Send Callers mailing list submissions to
call...@sharedweight.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
callers-requ...@sharedweight.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
callers-ow...@sharedweight.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Putting Out Fires (Dan Pearl)
2. Re: Putting Out Fires (Leda Shapiro)
3. Re: Not always the caller's fault! (J L Korr)
4. Re: Not always the caller's fault! (Chris Weiler (home))
5. New Dance (Rich Goss)
6. sometimes not the caller's fault! (Lewis Land)
7. Re: sometimes not the caller's fault! (Greg McKenzie)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:04:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Dan Pearl <daniel_pe...@yahoo.com>
To: call...@sharedweight.net
Subject: Re: [Callers] Putting Out Fires
Message-ID: <975135.90434...@web65706.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Until very recently, I thought "it is always the caller's fault".
The problem with absolutes like "always" is that a counterexample
jumps up and hits you in the face.
I like (and use) the tactics for putting out fires that others
recommended: Beef up the calling (earlier, more directional, more
complete), NOT calling to the late group, etc. Not mentioned here
yet is the old "manual intervention". I use a wireless mic, and
that allows me to move around, hopefully addressing issues before
they erupt in flames, but also providing an in-your-face hard-to-
ignore knowledgeable guide post.
If you ever read Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, you'll remember that
the science of psychohistory which allowed practitioners to
essentially predict the future of civilizations was compromised by
a random mutation ("The Mule"). I was thinking of that a few
Saturdays ago when I was calling for a challenging dance. I don't
mean challenging to the dancers: I mean challenging to me to call!
It was a regular dance series, and the "regulars" weren't there,
and there were lots of new dancers. That's OK with me; I do that
all the time. I found myself presenting pretty easy stuff, and
astonishingly, I needed to make it easier as the evening went on. I
was running out of easier-than-dead-easy material. That's also OK
-- I know how to write dances on the fly. What I was not prepared
for was a concentration of dancers that needed special handling.
One dancer, an older fellow who had been dancing for some time, was
literally moving in slow motion, and in a time delay so that the
people around him were sucked into his rift in the time-space
continuum. Another dancer, a newcomer who seemed to "get it"
initially, began careening in random directions at high speed, with
a great big smile on her face. Another new gentleman, also after
seemingly "getting it", started to regress to periods of non-
movement. I moved right next to him and said "right hand star",
putting my own hand out to model the action. He just stood there
and repeated "right hand star".
This made me think about, and question, the assumption that the
caller is always at fault. Perhaps that is a fine mental state to
be in (that is, not blaming the dancers), but you know, the conduct
of the evening is not, and cannot be entirely one person's
responsibility. A dance is like a machine with many moving parts,
and they need to be functioning in expected ways for a smooth
experience. Mistakes? They are part of what the machine does. I
have more trouble when communication that has worked before begins
to fail, when lessons learned are forgotten, and when other
unexpected behaviors arise.
So this was one of the least fun, least rewarding gigs in my 30
years of calling. I chalk it up to an unfortunate confluence of
factors likely not to be repeated for another 30 years.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 20:36:55 -0700
From: "Leda Shapiro" <le...@pacbell.net>
To: "'Caller's discussion list'" <call...@sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Putting Out Fires
Message-ID: <F067F11434C849D4A789A63A630B55EA@LEDAXP>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Thank you for reminding us that we, after all, are human...and
sometimes
those there does seem to be a random mutation in one evening...and
yes,
have read Asimov's Trilogy -in fact I read all three more than once.
Thankfully there are all those other nights to remember!
One every 30 years ain't bad..
Leda
-----Original Message-----
From: callers-boun...@sharedweight.net
[mailto:callers-boun...@sharedweight.net] On Behalf Of Dan Pearl
Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2010 8:04 PM
To: call...@sharedweight.net
Subject: Re: [Callers] Putting Out Fires
If you ever read Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, you'll remember that
the
science of psychohistory which allowed practitioners to essentially
predict
the future of civilizations was compromised by a random mutation
("The
Mule"). I was thinking of that a few Saturdays ago when I was
calling for a
challenging dance. I don't mean challenging to the dancers: I mean
challenging to me to call! It was a regular dance series, and the
"regulars" weren't there, and there were lots of new dancers.
That's OK
with me; I do that all the time. I found myself presenting pretty
easy
stuff, and astonishingly, I needed to make it easier as the evening
went on.
I was running out of easier-than-dead-easy material. That's also
OK -- I
know how to write dances on the fly. What I was not prepared for
was a
concentration of dancers that needed special handling.
One dancer, an older fellow who had been dancing for some time, was
literally moving in slow motion, and in a time delay so that the
people
around him were sucked into his rift in the time-space continuum.
