, like lines in a song.  Lots of other tunes and lyrics (e.g., "Yankee 
Doodle") could be used for this sort of exercise or the band or a single 
fiddler might be enlisted to provide instrumental music.

I haven't come up with a well-developed script for further incorporating music 
into a pre-dance intro session, but I'll mention a few other ideas that I've 
had, some of which I've tried out from time to time.  I'd be interested in 
hearing from anyone who routinely incorporates music (live or recorded) or 
singing into such sessions or into their teaching at one-time events such as 
the one Richard Hopkins described in the message that started this thread.

I've had various concerns about some of the ideas I describe below:  How long 
will this take, and is it the best use of the available time?  Will this feel 
too much like drilling or like haranguing/criticizing dancers about styling 
(for any of which people may have limited patience) and not enough like the fun 
party people came for?  Is this appropriate for a pre-dance intro, or should it 
be left for later, when the new dancers are mixed with a larger number of 
experienced dancers?  Will attempting to teach something about styling set up a 
situation where those who "get it" may become impatient with those who don't? 
Etc, etc.  These concerns are part of what has kept me from developing a more 
extensive routine for incorporating music into a pre-dance intro or into the 
teaching at a ONS.  They're also part of the reason I'm eager to learn about 
other callers' ideas and experiences.  Anyway, with those caveats, here are 
some ideas:

Rather than ask new dancers to do unusual things like L4/R12, I think it could 
be more useful to try to get them doing common thing well.

For example, after leading the sequence described above

 Cir L (8); Cir R (8); F (8); F (8)

one might ask dancers to repeat that sequence a few times to music.  Besides 
giving practice with phrasing, this could be a way of teaching the idea of 
dances following a repeating pattern--in this case, one that's only half as 
long as a standard contra and also less varied than a typical contemporary 
contra, and thus less of a strain on new dancers' memories.

You might use this or any similarly simple sequence as an opportunity to 
demonstrate "the special step we use in this kind of dancing", namely a simple 
brisk walking step, one step to the downbeat.  If you have appropriate musical 
examples available, you could demonstrate taking one step to the downbeat even 
when the tune is very notey and some people may be inclined to take lots of 
quick little steps.

After a just few rounds of the preceding sequence, most folks are likely to 
have it memorized.  If it seems appropriate, the caller might show how to use 
the last couple beats of the music for Circle Left to slow down and turn 
around, ready to start the Circle Right on the first beat of the next chunk of 
the tune.  Similarly, the caller might teach how to dance each half of Forward 
& Back as "step; step; step; CLOSE", ending ready to change direction 

Re: [Callers] Brain Dead - Need Suggestions

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Aug 18, 2019, at 7:33 AM, Linda S. Mrosko via Callers 
 wrote:

>  I think I'll focus on quickly saying something like the difference between 
> reels (animated alligators) and jigs (all the kings horses...) ...

Linda,

I presume and hope that if you use "animated alligators", "all the kings horses 
...", and/or other such phrases to explain the difference(s) between reels, 
jigs, and/or other tune types, you will do it by saying those phrases in the 
actual rhythms you mean to describe.  In my opinion, merely speaking such 
phrases as in ordinary conversation is not an effective way of communicating 
anything,  There are just too many opportunities for misinterpretation.

True story:  I once attended a presentation by a modern western square dance 
caller who gave the Mickey Mouse March as an example of a tune in 6/8 time and 
illustrated by singing

 One, two, three.
 One, two, three.
 Em oh you ess ee.

The Mickey Mouse March may indeed by played and sung in 6/8 time, though it 
seems more commonly to be published in a duple meter time signature (usually 
2/4) with a dotted rhythm.  Compare, for example,

https://www.sheetmusicdirect.com/en-US/se/ID_No/175876/Product.aspx

vs.

https://www.sheetmusicnow.com/products/mickey-mouse-march-easy-piano-p453304

That's not my main point, though.  My point is that even for the 6/8 version, 
the presenter's explanation--singing "one two three" (where the original lyric 
has "M-I-C"), etc.--is completely wrong.  The mere words "one, two, three; one, 
two, three" without the correct rhythm are not adequate to explain the idea of 
6/8 rhythm.  I presume the presenter at that session (who, by the way, I 
believe was--and probably still is--good at his craft and successful at 
entertaining the dancers at his events) had himself once seen or heard the idea 
of a 6/8 tune "taught" in such an inadequate manner.

By the way the 6/8 version of the Mickey Mouse March is an example of a tune in 
6/8 that is generally considered to be not a jig but--you guessed it--a march.  
Another example, definitely written in 6/8, is "Seventy-Six Trombones".  Some 
of Sousa's marches are also in 6/8.

--Jim



___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Brain Dead - Need Suggestions

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Aug 18, 2019, at 7:33 AM, Linda S. Mrosko via Callers 
 wrote:

>   And 4 potatoes.  Anybody got a good 4 potatoes story?  

I have one.

You may think that "4 potatoes" is an old traditional name for that little 
sequence of fiddle shuffles sometime used to start off a tune.  San Francisco 
Bay area fiddler Jody Stecher claims that he and banjo player Pete Wernick 
invented it in the 1960s as an experiment to see if they could get it to catch 
on (as we would now say, "go viral").  See this thread in the MandolinCafe 
discussion forum:

https://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/threads/92314-Four-Potatoes-Professor

The same claim is also discussed in this thread on FiddleHangout:

https://www.fiddlehangout.com/archive/740

In each of these discussion threads someone suggests a possible connection to 
the children's rhyme "One potato, two potato, three potato, four.  ..."  
However, such a connection seems unlikely to me, since (as I'm not the first to 
notice) the rhythms of the children's rhyme and the fiddle shuffle are not the 
same.

Paul Kotapish, the original poster in the MandolinCafe thread wrote:

> It has occurred to me, of course, that Jody might have been pulling my leg, 
> and that his story about inventing the expression might be the actual bit of 
> folklore.

The same thought occurred to me the first time I heard Jody's story.  However, 
I don't know of any documented use of the term "four potatoes" for an 
introductory fiddle shuffle predating the claimed time frame of the 1960s.  In 
fact, the earliest example I found with the few searches I tried in Google's 
Advanced Book Search is on page 173 of the 6th (1988) edition of the book 
_Dance A While_ by Jane Harris, Ann Pottman, and Marlys Waller:

 ... The caller needs to agree with the musicians about the music
 introduction, so that both the caller and the dancers can get
 off to a good, crisp start.  "Two or four potatoes" or a chord
 are typical.

