[Callers] New dance!

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Kamryn Wisner and I wrote a dance! 

Does it exist? 

“Techno fix” by Kamryn Wisner and Alexandra Deis-Lauby 

A1 N b and swing 
A2 Mad robin, Larks allemande left 1.5 
B1 Partner b and s 
B2 Circle 3/4 balance ring, CA twirl 

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

Re: [Callers] Discussion group for musicians

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Other than the musician shared weight list?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 22, 2019, at 6:06 PM, tom hinds via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know of a discussion list for contra dance musicians?  I used 
> google and didn’t find anything.
> 
> 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] How would you teach this? What would you call it?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Well if you have ecd folks on the floor... 
bottoms star right once around and ease out and pause!  Gents will continue up 
the outside of the set one place as the ladies cast up one place, AND the 1s 
lead down all the way to the bottom. Go!

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 3:49 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Here's a crack at putting the star burst in a duple improper choreography.
> 
> Stellar Star Burst
> Contra/Improper
> 
> A1 ---
> (16) Neighbor gyre and swing
> A2 ---
> (8) Larks/Gents allemande Left 1-1/2
> (8) Partner swing
> B1 ---
> (8) Long lines, forward and back
> (8) Left hand Star 3/4
> B2 ---
> (8) Star Burst: ravens/ladies lead out, curve left; larks/gents lead back in 
> (single progression)
> (8) with new neighbors Right hand Star 1x
> 
> I'm not positive on the timing of B1 & B2. There are a couple of places to 
> adjust it. This assumes giving folks a little extra time for the star burst, 
> with a left hand star 3/4x that probably won't take the full 8 counts. If A2 
> were circle left 3/4 & partner swing. Then B1 becomes long lines forward and 
> back with a left hand star 1 & 1/4; which would compress the starburst into 
> ~6. You could also make it take more time with a double progression (a wider 
> out, loop, and in; although it might be hard to keep track of). The gyre and 
> swing at the A1 is pretty forgiving. 
> 
> I don't know how different the star burst would feel from a poussette; the 
> two are very similar; and the above sequence could be rendered:
> 
> A1 ---
> (16) Neighbor gyre and swing
> A2 ---
> (8) Larks allemande Left 1-1/2
> (8) Partner swing
> B1 ---
> (8) Long lines, forward and back
> (8) Circle Right 3/4
> B2 ---
> (8) Poussette (larks start push) to progress
> (8) With next neighbors Circle Left 1X
> 
> I think I'd rather dance the first one than the second; but I'm not sure it's 
> worth the teaching time.
> 
>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 5:52 PM Angela DeCarlis  wrote:
>> I would probably get everyone into their final positions first before 
>> teaching the move, so's that everyone knows where they'll end up.
>> 
>> After that the language would look something like, "Star Right all the way 
>> around. With your partner and without hands, slide out and away from the 
>> center of the set in the direction that feels comfortable moving out of that 
>> star. Ones move up through the center. Twos and Threes, slide back into the 
>> set into the positions we previewed earlier."
>> 
>> It would be slightly easier to teach if it weren't proper! Then you could 
>> specify who's leading whom for those slides.
>> 
>> I like this move and would like to see a version of it in a duple improper 
>> choreography, please! Sans the folks moving through the center, 
>> unfortunately.
>> 
>> Angela
>> 
>> 
>>> On Thu, Mar 7, 2019, 5:15 PM QuiAnn2 via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
>>> If it isn’t already a defined move it should most definitely be called a 
>>> “star burst”!!
>>> 
>>> Jacqui Grennan
>>> 
 On Mar 7, 2019, at 1:30 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers 
  wrote:
 
 Hi All,
 
 I'm playing around with choreographing triplets, and I've got a sequence 
 that I think would flow well; but I'm not sure how to teach it short of a 
 demo.
 
 The idea is that couples 2 & 3 do a star. Out of that star, they move out, 
 up, and back in; leaving space in the middle for couple 1 to move to the 
 bottom. 
 
 I put together an animation of it:
 https://scratch.mit.edu/projects/292197780/
 
 Is that already a defined move? What would you call it? How would you 
 teach it?
 
 Thanks for your thoughts!
 
 -- 
 Luke Donforth
 luke.donfo...@gmail.com
 ___
 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/
> 
> 
> -- 
> Luke Donforth
> luke.donfo...@gmail.com
> ___
> 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] Who’s in the middle?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Thanks! I want more dances in my box that familiarize folks with dancing with 
all the people even if they aren’t expecting it, but to have that built into 
the dance.  So this is for dance communities that don’t have a lot of swapping 
and aren’t as skilled overall. So on the simpler side (but not boring). 