Another
dancer, a newcomer who seemed to "get it" initially, began
careening in
random directions at high speed, with a great big smile on her face.
Another new gentleman, also after seemingly "getting it", started
to regress
to periods of non-movement. I moved right next to him and said
"right hand
star", putting my own hand out to model the action. He just stood
there and
repeated "right hand star".
This made me think about, and question, the assumption that the
caller is
always at fault. Perhaps that is a fine mental state to be in (that
is, not
blaming the dancers), but you know, the conduct of the evening is
not, and
cannot be entirely one person's responsibility. A dance is like a
machine
with many moving parts, and they need to be functioning in expected
ways for
a smooth experience. Mistakes? They are part of what the machine
does. I
have more trouble when communication that has worked before begins
to fail,
when lessons learned are forgotten, and when other unexpected
behaviors
arise.
So this was one of the least fun, least rewarding gigs in my 30
years of
calling. I chalk it up to an unfortunate confluence of factors
likely not to
be repeated for another 30 years.
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
call...@sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 01:46:14 -0400
From: J L Korr <jeremyk...@hotmail.com>
To: <call...@sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Not always the caller's fault!
Message-ID: <snt101-w50819a68f3b751180e9c7bc7...@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sorry, folks, but this conversation is pushing a personal button
about not using words like "always" and "never" unless it's truly
so. I completely agree with Greg, Martha, and others that in
general, the caller does and should bear responsibility for
problems on the dance floor. But I can't agree that this is always
the case. Consider these two scenarios, among others:
1) In a large dance hall at a festival with 500 dancers, one of ten
contra lines begins to break down when pairs of less experienced
dancers happen to meet simultaneously in three different minor sets
and become confused. The rest of the hall is fine. The caller can't
intervene personally by, for example, running out on the floor.
2) During the 12:15 am - 2:00 am set at the Falcon Ridge Folk
Festival, again with hundreds of dancers, the caller calls a
relatively easy dance requiring little thought. Some dancers, who
are in a range of mental states from alcohol, etc., have trouble
staying oriented and coordinated, causing recurring problems in
their sets.
I'd argue that in these contexts, though the dance floor itself is
experiencing a breakdown, the caller hasn't done anything wrong,
nor does s/he have the responsibility of fixing the problem. In the
first scenario, the caller must select dances for and call to the
broadest possible swath of dancers among those present, recognizing
that some minor problems are inevitable. In the second scenario,
the inebriated dancers are entitled to participate in the dance at
that venue, and there's little the caller can do to improve their
mental coordination.
So I'd say the caller almost always has responsibility for problems
that occur in the hall, but in certain scenarios does not, or at
least has limited responsibility relative to most situations. --
Jeremy
From: Martha Wild <maw...@sbcglobal.net>
Oh, yes, and it's always the caller's responsibility.
From: Greg McKenzie <greg...@earthlink.net>
There are never fires in the hall--only in your own mind. If there
is trouble anywhere in the hall it is because you have screwed
up...somewhere. <snip> The caller should take full
responsibility for
the gaff.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?
ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 06:31:29 -0400
From: "Chris Weiler (home)" <chris.wei...@weirdtable.org>
To: Caller's discussion list <call...@sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] Not always the caller's fault!
Message-ID: <4bc59981.7070...@weirdtable.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I think there needs to be a distinction between what is really
happening
in the hall and the stance that we take from the microphone. There
are
hundreds of variables that are all outside of our control at a
dance. We
pretend to have control, but all we can do is influence. It is our
responsibility to use that influence to try and help everyone have
a lot
of fun. But you're not going to be able to stop some problems from
happening.
That said, there is a lot of power in taking responsibility from the
microphone for problems, even when it's not your fault. Some have
been
listed here already. It puts people at ease. They can relax and enjoy
the next dance without being overly focused on what went wrong. It
reinforces your authority when lines falling apart are creating a
feeling of chaos. And sometimes, it really is your fault. ;)
I had this happen at a recent dance. I called a very simple dance,
but
it is constructed symmetrically, so sometimes it can be difficult to
know if you're in the As or the Bs. The second time through the
dance, I
called "neighbor" instead of "partner" and half the hall believed
me and
the other half didn't. Everyone was in a different place very
quickly.
After seeing that I couldn't get everyone back to the same place to
recover after a couple of attempts, I stopped the music and
immediately
announced "Sorry, folks, my fault completely. Let's try this
again." The
crowd erupted in applause! They lined up and we started again without
any further trouble. People respond to humility and to people who
take
responsibility for their actions. It humanizes you in their eyes and
they'll cut you a lot of slack for it.