This is in the contra section, which was significantly updated from the 5th 
(1978) edition of the book.  In a cursory skim of the introduction to the 
contra section in the 1978 edition, I didn't notice the term "potatoes."

To be absolutely clear, Jody and Peter don't claim to have invented the 
introductory shuffle itself (which I presume has long been used as a way for a 
fiddler to set the tempo and help all the members of the band come in on the 
tune together).  They only claim to have coined and spread the name "four 
potatoes" to describe it.

If anyone can find a documented case of the term "potatoes" being used for a 
fiddle shuffle before the 1960's, I'd like to know about it.

I recall Jody telling me that he and Pete (or maybe just Pete) tried to spread 
a couple other neologisms around the same time that they came up with "four 
potatoes," but I don't remember what they were.  I think he said that 
"potatoes" was the only one that caught on.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Brain Dead - Need Suggestions

[jim saxe via Callers]

Linda,

I'll hazard a guess that the request to lead "dances that encourage really 
paying attention to beat counts" is really a request for dances that keep 
everyone dancing together in time to the phrasing of the music.  I think that 
skilled contra/ECD/Scottish/... dancers who dance to the phrase mostly do it by 
sensing the structure of the music not by explicit mental counting--unless 
they're forced to resort to counting because the band is getting to 
improvisational.

It is sometimes stated as conventional wisdom that ONS leaders need to 
recognize situations where dancing to the phrase isn't going to be the 
happening thing and learn to let go of the phrasing and let the dancers dance 
at their own comfortable pace.  Perhaps some previous caller who had your gig 
either (a) followed this advice or (b) tried to get people to dance on phrase 
with material where keeping track of the figures and keeping track of the 
phrasing at the same time was beyond the collective skill level of the crowd.  
In either case, your contact's disappointment at the results could be the 
reason for the request you report.

Turning aside from such speculation, here a few specific ideas, with the 
disclaimer that I have little experience leading ONS events and that I won't 
feel insulted if someone more experienced wants to contradict or revise them.

1.  Dancers of a wide age range seem to have any easy time dancing "Sasha!" in 
time to the music.

2.  In any dance from your ONS repertoire that includes

 forward (4 steps, or 3 steps and close)
 back (same)

, changing it to

 forward two, stamp-stamp-stamp
 back two, stamp-stamp-stamp

might help keep people moving together to the music--or at least help convince 
your contact that you're trying to teach something--especially if you can 
select music that seems to fit that action.  (However, I recommend avoiding 
choreography with foot stamping if you find that the space has a non-resilient 
floor.)

3.  You might try something like this version of "(Come) Haste to the Wedding" 
(to the tune of the same name):

 Formation: Sicilian Circle

 A1 (8) Circle L
(8) Circle R 

 A2 (8) Star R
(8) Star L 

 B1 (8) Partners do-si-do
(2) Clap, Clap (i.e, clap own hands together on beats 9 and 10)
(6) Partners two-hand turn once around

 B2 (8) Neighbors (sometimes called "opposites") do-si-do
(2) Clap, Clap
(6) Pass Through (and bow to new neighbors if time allows)

Perhaps other list members who have taught this dance often can share their 
approaches for teaching dancers to clap on beats 9 and 10 of the B parts, 
rather than on beats 7 and 8 as some may tend to do.  Of course it will help to 
have music where the correct beats are played staccato and with emphasis.

I look forward to reading ideas that others may offer.

--Jim

On Aug 16, 2019, at 9:40 PM, Linda S. Mrosko via Callers 
 wrote:

> ...
> 
> Been hired to lead a dance for a music school -- ages 5 and up to teens and 
> their parents and my contact asked if I could lead "dances that encourage 
> really paying attention to beat counts….throw in some music  education in 
> addition to fun."
> 
> ...

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] "Dixie Twirl" term

[jim saxe via Callers]

I rather like the term Greg Frock's suggestion (not claimed to be original) of 
"Thread the Needle".  While I've heard "Thread the Needle" used with other 
meanings, I think there's little danger of confusion in the contra context, 
especially since that the action is rare enough that the caller will presumably 
need to teach it.

Ric Goldman wrote:

> I’ve sometimes come across this a Paired Twirl, a Paired California Twirl, a 
> California Four,  or an Arch and Swap (taught this way):
>  
>In a line-of-4 facing all the same, middles raise an arch and, 
> keeping hands, right-hand pair goes under the arch (led by end dancer) while 
> left-hand pair cross over to the other side (led by the end dancer).
>End result is the same line-of-4, facing back the other way, 
> much as a California Twirl does for 2 dancers.
>  
> This description also avoids any gender-specific terms in case that’s an 
> offense issue for others.

In modern western square dance terminology, the figure might be called "As 
Couples, California Twirl" though I don't know whether it actually is (since it 
might be claimed that that would imply the right hand pair going under the arch 
side-by-side--which could require quite a stretch of the arching dancers' 
arms--rather than with the end dancer in the lead).

Digressing for a moment from the terminology, I'll take the opportunity to 
opine that the action could be smoother if the two dancers nearest the left end 
of the line are the ones who make the arch, rather than the two center dancers. 
 (Anyone agree? disagree?)  Regardless of who makes the arch, it's important 
that the dancer on the left end of the line remember to move across the set 
instead standing still as if only the right hand dancers were active.

Returning to terminology, note that if the leftmost pair of dancers make the 
arch. then "As Couples, California Twirl" definitely will not bean accurate 
description, but I think "Thread the Needle" would be just fine.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Riffing on "The Nice Combination"

[jim saxe via Callers]

I believe the star would be once around.  Note that the Gents/Larks would chain 
by the left hand, ending on the left of their respective neighbors.

--Jim

On Aug 2, 2019, at 1:37 PM, DAVID HARDING via Callers 
 suggested

> A1 N B
> A2 Down hall, turn as couple, up hall
> B1 Circle RIGHT 3/4, swing partner
> B2 Gents/Larks chain, RH star

and on Aug 2, 2019, at 1:51 PM, Paul Wilde via Callers 
 replied

> Star is half way around?

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Contra Corners Dance

[jim saxe via Callers]

A nice easy dance for introducing Contra Corners is "Down by the Riverside" by 
Melanie Axel-Lute:

 http://www.maxellute.net/down.html

The dance is a progressive 3-face-3, ending with a basket swing in B2 after 
which dancer open out with anyone in the middle, facing a new threesome.  Like 
Erik Hoffman's "Walpole Dollhouse",

 
http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/2013-May/006143.html

you can think of it as a much simplified version of Pat Shaw's "Walpole 
Cottage".