So things like roger Diggle’s who’s in the middle or simple right handed gents 
chain dances that get folks to do things outside their “normal”, but are still 
pretty easy so they experience success with it. 

Thanks for all the suggestions so far! 

The harder ones are god too though, just for a slightly different purpose. 

A

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 8, 2019, at 3:07 PM, QuiAnn2  wrote:
> 
> Ann Arbor One
> by Al Olson
> Contra/Becket-CW/Easy
> 
> A1 ---
> (8) Star Left 3/4
> (8) NEW N allemande RT to short wavy lines (anyone in middle) <=PROGRESSION
> A2 ---
> (8) Balance and slide to the right (as in Rory O’More)
> (8) Balance and slide to the left (as in Rory O’More)
> B1 ---
> (8) Pull by this N with RH to begin 1/2 Hey (pass Left shoulders in the 
> middle)
> (8) Same N Sw
> B2 ---
> (6) Circle Left 3/4
> (10) P Sw
> 
> 
>> On Mar 8, 2019, at 7:27 AM, Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Anyone have a simple wave dance where it doesn’t matter which role is in the 
>> middle of the wave? 
>> 
>> Kind of like Bob Isaacs’ double your fun but easier. 
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Alex
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> ___
>> 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/

[Callers] Who’s in the middle?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Anyone have a simple wave dance where it doesn’t matter which role is in the 
middle of the wave? 

Kind of like Bob Isaacs’ double your fun but easier. 

Thanks!

Alex


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

Re: [Callers] Name that Dance, part 3312

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

If nils called the first one it might be “have I danced this before?” He wrote 
it. I know if has a two hand turn. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 23, 2019, at 12:50 PM, frannie via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> The second dance is one I called: Kindred Spirits version 2 by Chris Page.  
> Becket starts slide circle do si do to wave. The original dance Kindred 
> Spirits is a petronella version with a N swing. See Chris' website. 
> 
> Twirls,
> Frannie
> 
>> On Sat, Feb 23, 2019, 9:40 AM Maia McCormick via Callers 
>>  wrote:
>> Trying to track down name + author for two deliiightful dances I had at 
>> Dance Flurry, can anyone help?
>> 
>> Dance the first, improper:
>> A1: circle L 1x
>> N two-hand turn 1.5
>> A2: larks alle. L 1.5
>> half hey (P by R)
>> B1: P balance and swing
>> B2: long lines, lark roll partner away
>> circle R 3/4
>> 
>> Dance the second, improper, starts in short waves:
>> A1: bal. wave, spin R
>> N pull by L, ravens chain
>> A2: full hey (ravens by R)
>> B1: P balance and swing
>> B2 ...? (circle L 3, pass thru and dosido I think?)
>> 
>> Thanks all!
>> - Maia
>> ___
>> 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/
___
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

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

In my dance community a proper dance won’t help because everyone dances all the 
roles so training folks to look for certain genders isn’t a good idea (and in 
my opinion never is). Instead, I’d suggest something with short Allemandes 
(half, 3/4) or diagonal waves (dr Blums delight). 

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. 