Chris Weiler
Goffstown, NH
J L Korr wrote:
Sorry, folks, but this conversation is pushing a personal button
about not using words like "always" and "never" unless it's truly
so. I completely agree with Greg, Martha, and others that in
general, the caller does and should bear responsibility for
problems on the dance floor. But I can't agree that this is always
the case. Consider these two scenarios, among others:
1) In a large dance hall at a festival with 500 dancers, one of
ten contra lines begins to break down when pairs of less
experienced dancers happen to meet simultaneously in three
different minor sets and become confused. The rest of the hall is
fine. The caller can't intervene personally by, for example,
running out on the floor.
2) During the 12:15 am - 2:00 am set at the Falcon Ridge Folk
Festival, again with hundreds of dancers, the caller calls a
relatively easy dance requiring little thought. Some dancers, who
are in a range of mental states from alcohol, etc., have trouble
staying oriented and coordinated, causing recurring problems in
their sets.
I'd argue that in these contexts, though the dance floor itself is
experiencing a breakdown, the caller hasn't done anything wrong,
nor does s/he have the responsibility of fixing the problem. In
the first scenario, the caller must select dances for and call to
the broadest possible swath of dancers among those present,
recognizing that some minor problems are inevitable. In the second
scenario, the inebriated dancers are entitled to participate in
the dance at that venue, and there's little the caller can do to
improve their mental coordination.
So I'd say the caller almost always has responsibility for
problems that occur in the hall, but in certain scenarios does
not, or at least has limited responsibility relative to most
situations. --Jeremy
From: Martha Wild <maw...@sbcglobal.net>
Oh, yes, and it's always the caller's responsibility.
From: Greg McKenzie <greg...@earthlink.net>
There are never fires in the hall--only in your own mind. If
there
is trouble anywhere in the hall it is because you have screwed
up...somewhere. <snip> The caller should take full
responsibility for
the gaff.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from
your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?
ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
call...@sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:15:21 -0700
From: Rich Goss <richg...@comcast.net>
To: Shared Weight <call...@sharedweight.net>
Subject: [Callers] New Dance
Message-ID: <c7eb1c09.8c6e%richg...@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Wrote this dance recently in honor of one of our dancers who
recently passed
away, Betty Stewart. Has this one already been written?
Betty?s Night Out ? Rich Goss
Improper, Double Prog
A1: Neighbor Dosido and Swing (end facing down hall)
A2: Down hall 4-in-line, turn as couples; Return, face across
B1: 1/2 Hey, Gents Ricochet Back (Ladies cross rt sh)
Partner swing
B2: Circle Left 3/4
As Couples, zig left, zag right, zig left
Rich, Portland Or
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:15:03 -0600
From: Lewis Land <lewisl...@windstream.net>
To: Caller's discussion list <call...@sharedweight.net>
Cc: J L Korr <jeremyk...@hotmail.com>
Subject: [Callers] sometimes not the caller's fault!
Message-ID: <4bc5cde7.5010...@windstream.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Regarding J L Korr's message observing that it's not always the
caller's
fault, he is completely correct. The point Greg and I were trying to
make is that the caller is sort of like the conductor in an
orchestra,
the person who is ultimately responsible for making everything go
smoothly and happen on time.
Things don't always go smoothly, of course. Where I call we often
have a
group consisting of more than 50% newcomers, and when I tell them
that
any mistakes in the dance are always the caller's fault, it's my
way of
putting the newcomers at ease and making them feel welcome. Some
people
that show up have never done any kind of dancing before, in their
entire
lives (these are usually guys), and the prospect of community dancing
can be quite intimidating. Based on my own experience when I first
started contra dancing, I try to make it clear to the novices that
we're
a very non-judgmental group, so even the most catastrophic
missteps on
their part are ultimately my responsibility.
That said, at almost every dance I've called I have found myself
rolling
my eyes at the sight of, for example, some dancer who has been
showing
up regularly for /years/, and still has no sense of timing (again,
usually a guy), or the group of young, inexperienced dancers who
insist
on dancing exclusively with each other, disrupting the entire line
because they seem to think contra is somewhat like break dancing.
There
are plenty of times when incompetent dancers screw things up, and
during
post-dance conversations with our other caller I will rant about them
unmercifully. But at the dance the best thing I can do is try to
project
an air of confidence and let people know everything's going to be
fine,
and fun. It's very similar to the attitude I tried to project when
I was
raising teenage children.