On account of the progression, dancers get to lead the contra corners figure 
with a succession of different opposite active (center) dancers.  Thus, dancers 
who don't quite understand the figure are likely eventually to run into 
counterparts who can send guide them in the correct direction.  By contrast in 
a triplet, triple-minor, or duple-minor setting, a confused dancer may be asked 
to lead contra corners with the same equally-confused partner time after time.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

[Callers] What are they thunking? (was Re: Hand Turns & Safety)

[jim saxe via Callers]

On May 18, 2019, at 11:28 AM, Rich Dempsey via Callers 
 wrote, regarding flat-hand allemanders:

>  ... I still don't understand what those people are thinking. 

The question of "what those people are thinking" often comes to my mind in 
relation to dance style points in general.  A caller (whether myself or someone 
else) describes something in terms that seem crystal clear; the thing they are 
suggesting is something simple (e.g., "straight wrist, bent fingers", as 
contrasted to, say, a complicated choreographic pattern or a long footwork 
sequence in 11/8 time); perhaps they even do a demonstration and specifically 
call dancers' attention to the details they mean to demonstrate ("Notice how my 
fingers ..."); and yet, once the music starts, a large number of dancers do 
something different from what the caller suggested.  What on earth are all 
those people thinking?

When a caller's attempt to put something across to a group of dancers isn't 
very successful, it seems to me that figuring out *why* can be an important 
first step toward coming up with a better approach to teaching that thing in 
the future--or toward having better judgment in the future about whether or not 
to attempt to teach that particular thing  (whether it's a styling nuance, an 
unfamiliar figure, a complete dance sequence, or whatever) in any particular 
situation.

So I'd like to get your thoughts about figuring out what's going on when a 
caller's attempt to teach a style point fall flat.  What sorts of things do you 
think the nonconforming dancers might be thinking?  How do you try to judge 
what the most significant issues are in any particular case, so that you can 
decide what to do differently next time?  (I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be 
productive to go around cornering different dancers and saying, "Hey, , I 
noticed that in that dance where I made a big point of teaching people to do 
such-and-such, you kept doing so-and-so. What's up with that?")  Can you offer 
any specific stories about how you diagnosed a difficulty in putting across a 
particular style point (whether about allemandes or anything else) and how you 
improved your presentation later?

For anyone who feels like wading through more of my musings, below are some 
possible reasons I've thought of that dancers might not follow a caller's 
styling advice.  Some of them may overlap or interact with others, and perhaps 
some of you can think of other important possibilities that I've omitted.  I 
don't have any great ideas to offer about how to judge which of the 
possibilities listed below apply in any particular situation.  I welcome your 
comments.

--Jim

1. *Intentional rebellion*:  Some dancers may get the vibe that "the caller is 
criticizing us" or "the caller thinks (s)he knows our idea of fun better than 
we do."  They may find this presumption on the part of the caller extremely 
off-putting and may decide to show the pompous twit who's boss by visibly 
disobeying.  [While it may be tempting to assume intentional rebellion as the 
explanation when you see dancers apparently making no effort to follow a very 
clearly explained suggestion from the caller, I think that such instances of 
outright contrariness are actually quite rare.]

2. *Informed dissent*:  The dancers in question really, truly understand the 
styling the caller is recommending and have really, truly given it a fair 
try--perhaps more than once, and with a variety of different partners and/or 
neighbors at one or more previous dance events--but have concluded that they 
personally prefer a different styling from what the caller is suggesting.  
Furthermore, they have judged, after due consideration, that they will not 
impose awkwardness or discomfort on other dancers by using their own preferred 
styling.  [I certainly must grant respect to the preferences of dancers in this 
category--and most especially so when they have some frailty or injury that 
would make it painful to dance in the style recommended by the caller.  
However, there are times when informed dissent strikes me as an unlikely 
explanation for dancer behavior.  In particular, it seems unlikely to me that 
most of the dancers who allemande with flat hands, straight fingers, and 
sharply bent
  wrists can really have given a fair try to the styling with gently curled 
fingers and straight wrists and found it wanting.  Of course I haven't lived in 
all those people's bodies.]

3. *Genuine ambiguity*:  The caller's words may have been ambiguous, and some 
dancers may have followed an interpretation that never occurred to the caller 
but that is just as plausible as the one that the caller intended.  [This 
situation can occur not only for style suggestions, but also in cases involving 
the basic choreography of a dance.  To give just one of many, many possible 
examples, a caller who identifies the role of "first corner" in Contra Corners 
as "the person to the right of your partner" may think the meaning is 

Re: [Callers] Calling techno?

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Mar 28, 2019, at 2:39 PM, Bob via Callers  
wrote:

> ...
> Live or mixed recordings? If live then it should be perfectly square AABB. If 
> mixed, the only thing you can count on is 8-beat phrases. ...

Can you even count on 8-beat phrases if someone, such as a caller or a 
knowledgeable DJ, hasn't vetted the tracks?

I know practically nothing about techno music, but recordings in other genres 
that aren't made for phrased dancing will not necessarily follow strict 8-beat 
phrasing.  For instance ...

It's pretty common for a folk singers accompanying themselves to play a few 
bars of guitar strums--and not always the same number--while trying to remember 
the first line of the next verse.  While I haven't gone looking for examples, 
I'd be surprised if such variable inter-verse vamping didn't sometimes appear 
even on studio recordings.

In some fiddle traditions, such as southern and Quebecois, besides straight 
tunes and wildly crooked tunes, there are also tunes that are mostly straight 
but have an occasional odd phrase.  Even medleys of straight tunes can 
sometimes have some extra beats at the transitions between tunes, as heard 
around 0:59 in this video:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLUyg173n_M
 Yo-Yo Ma - Fiddle Medley ft. Stuart Duncan, Edgar Meyer, Chris Thile

Line dances are mostly choreographed to music that's in multiples of 8 beats, 
but exceptions are hardly unusual.  Also, in order to fit recordings that were 
made for listening and not specifically for dance routines, line-dance step 
sheets may prescribe various irregularities in the routines.  Here are just a 
few of the examples a little searching turned up:

 
https://www.learn2dance4fun.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Boot-Scootin-Boogie.pdf
 Boot Scootin’ Boogie
 38 count, 4 wall, beginner line dance

 
https://www.copperknob.co.uk/stepsheets/every-little-honky-tonk-ID132260.aspx
 Every Little Honky Tonk
 32-count, 4 wall line dance with 12-count tag after wall 2

 http://tinalinedancers.com/data/documents/Came-Here-To-Forget.pdf
 Came Here To Forget
 Description: Line Dance - 2 Wall (24ct.) - Intermediate 1 Restart, 2 Tags
 Sequence: 24, 24, Tag 1, 14cts- Restart, 24, 24, Tag 2 (6cts.), 24, 24...

