Re: [Callers] Rotation shifts (was: Another dance-check zig-zag R dance)

[Tony Parkes via Callers]

Ron Blechner wrote (after giving examples of transitions that some might call 
awkward):

> And maybe the answer someone might give is “these are all bad flow”. Yet 
> people seem to like many dances with them in it. I would be interested to 
> find out why.

The idea that every transition must be ultra-smooth is a fairly recent one, 
compared to the length of time that contras and squares have been around. It 
appears to have become prominent in the square dance revival in the late 1950s, 
and in the contra dance revival in the mid-1970s (I may be off by a few years 
in both cases). Both contras and squares began evolving into their present 
forms around 1800 (to use a very round number).

And I think flow can be given too much emphasis. I’ve heard modern square dance 
callers speak of “overflow,” which happens when there is too much movement in 
one direction (say clockwise). Those I’ve heard have spoken of it as if it’s a 
bad thing, but there are people in that network who appear to think flow should 
take precedence over other criteria for a good sequence of moves. There’s been 
a trend away from using “forward and back” over the last two or three decades, 
and I can’t remember the last time I heard a modern caller follow a circle left 
with a circle right.

In contras, I think it depends on where in the music the transition occurs. I 
wrote Shadrack’s Delight (1972) in a deliberate mix of traditional and modern 
style; it ends with a courtesy turn into a do-si-do with the next neighbor. I 
don’t think I would have put a transition like that in the middle of the dance 
even then; I’ve avoided it in most of the routines I’ve written since.

Tony Parkes
Billerica, Mass.
www.hands4.com
New book! Square Dance Calling: An Old Art for a New Century
(to be published Spring 2017)

[Callers] Rotation shifts (was: Another dance-check zig-zag R dance)

[Ron Blechner via Callers]

As long as you're opening this line of thought, here's some more thoughts:

Should we thus also say that every circle L / star R to circle R / star L
transition has equally no place in contra? Because that's even more of a
pronounced shift in rotational direction. (To be clear: with same
neighbors, not as a transition.)

I can imagine a counter-point would be noting that the swing is unique
because it's a tighter rotation, and so it's not the same as stars/circles.

But then how do we explain the frequency of dances with swing to ladies
allemande right / ladies pass right to start a hey? It's absolutely ladies
going from clockwise swing rotation to moving the opposite direction.

Or how about some other frequently used transitions (from most frequent)?:

Chain / R+L Thru to circle left. (Common, and a change in vector for both
roles)

Chain/star promenade to Face Next neighbor, DSD/"Gypsy"/Allemandes R with
that new neighbor. (Less common, but I dance one of these every few weeks,
on average.)

Contra Corners dances where ladies role has to make both a hand and
direction change (like... Chorus Jig)

And maybe the answer someone might give is "these are all bad flow". Yet
people seem to like many dances with them in it. I would be interested to
find out why.

In dance,
Ron

On Mar 14, 2017 11:41 PM, "Bob Isaacs"  wrote:

Ron and All:


I respectfully disagree.  As long as we swing in a clockwise direction, the
swing/circle R transition will flow poorly for both roles, and should
have no place in any contra dance -


Bob




--
*From:* Ron Blechner 
*Sent:* Tuesday, March 14, 2017 11:19 PM
*To:* Bob Isaacs
*Cc:* Caller's discussion list
*Subject:* Re: [Callers] Another dance-check zig-zag R dance

I dance the ladies role enough where I feel I can confidently assert that
swing -> circle R is as difficult for gents as swing -> circle L is for
ladies. Either way, one person is unfolding from the swing opposite from
the rotation of the subsequent circle.

The bigger objection to flow is simply that it's a circle right that is
from a standstill, and people don't dance many circle rights. (But we dance
plenty circle lefts from a standstill.) In this case, I'm interested in the
circle R as something to fill a second-half-of-evening slot where I often
have need for dances that are fairly easy but not the same old circle
lefts, swings, stars, chains, and allemandes.

Best,
Ron

On Mar 14, 2017 11:05 PM, "Bob Isaacs via Callers" <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hi Ron:
>
>
> Two transitions in this dance I find troubling.  The R and L through/gents
> allemande is awkward for the gents, whose L hand is occupied in the
> courtesy turn of the R and L through.  This can be avoided by 1/2 hey (GL,
> PR, LL, NR), gents allemande L 1 1/2 (or allemande/hey if you prefer that
> order).
>
>
> But swing/circle R?
>
>
> Bob
>
>
> --
> *From:* Callers  on behalf of Ron
> Blechner via Callers 
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 14, 2017 9:49:10 PM
> *To:* callers
> *Subject:* [Callers] Another dance-check zig-zag R dance
>
> So, this is a cross between Jeff Spero's Kiss the Bride and Rick Mohr's
> Rockin' Robin:
>
> Duple Imp.
> A1. N DSD (6)
>NS (10)
> A2. R+L Thru (8) (across)
>Gents Alle L 1.5x (8)
> B1. P Meltdown Swing (16)*
> B2. Circle R 1.25x (10)
>Zig R, Zag L (6) (to next Ns)
>
> I was futzing with Kiss the Bride and this came out. I'd like to give
> credit if it's been written, or pick a name if not.
>
> In dance,
> Ron Blechner
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>