One final comment: I sometimes find myself dancing in a venue where
the
caller is very experienced and is obviously experimenting with new
and
challenging dances, at a level that is clearly incompatible with the
experience level of most of the dancers in the hall. I think this is
very self-indulgent. We all need to grow as callers, but the best
callers can gauge the experience level of the group and call
appropriately. Some of my best calling experiences have involved
calling
a dance that I've labeled "painfully easy", and afterward having a
new
dancer come up to thank me for my calling and tell me what a
wonderful
time they've had. That's really what it's all about. -Lewis Land
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:57:15 -0700
From: Greg McKenzie <greg...@earthlink.net>
To: Caller's discussion list <call...@sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] sometimes not the caller's fault!
Message-ID: <e1o24y1-0007yt...@elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Thanks to all who spoke up, for bringing this
issue into more clarity. ?It?s always the
caller?s fault,? is a clever line that is often
misunderstood. Too many callers see it as a
throw-away gesture that has a laudable sentiment, but no real
substance.
It might be more accurate, and more useful to
say: ?The caller always takes full responsibility
for anything that happens in the hall.?
This posture is one with a history that grows out
of the caller?s role as the master of
ceremonies. MCs have always understood the need
for taking responsibility as part of their task
of holding the attention of the hall. This is
how they maintain their position of
leadership. It was with the development of
amplified public address systems that this
responsibility became much more salient and much
more necessary. When speaking with a microphone
the emcee has the awesome power of projecting
their thoughts into the minds of all present,
with little effort. This ability comes with a
great responsibility of leadership, and
professional emcees have learned that their role
is to always speak on behalf of the interests of
everyone in the hall. That means taking full
responsibility for anything that goes wrong.
How can the caller take responsibility for
everything that happens? If the toilet in the
ladies bathroom backs up, is it the caller?s fault?
Actually, it is. More to the point, it is the
caller?s responsibility, as a leader, to deal
with the situation. Here is one possible example:
?Ladies and gentlemen: Please accept my sincere
apologies. I have been informed that there is a
serious problem with the plumbing in the ladies
bathroom. I am sorry about this inconvenience
and ask for your gracious cooperation. The
ladies bathroom will be closed for the rest of
this evening. Julie, our wonderful dance
manager, has made a sign with both a ?Men?s? and
a ?Ladies? side which will be hung on the working
bathroom. Julie will take responsibility for
switching the sign during each dance. We ask
that you use this bathroom only when it is
labeled for your gender. Once again, I am sorry
about this inconvenience. We all appreciate your
cooperation and consideration in dealing with
this problem. Now, please take hands in groups
of four from the top of the hall.?
This announcement could, of course, be made by
the dance manager or some other responsible
party. The caller, however, should apologize, in
any case, for the disruption of the dance
program. In the absence of anyone else stepping
forward it is the caller?s responsibility to
address the problem. The point is to put the
dancers at ease so that they can do their job of
enjoying a wonderful evening of social dance with live music.
Someone brought up the issue of dancers who fail
to integrate into the community and form clumps
of newcomers. Is this the caller?s fault? Yes
it is. The tradition of contra dance includes
learning at a regular dance rather than in
separate lessons. Consequently, integrating
newcomers into the community is the caller?s
responsibility and is one of the most essential
core skills that define an excellent contra dance
caller. Clumps of newcomers in the hall are a
clear symptom of poor calling. Sorry. It?s one
of your primary responsibilities. (Note that if
we relinquish this responsibility it eliminates
any discussion of how the caller can integrate
newcomers, something that really should be addressed.)
There have been some good points made in this
thread. In the final analysis, however, the idea
of the caller taking total responsibility is an
inescapable position. While it may be true that
the caller is not omnipotent I would submit the
following points about the caller?s responsibility for the hall::
* This is not a statement of fact. It is a
statement of policy which defines the professional role of a caller.
* Any alternative policy offers no possible
action that the caller can take to ?put out
fires? or improve the situation. Other positions
offer only excuses for the caller to relinquish leadership.
* By accepting this policy the caller can
provide both leadership and a positive example
for others. If the caller makes excuses others will follow that
example.
If there is any core principle to calling
effectively and with professionalism, this is
it. If the caller is not willing to take
responsibility for everything that happens in the
hall they are simply not doing their job. If
there is a problem with the evening?whether it be
disruptive dancers, a band that plays
inappropriate tunes, or ?incompetent dancers,??an
excellent caller will always ask: ?What could I
do differently next time to better address this
problem?? Without taking full responsibility the
caller will not have the motivation to
improve. There are always excuses to employ. A
professional caller does not make excuses. Most
importantly, this action sets an example for everyone.
Calling is a role of leadership. If the
caller?who has a PA system?is not willing to take
responsibility, why should anyone else?
Greg McKenzie
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
call...@sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
End of Callers Digest, Vol 68, Issue 12
***************************************