For some other examples of music that's largely, *but not entirely*, in chunks 
of 8 beats (or eight bars of triple meter), try listening to any of these while 
tapping your foot or fingers and counting along:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg0kfd7kow4
 Paul McCartney - When I'm 64

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33o32C0ogVM
 Julie Andrews - My Favorite Things

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbyAZQ45uww
 Nancy Sinatra - These Boots Are Made for Walkin'

So here's my question, for those of you who are more familiar with techno music 
than I am:  If you play a random track not already "vetted" for phrasing, if 
you find a place where there's sufficiently discernible phrasing to establish a 
starting point for your "mental metronome of 8 counts" (to quote Donna Hunt), 
if you use that mental metronome to carry you through a part where phrasing is 
less evident, and if you then get to another part with findable phrasing, how 
reliably (or not) can you expect that the phrases will still line up with your 
mental eight-counts?

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Opposite StarThru and functional difference in LD v Slide

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Mar 24, 2019, at 9:52 PM, I wrote:
> 
> The term "Left Star Thru" was indeed sometimes used in to refer to a varian 
> of Star Thru using the gent's right hand and lady's left.

Ooops.  Of course, I meant to say "... a variant of Star Thru using the gent's 
_left_ hand and lady's _right_.

--Jim


___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] [External] Re: Opposite StarThru and functional difference in LD v Slide

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Mar 24, 2019, at 9:51 PM, Don Veino via Callers 
 wrote:
> 
> I think I've actually heard Arizona Twirl from somewhere as well.
> 
> In the interest of keeping the lexicon as small as possible, why not just say 
> "with inside hands, twirl to swap" or similar?

>From the position of facing couples, if the caller says "with inside hands, 
>twirl to swap," would that mean that you're supposed to do the "twirl to swap" 
>with the dancer beside you, or would it mean that you're supposed to do it 
>with the dancer facing you?  I thing that without additional words (and 
>without the benefit of a previous walk-through), the meaning isn't obvious.  
>Adn if dancers think the meaning *is* obvious, they might not all come up with 
>the same "obvious" meaning that the caller intended.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Opposite StarThru and functional difference in LD v Slide

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Mar 21, 2019, at 2:29 PM, Rich Sbardella  wrote (in part):

> Many MWSD calls have left versions.  For example Pass Thru (by right 
> shoulder) and Left Pass thru (by left shoulder).  Swing Thru is another.  
> Swing thru is turn half by the left, half by the right, but Left Swing Thru 
> is turn half but the left, then half by the right.  Left Square Thru is one 
> that starts with the left hand, BUT the dancers walk the exact same pattern 
> as a normal, right handed square thru.
> 
> In the case of a star thru and slide thru, I have never danced or called a 
> Left Star Thru or a Left Slide Thru.  ... 

The term "Left Star Thru" was indeed sometimes used in to refer to a varian of 
Star Thru using the gent's right hand and lady's left.  That usage now appears 
to be deprecated.  The reason, I presume, is that in contrast to calls like 
"Left Pass Thru" or "Left Swing Thru," the call "Left Star Thru" exhibits the 
historical bias of directing calls preferentially to the gents.

As an example, in the current version of the definition document for the 
CallerLab Advanced program, the call "Double Star Thru" is defined as follows:

 From any appropriate formation (e.g. Normal Facing Couples):
 Those who can Star Thru. Those who can do the mirror image
 of a Star Thru (an arch is made with the man's left hand and
 the woman's right hand; the man goes around the arch while the
 lady goes under). In each part of the call, some dancers must
 be active. Normal facing couples will end as sashayed couples
 back-to-back.

I've seen versions of the document from c. 2000 that describe the second half 
of Double Star Thru as a "Left Star Thru" (for those who can) rather than as 
"the mirror image of a Star Thru."

--Jim

On Mar 24, 2019, at 3:53 PM, Andy Shore via Callers 
 wrote (in part):

> Left Star Thru (edited slightly)
> From a boy facing a girl: boy holds left hand up and girl places her right 
> palm against it. boy steps forward and does a quarter left as the girl passes 
> the boy left shoulders under the raised arms and does a quarter right. 
> Finishes as a couple.
> https://www.ceder.net/oldcalls/viewsingle.php?RecordId=3616

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Opposite StarThru and functional difference in LD v Slide

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Mar 21, 2019, at 12:02 PM, John Sweeney via Callers 
 wrote:

> Hi Seth,
> 1)   Larry Jennings has a whole section on this in Give-and-Take.  
> Page 42: Effective Lingo.
>  
>   He suggests that you don’t need any fancy names.  Just use 
> “Twirl to Swap”.  As you do the walk-through you tell the dancers:
> Initial facing
> Final facing
> Which hands are joined

While I hold Larry Jennings in extremely high regard, this is one of the few 
topics on which I'd venture to differ with him.  I think there are many 
situations where the more specific terms will be not only more concise, but 
also more effective than "twirl to swap" plus the necessary additional words.  
The most case is in extemporaneously-called square dance sequences, but I it 
also applies for no-walk-through contra medleys and even for an ordinary contra 
dance (with walk-through) if the dance sequence includes more than one kind of 
"twirl to swap" action.  Of course the more specific terms will only be 
effective if dancers are familiar with them, which they won't be if their local 
callers avoid those terms as much as possible.

Since John has mentioned _Give-and-Take_, there's something I else I should 
mention.  In the book, there's a table listing various ways for dancers to swap 
places (Box the Gnat, California Twirl, etc.) with info about what hands to use 
and which way people turn.

 *DO NOT* trust this table!! It is riddled with errors.  

Among other things, I suspect that at some point between different drafts of 
the book, the column headings for the men's actions and the women's actions got 
swapped but the individual entries didn't all get updated accordingly.  And I 
must presume that this happened at a stage when Larry no longer the energy to 
check up on things as thoroughly as he would have in healthier days.  Besides 
some apparent reversals of men's and women's roles there are some other things 
that strike me as incorrect, or at least ambiguous.  Unfortunately, I didn't 
look at the table carefully enough to notice these points and report them or 
seek clarification while Larry was still living.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Building to Contra Corners

[jim saxe via Callers]

Alexandra Deis-Lauby wrote:

> If the figure is new to your dancers, use a triplet (by David smuckler) or a 
> three facing three (Melanie axel lute wrote one).  Contra corners is much 
> easier in that formation.

You can find Melanie Axel-Lute's "Down by the Riverside" here:

 http://www.maxellute.net/down.html

In either a triplet or a three-face-three the "inactives" don't have to do 
double duty being contra corners to two different "active" dancers.  Something 
I like about the 3-face-3 setup is that the center people get to dance with a 
variety of different opposites, so that unsure dancers might at least 
occasionally meet someone who can send them in the correct direction.

While the triple-minor setting also avoids having "inactives" do double duty, 
it could be problematical because most contra dancers these days, except for 
those who are also English country dancers, are not very familiar with the way 
progression works in triple minors.

Bob Fabinski wrote:

> I have successfully called "Almost Sackett's Harbor," a triple minor, triple 
> progression dance.
> with the Contra Corners figure in a triplet formation, and there is no 
> waiting out at the top.

For those unfamiliar with Al Olson's dance "Almost Sackett's Harbor," 
instructions can be found in Larry Jennings's book _Give-and-Take_ and on pages 
21=22 of the 1990 Ralph Page Dance Legacy Weekend syllabus:

 https://www.library.unh.edu/special/forms/rpdlw/syllabus1990.pdf

I'd recommend considerable caution about using this dance.  The challenging 
part isn't the contra corners; it's the progression.  In the notes on the dance 
in the RPDLW syllabus cited above, Larry Jennings writes:

 If the active couples make a point of letting go of the couple
 above them, it may be easier for the #2 and #3 to keep their
 roles straight.

This point is not to be taken lightly!  The action in phrase 7 of the dance 
(first half of B2) puts the dancers into new groups of six, and it can be very 
tempting to think that that's all the regrouping they need to do.  Not so!  
After circling right in phrase 8, the dancers must again regroup into NEW(er) 
groups of six with the active couples, who were in middle positions in the 
groups that just circled right, are again in top position.  To achieve this the 
actives must let go of the couple above them (who have been the #2 couple in 
the round of the dance just completed), and those former #2 dancer must attach 
themselves to the next couple above so as to become a #3 couple in the round 
about to commence.

If there's even one place and time where a sufficient number of dancers cone 
together who don't understand and remember to do the regrouping that I've just 
described, the likely result will be that in the phrase 2 (second half of A1) 
of the new round, instead of the dancers all being in circles of six, there 
will somewhere be a circle of four and a nearby circle of eight.  Once that 
happens, recovery can be practically impossible and the discombobulation can 
spread along the set at triple-progression speed.

I don't doubt Bob's assertion that he's called the dance successfully, and if 
he has any specific advice about teaching it, I'd be delighted if he'd share 
it.  But for anyone else who's thinking of calling it, especially to dancers 
who aren't already familiar with triple minors, I advise you to make sure you 
understand the dance thoroughly (including end effects) and to think carefully 
about how to teach it.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Calling a "box circulate"

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Jan 7, 2019, at 9:26 AM, Jonathan Sivier via Callers 
 wrote:
> 
>   Back in the 1980's, when I first encountered dances with this figure, the 
> term "Box Circulate" hadn't been coined as far as I know. I've only been 
> hearing that term fairly recently (which could easily be 10 years or more I 
> suppose, I don't know when it was first used).

The terms "Box Circulate" comes from modern western square dancing.  Clark 
Baker's database of square dance calls

 http://fortytwo.ws/~cbaker/calls_database.html

dates it to 1968.  (Box Circulate is a variant of an 8-person call "Circulate", 
which Clark dates to 1963.)  The first use of the Box Circulate action (but not 
the name) that I know of in contra dancing was in Steve Schnur's dance "The 
24th of June", which I believe Steve wrote in the early 1980s.  I don't know 
whether he got the figure from MWSD or whether he developed it independently.

> Back then the term I heard most often for this figure was "Rotate".  The 
> original poster was asking for a term to use while calling that was a bit 
> less cumbersome than "Box Circulate" or even "Circulate".  Going back to a 
> more compact term used in the past seems like a reasonable idea.

I believe the name "Rotate the Set" is a coinage of Larry Jennings.  I don't 
know whether Larry was aware of the existing term "(Box) Circulate".  If he 
was, this is one of the unusual instances where I'd question his judgment.  I 
don't think "Rotate the Set" is any more suggestive of the action, and it seems 
gratuitous to invent a new name simply to avoid using terminology from MWSD.

The usual terminology I remember from the 1980's was something "Men [or gents] 
cross; women [or ladies] loop" (or vice versa, as appropriate), which uses more 
syllables but is IMNSHO fr more suggestive of the action than either "Rotate 
(the Set)" or "(Box) Circulate".

As for dancer misunderstandings of the action, the most common one I've noticed 
is that some dancers will cross the set and apparently feel compelled to turn 
around and face back in, as if that's the obvious--or even the only 
possible--right thing to do.  Another thing that can happen is that an original 
in-facing dancer may not cross the set at all, perhaps on account of the 
adjacent dancer retaining a handhold too long.

--Jim



___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] "Second" ONS

[jim saxe via Callers]

Allison,

Thanks for your answers.  They were exactly on target at addressing the spirit 
of my questions and were quite informative.

Thanks for clarifying that the issue about Mad Scatter was anxiety about not 
finding new partners, and not about anyone being fixated on some idea like "I 
want to do the last [set] dance with my favorite partner, darn it!"  I presume 
the lost and (not?) found issue was largely a result of people making large 
"blobs".  Not only is it more likely for people in a big blob not to naturally 
pair up, but it's even possible that someone looking for a partner could more 
readily grab another leftover person from an adjacent group than find the one 
on the far side of their own group.  Then the remaining non-partnered people 
could be quite far apart.  One of them might even give up and sit down.  Etc.  
And how could you have even guessed that it might be useful to teach strategies 
for coping with the situation if you didn't anticipate the big blobs in the 
first place?

Best of luck with your next dance.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] "Second" ONS

[jim saxe via Callers]

Good advice from both Alan and Rich.  I agree with Rich that you could repeat 
more than one well-received dance from last time.

Alan wrote:

> and have a couple slightly more challenging ones - with progression, etc - up 
> your sleeve but without any emotional investment in actually using them.

Definitely agree on the "without any emotional investment" part.  Long-term, do 
you have an ambition for these events to evolve into "contra" dances, or would 
you be happy as a clam to keep having events where facility at ending a swing 
side-by-side with the _ on the left and the _ on the right is not an 
important skill, so long as you have a room full of smiling dancers?

I have a few comments and questions about your notes:

The notes say "beginner's lesson (circle, Lark Raven, ...)" but the dance 
descriptions use "ladles" and "gentlespoons".  What terms did you actually use? 
 If you used "Larks" and "Ravens", did you say anything at all about their 
relation to traditional gender roles?  In practice how much correlation was 
there between what people looked like and which role they danced in?

Leaving aside the waltz and the polka, it looks like the only two dances where 
the roles of Lark/Gentlespoon vs. Raven/Ladle were significant were the roll 
away dance and Mad Scatter.

Notes on the roll away dance say "succeeded at walkthrough, weren't going to 
make it through the dance."  If you could tell, did the confusion seem to have 
to do with figuring out wha was in what role, or was it mostly about something 
else, such as getting from the star to the lines of four?

[Two side comments on that dance: (1) Notes say "This variation is Wade 
Pearson's, removing the right-left-through. ...", but the "original" version 
you link to doesn't have a right and left through.  It has a cross trail.  (2) 
Personally, I don't think it would be a great loss to drop this dance from the 
repertoire, regardless of the role terminology or the manner of setting up the 
lines of four.  I could say more on both points but don't want to go even 
further off topic.]

The other dance description that mentions the roles is Mad Scatter.  How did 
that work out in practice?  I note that it doesn't really matter which member 
of each pair goes into the center for an allemande or star and which one 
orbits, provided nobody minds who they get for new partner.  But I'm curious 
about what actually happened.

Notes on Mad Scatter say "Avoid a mixer last even though they voted for it."  
Do you have reason to believe that people were disappointed about that?  I 
certainly know of many dance series where people would bristle at having a 
mixer as the "last" dance of the evening (even if followed by a waltz as the 
really last dance), but I'm wondering whether you actually sensed such 
bristling at your event.  Note also Rich's comment on ending a barn dance with 
a circle mixer.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Great dances for learning how to dance with ghosts?

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Apr 11, 2018, at 5:18 AM, Tom Hinds  wrote:

> Jim, maybe the meager response was because you didn't give an example.  And 
> what does "the DL;TR crowd" mean?


I didn't give an explicit example in my 2014 message

https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/msg07945.html

but I did go into more detail about the general pattern than in my
recent posting.  And I fear that as a result some people glanced
at my message, decided it was too long, and didn't read it.
(TL;DR = "too long; didn't read".)  In our current thread, Yoyo
pointed out that "The Hobbit" is an example, and he identified
the three different points where neutral dancers reenter the set.

A simpler example is "Lisa's Contra", mentioned earlier in this
thread by Mark Hillegonds.  Here, with a little reformatting, is
how Mark notated it:

 Lisa’s Contra
 by Tom Hinds
 Contra/Improper/Int

 A1 ---
 (16)  Neighbor B & S
 A2 ---
 (4,4)  Pass thru to a wave, Wave balance
 (2,4,2)  Walk forward to person in next wave
 (don't take hands),  Gypsy R 1/2,  Walk back
 to re-form original wave, but facing opposite
 direction (N in RH, Gents LH)
 B1 ---
 (4,4)  Wave balance, Gents alle L 1/2
 (8)  Partner swing
 B2 ---
 (6,2)  Circle L 3/4, Pass thru up and down
 (8)  Next Neighbor do si do

[For Tom's original notation and notes, see page 15 of his book
_Bad Hair Decade_.]

This dance includes just one out-of-minor-set action:  In the
A2 part, you briefly leave your current neighbors to gypsy (or
"walk around" or whatever you want to call it) with your previous
neighbor.  The result is that when you get to the top or bottom
of the line, you experience THREE pairs of transitions out and
back in, as follows:

 * In B2 of some round of the dance, you pass through up or
   down and the here's no new neighbor to dance with.
   [So this is the first time you go out.]

 * In A2 of the next round, you briefly come back in [for
   the first time] to g your previous neighbor.


 * Then you immediately go back out [for the second time].

 * In B2, a new neighbor approaches and you come in [2nd
   time] starting with the do-si-do.


 * In A2 of the next round, you step forward from your
   wave and there's no old neighbor coming toward you
   along the line.  [You've just gone out for the third
   time.]  You could dance around a "ghost" or you could
   treat your partner (across the set) as a neighbor.

 * Then you return to a new wave with the neighbors you
   just briefly left.  [That's the third time you come
   back in.  You now remain in until you get to the
   other end of the set or the music stops.]

I could give other examples, but really all you need to do is
pick almost any dance where you go out of your minor set (to
dance with a previous neighbor, future neighbor, or shadow)
and then return.  If you analyze the end effects carefully,
you'll usually find that dancers go out (become neutral) and 
come back in at least three times.  It's actually harder to
find examples where they go out and come back in exactly
twice.

Often, the thing to do in order to come back in in the right
position is so obvious to experienced contra dancers that
we hardly notice there's a decision to be made.  We just do
the obvious/habitual thing and it turns out to be right.  I
think that's part of the reason that the commonness of the
(out-in)x3 pattern could go unnoticed for so long by so many
people.  I don't know of anyone who wrote about it before I
noticed it in 2013 (if anyone does, please tell me).  And by
then I must have experienced it myself hundreds of times, if
not a thousand or more in 30+ years of dancing, without
really noticing.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Great dances for learning how to dance with ghosts?

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Apr 6, 2018, at 3:49 PM, Yoyo Zhou via Callers 
 wrote:

> I recall reading something, possibly from Jim Saxe on this list (and maybe 
> from Larry Jennings?), about how in most dances without out-of-minor-set 
> interactions, you come back into the set ... once - after progressing to the 
> end. But in dances like The Hobbit, where you leave the minor set once, you 
> actually come back in to the set 3 times. ...

That would have been from me in a message to this list on July 9,
2014 with the subject "An observation about end effects -- becoming
neutral three times at each end".

 https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/msg07945.html

Based on the meager response at the time, I fear that few readers
got my point (though it looks like Yoyo was one who did).  For the
TL;DR crowd, here's the short version:

 In almost every contra with even a simple out-of-minor-set
 action, dancers who reach the top or bottom will become
 neutral and return to the body of the set not twice but at
 least *THREE* different times.

I'm not going to give an example.  I think that anyone who picks
a few examples of dances with out-of-minor-set action and actually
takes the trouble to trace the end effects carefully will see, now
that I've pointed it out, that what I've said is true.  And anyone
who won't take that trouble to do that probably also wouldn't take
the trouble to study my analysis of an example if I gave one.

In case anyone's wondering about my terminology, I won't try to
give definitions of "out-of-minor-set action" and "neutral" that
cover every unusual situation, but here are some remarks about
common situations that should make my meaning clear:

If you leave your partner to dance with a shadow and then
return to your partner, or if you leave a neighbor to dance
with a future neighbor or a previous neighbor and then return
to the first neighbor, I count that as an out-of-minor-set
action.  If a dance merely has you and your partner progress
to new neighbors in the middle of the tune (instead of at the
transition from B2 to A1), and you stay in that new foursome
until the same point in the next round of the dance, then I
don't count it as out-of-minor-set action.  I also don't count
merely taking hands in long lines with a shadow or a past or
future neighbor while you still have your partner or your
current neighbor in the other hand.

If dancers are doing something in groups of four, I count any
dancers near the top or bottom to the set who aren't part of
a complete foursome as neutral.  This includes the case where
a pair dancers stand still during a diagonal ladies' chain
or a diagonal right and left through because there's nobody
to do it with.

If most of the dancers are doing a two-person figure with
partners, neighbors, or shadows on the sides of the set,
then I count as neutral any dancers at the top or bottom
who are (1) standing still, (2) "dancing with ghosts", or
(3) dancing the figure with someone *across* the set
(possibly a partner or shadow acting as a neighbor).

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Politically Correct?

[jim saxe via Callers]

An important thing to remember is that sometimes *you just can't
please everyone* no matter what you do.  That applies not only
to issues that some would characterize as being about "political
correctness" (singing call lyrics; the "g-word"; gendered vs.
gender-free names for dance roles), but to many, many other
decisions about dance calling, dance organization, and life in
general.  

Some of our recent discussion have made me recall an old fable of
which I offer here one version (from the March 29, 1753, number
of the British weekly, _The World_, as quoted at

 https://books.google.com/books?id=L3YPQAAJ=PA78

):

 An old man and a little boy were driving an ass to the next
 market to sell.  What a fool is this fellow (says a man upon
 the road) to be trudging it on foot with his son, that his
 ass may go light!  The old man, hearing this, sat his boy
 upon the ass, and went whistling by the side of him.  Why,
 sirrah! (cries a second man to the boy) is it fit for you to
 be riding, while your poor old father is walking on foot?
 The father, upon this rebuke, took down his boy from the ass,
 and mounted himself.  Do you see (says a third) how the lazy
 old knave rides along, upon his beast, while his poor little
 boy is almost crippled with walking?  The old man no sooner
 heard this, than he took up his son behind him.  Pray, honest
 friend (says a fourth) is that ass your own?  Yes, says the
 old man.  One would not have thought so, replied the other,
 by your loading him so unmercifully.  You and your son are
 better able to carry the poor beast than he you.  Any thing
 to please, says the owner; and alighting with his son, they
 tied the legs of the ass together, and by the help of a pole
 endeavoured to carry him upon their shoulders over the bridge
 that led to the town.  This was so entertaining a sight that
 the people ran in crowds to laugh at it; till the ass,
 conceiving a dislike to the over-complaisance of his master,
 burst asunder the cords that tied him, slipt from the pole,
 and tumbled into the river.  The poor old man made the best
 of his way home, ashamed and vexed that, by endeavouring to
 please everybody, he had pleased nobody, and lost his ass
 into the bargain.

Regarding Rich's question about "Billy Boy", Frannie wrote:

> I learned it as a child as "She's a young girl."  That would at least get rid 
> of the people are things issue.

I might go further and change tag line to something like

She is young and she cannot leave her mother

lest someone object to the word "girl."  Drawing an analogy to
the fable above, I think this sort of change is in the realm
of deciding who should walk and who, if anyone, should ride. 
Your own modern sensibilities may suggest a departure from past
practice.  Or if you think there's more than one reasonable
course of action (though perhaps no perfect one), then you might
feel little inconvenience in acceding to the most common (or the
most loudly asserted) preference of others, even it's not your
own first choice.

But now what if somebody objects to the word "young" because
it implies the protagonist in the song is courting an underage
child?  Or what if someone knows the ending of the original
song (where the woman sung of turns out to be far from young)
and complains that it is ageist?  Or what if someone finds the
gendered pronouns "she" and "her" to be unacceptable in any
context?  There comes a point--and obviously not everyone will
agree where that point is--when either you can go looking for
a length of cord and a pole or you can decide that it's time
to say No.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Good dances with challenging timing

[jim saxe via Callers]

Here's a dance that I think rewards good timing:

 Brimmer and May Reel
 by Dan Pearl
 Duple improper contra

 A1.  Balance and swing (new) neighbor
 A2.  Right and left through
  #1 couple swing
 B1.  Down the hall four in line (4!)
  #1 couple (in center) California twirl (4) 
  Mirror allemande neighbors with handy hand (M1 and W2
  by L, W1 and M2 by R) twice around (8!)
 B2.  Lead up the hall as couples, two's following ones; ones
  cast down (unassisted, of course) around twos and
  face up while twos continue up and turn in to face
  down; circle left (still in original foursomes) half
  way (to original places); pass through up and down
  to progress (16)

The A parts are given as Dan now prefers them.  The original
version had more challenging timing

 A1.  Swing (new) neighbor (8)
  Right and left through (8)
 A2.  #1 couple balance and swing (16)

but that can be viewed more as a defect than as a rewarding
challenge. I'm more interested in the action in the B parts.

 * If dancers take six or eight steps down the hall before
   starting the California twirl, the subsequent actions can
   become a "rat race."

 * The key to getting the 2x allemandes done in time is not
   to take huge steps but to keep your feet close to your
   neighbor's feet.

 * If twos don't continue up the hall as ones cast around
   them, they lengthen the ones' path and may also cause
   the entire set to drift towards the foot of the hall.

 * If dancers start the CA twirl on time, and keep the
   allemandes tight, the action in B2 need not be at all
   rushed in order to bring them to their new neighbors
   just in time for the balance.

--Jim

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

[Callers] Quiet (was Super easy dances - do they exist?)

[jim saxe via Callers]

Linda Mrosko asked:

> As an aside -- how do you quiet a room with terrible acoustics full of loud 
> people?  Thanks!

John Sweeney replied:

>   Last time I had the challenge of working with a room full of noisy 
> youngsters (most of whom didn’t speak English) I just led by example, 
> starting with a Grand March then did:

>   Once they has used up a bit of energy I was able to get them to quiet 
> down a bit!

I think there's more to it than using up a bit of energy.  John
had also shown the dancers (not merely told/lectured them) that
he had something to offer that was fun.  I think that could have
done at least a little toward making them willing to attend to
whatever he was about to present next (which is not to say that
the chance to let off some steam mightn't also have helped).
[John, do you agree?]

Jeremy Child suggested

> To quiet a room I use the Girl Guides technique:
> 
> I raise my hand, and anyone who sees me knows to stop talking and raise their 
> hand too.  More notice this (other peoples hands up and slightly diminished 
> volume).  This snowballs quite quickly as peer pressure kicks in, and is a 
> very effective technique.  You have to teach it to them first, of course, but 
> they pick it up quite quickly.


and Linda replied:

> Oh how I wish that would work.  I've tried that technique over the years.  
> They just ignore me. ...


I'd be interested in learning more details from Jeremy, or
anyone else who has had success with the raised hand technique
of quieting a room.  For example:  What country do you (mostly)
work in?  Were you dealing with people who might already have
learned (and bought into) the idea that "When the hand goes up,
the mouth goes shut" in some other setting such as Girl Guides
(or Girl Scouts in the US)?  If you were dealing with young
folks (what age?), were there also other adults around who were
already authority figures to them and who might make their
disapproval known if the youngsters ignored your raised hand?
Most significantly:  I'm no psychologist, but it seems to me
that this sort of thing is most likely to work if the dancers
are convinced (a) that you have something to tell them that's
worth hearing and (b) that if they keep talking they're
liable to miss it.  What do you do to convince them (or at
least get them to grant provisional acceptance) of those
points at the start of the event?  Also:  Have you ever worked
with groups (what kind?) where the raised hand didn't work any
better for you than Linda reports?

--Jim

Re: [Callers] Docey-Doe (Was: Swing Like Thunder)

[jim saxe via Callers]

On Jun 15, 2017, at 3:08 AM, John Sweeney wrote:

> There is a very good example of the rollaway into a Docey-Doe, that Tony 
> mentions, in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfZZdB2MyKs at 5:16. ...

And note how the start of the 'Docey-Doe" is described
in the narration:  "From the circle, the ladies will pass
left shoulders, ..."

--Jim

Re: [Callers] Swing Like Thunder

[jim saxe via Callers]

Deborah Hyland wrote:

> > The next question I had was whether the circles got progressively bigger or 
> > whether it was always circles of 4. Thanks so much!

And Tony Parkes replied, in part:

> One could conceivably use a Texas do-si-do (now called do-paso just about 
> everywhere) with circles of six or more. ...

True.  However, the Colorado docey-doe discussed earlier
in this thread, where women begin by switching places
with each other--either by a left shoulder pass [something
like a left half gypsy] or by rollaway type action with
the "opposite" gent--doesn't generalize naturally to a
circle of more than two couples.

In any case, regardless of whether you use the basket in
a cumulative (4,6,8) or single visiting form, you of course
get to match it with whatever chorus figure(s) you think
will be accessible and fun for the dancers at your event,
and that needn't necessarily include any variant of
docey-doe.

--Jim

Re: [Callers] Docey-Doe (Was: Swing Like Thunder)

[jim saxe via Callers]

The version of the "Docey-Doe" done by Shaw's exhibition
group, the Cheyenne Mountain Dancers, can be seen multiple
times in this video:

 https://squaredancehistory.com/items/show/769
 also at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA-Qoipv-Kk

Tony Parkes wrote:


> ... the instructions in Shaw’s book and those on the LSF webpage describe two 
> related-but-different versions of the docey-doe. ...

> Brief descriptions: In Shaw’s book, from a circle of four, the ladies pass 
> left shoulders and face partner. On the webpage, from a circle of four, 
> ladies do a rollaway with their opposite to face partner. In both versions, 
> continue with left hand to partner, ...

Note that two versions are even more closely related than a
cursory reading of Tony's description might suggest.  The
action for the women in the "rollaway" is to follow pretty
much the identical track as they would if they were to pass
left shoulders with each other, but doing a solo clockwise
spin (pirouette) as they travel.  In the film/video cited
above, there are some cases where a woman pirouettes twice
around.   And note, by the way, that the women do not finish
the "rollaway? by rejoining hands with the dancer they rolled
past (their opposite), but instead go directly into a left
hand action with partner.

--Jim

Re: [Callers] Calling at Free Folk Festival

[jim saxe via Callers]

Clare,

I've called at the SF Free Folk Festival before.  As Nick says,
you can expect to see a fair number of experienced contra dancers
there.  This was true even last year, when S was also a one-day
event with the evening contra opposite the Palo Alto contra, and I
think the San Rafael contra as well.  I wouldn't worry about losing
a ton of contra dancers to the blues/fusion dance. While some contra
dancers have eclectic tastes, quite a few stick to contras only.
Of course, you can also expect to have a much higher proportion of
total newbies and very occasional (and "rusty") contra dancers than
typical at a regular contra series.

You should be quite able to call simple duple minor contras, not
"barn dance" repertoire.  And I'd expect to have quite a few people
there (a significant minority if not a majority) who do know the
difference.

You wrote: 

>  ... (low piece count, connected, easy single progression, stays in
> minor set, etc) ...

Those are all good ideas in this situation.  Another point to note
is whether any move that could be tricky for complete newbies (e.g.,
roll away with a half sashay, or the courtesy turn in a "right and
left through") is done with a series of different neighbors or with
the same partner each time.  If it's done with partners, a pair of
new dancers dancing together could repeatedly end up in the wrong
place or facing the wrong direction.  To keep the significant
contingent of experienced dancers from getting ticked off you'll
need to include partner swings in most, if not all, contras.  If
a couple persistently ends with the "lady" on the left, you'd like
the dance to be such that an easy recovery follows, or at least
such that the pocket of disorganization stays small and doesn't
spread up and down the set.

> It’s in a high school gym, so I know to keep calls short and clear due to 
> acoustics.

Acoustics can definitely be a problem at S.  I'd say to keep
calls _long_ and clear:

FACE aCROSS; LADies CHAIN

instead of

- - - CHAIN

and

GENTleMEN LEFT alleMANDE

instead of

- - MEN allemande LEFT

and

LONG LINES FORward GO

instead of

- - FORward and BACK

Newbies typically have slower reaction time to the calls than
experienced dancers have, and they also don't have as good a
sense of when the phrase is coming around.  And even if they've
been told "better never than late," they may not appreciate how
to put that into practice.  Even with a four-beat call instead 
of a one- or two-beat call, you may occasionally see a couple
continue to swing a whole time around *after* you deliver the
last word of the call for the next action.

Try to project your voice into the mic, enunciate clearly, and
choose calls with not too many syllables per beat.

You might ask one of the other callers, or some other person
you trust, to listen at the back of the room while you teach and
call and to check on whether your words can be heard clearly
through the music and/or conversational buzz.  You might even
make this request of the sound tech, perhaps wording it as a
request to check on *your* enunciation and mic technique.

--Jim