A

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 20, 2019, at 5:06 PM, Ann Fallon via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi, Hannah
> 
> I like your idea of teaching a proper dance earlier in your program.  If you 
> are going to choose a contra corners dance in which the active couple has to 
> do a half-figure eight to get proper, you might want to teach the half-figure 
> eight in an earlier dance, too.
> 
> Here's a triplet which I also find useful for teaching/learning contra 
> corners.  I am the author, but don't mean to be self-promoting here.
> 
> Microchasmic Triplet
> 
> Proper Formation, all facing partner
> The middle couple is the "active" couple, so there is no need to get them 
> into position before starting the contra corners.
> 
> A1Forward and Back, DSD Partner
> A2Middle couple turn contra corners
> B1ALL balance and swing Partner, end facing up
> B2Top couple lead a cast off to the bottom.   When they reach the bottom 
> they make a two-handed arch and the other two couples go below them and come 
> through the arch.
> 
>  It's a peel the banana, come through the arch figure as in the Virginia 
> Reel. 
> Encourage the dancers to come to the top of their set before casting off to 
> the bottom, or the sets will move too far down the hall. 
> 
> Here's a link to a video.  
> 
> Good luck!
> 
> Ann
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Hannah Chamb via Callers 
> To: callers 
> Sent: Wed, Feb 20, 2019 4:38 pm
> Subject: [Callers] Building to Contra Corners
> 
> Hi all, first time posting here!
> 
> I'm new-ish to calling and I've yet to call contra corners. I think I'm up 
> for the challenge and could teach the figure itself, but I still think it's a 
> tricky one for dancers in all but the most experienced crowds. A few callers 
> I know have advised me to build up to a challenging figure like contra 
> corners over the course of an evening by calling dances that echo the skills 
> the dancers will need later. 
> 
> With that in mind, what dances would you call early in the evening in a 
> mixed-level group that would help "teach" dancers the skills they need to be 
> successful at contra corners? 
> 
> I've been thinking I should include an easy proper-ish dance, and maybe a 
> dance with allemandes outside the minor set... anything else come to mind?
> 
> Thanks in advance, 
> Hannah Chamberlain
> Westbrook, ME
> ___
> 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/
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Fwd: Glossary dances with promenade, no chain/RL through?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Yes! I love the promenade and loop, though I wouldn’t use it early in the 
evening with a bus load of beginners unless the experienced folks were really 
experienced. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2018, at 11:53 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Rich Sbardella 
> Date: Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Glossary dances with promenade, no chain/RL through?
> To: Alexandra Deis-Lauby 
> 
> 
> Alex,
> Old Time Elixir #2 by Linda Leslie and Wrinkled Riccon by Melanie Axel Lute 
> are two great dances.
> Rich
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Alexandra Deis-Lauby 
>>  wrote:
>> I find that there aren’t many dances with a Promenade or RL that are NOT 
>> followed by a circle left. When Dancing promenades to circle lefts, I don’t 
>> like them as an experienced dancer because they don’t feel good and as a 
>> caller I watch new dancers struggle with them because they don’t flow 
>> logically unless the dancers correct for it (which one won’t know how to do 
>> unless they’ve been dancing a very long time and are attuned to momentum.) 
>> Does anyone have dances with promenade or right and left throughs that flow 
>> into the next figure in a logical and satisfying way? 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On Aug 13, 2018, at 11:08 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Maia,
>>> I put one together a couple of years ago.  I tried to make the timing as 
>>> forgiving as possible, thus the Balance the Ring and Pass Thru, instead of 
>>> CL 3/4 & Pass Thru.
>>> 
>>> My Corduroy Blazer (D/I)
>>> 
>>> A1: N DSD, N Swg
>>> A2: Gents Alle L 1-1/2. P Swg
>>> B1: Prom Across, LL
>>> B2: CL 3/4. Bal Ring, Pass Thru
>>> 
>>> Rich Sbardella
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 9:08 PM, Maia McCormick via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
 Hi folks,
 
 Had a busload of beginners at my dance last night and realized I have a 
 hole in my program -- I don't have any good glossary/beginner-friendly 
 dances with a promenade but no chain or RL through. Any suggestions?
 
 Thanks!
 Maia
 
 ___
 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/
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Glossary dances with promenade, no chain/RL through?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

I find that there aren’t many dances with a Promenade or RL that are NOT 
followed by a circle left. When Dancing promenades to circle lefts, I don’t 
like them as an experienced dancer because they don’t feel good and as a caller 
I watch new dancers struggle with them because they don’t flow logically unless 
the dancers correct for it (which one won’t know how to do unless they’ve been 
dancing a very long time and are attuned to momentum.) 
Does anyone have dances with promenade or right and left throughs that flow 
into the next figure in a logical and satisfying way? 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 13, 2018, at 11:08 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hello Maia,
> I put one together a couple of years ago.  I tried to make the timing as 
> forgiving as possible, thus the Balance the Ring and Pass Thru, instead of CL 
> 3/4 & Pass Thru.
> 
> My Corduroy Blazer (D/I)
> 
> A1: N DSD, N Swg
> A2: Gents Alle L 1-1/2. P Swg
> B1: Prom Across, LL
> B2: CL 3/4. Bal Ring, Pass Thru
> 
> Rich Sbardella
> 
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2018 at 9:08 PM, Maia McCormick via Callers 
>  wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> Had a busload of beginners at my dance last night and realized I have a hole 
>> in my program -- I don't have any good glossary/beginner-friendly dances 
>> with a promenade but no chain or RL through. Any suggestions?
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> Maia
>> 
>> ___
>> 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/
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Partial circulate the wave?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

I might say “short circulate”. 

There are some other versions of circulates which are cool. Chris Page has some 
on diagonals as in his dance “kitty corner” 
And bob Isaacs had his 4x4 “circulate 8”. Not. Both very cool.   I’d call your 
new version if it were in a dance! 

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 18, 2018, at 2:10 PM, Bill Olson via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Jack and all, A little off topic, but... Your dance made me remember a 
> dance I wrote back in 2002, "Do Make Waves". here's from my web site: 
> 
> DO MAKE WAVES
>  A duple improper contra by Bill Olson
> 
>   A1:  Star R x 1 to long waves (Right Hand to N, L to previous N. 
> Women are facing in, Men out))(8), Bal Wave(4) (women reach forward to form a 
> wave of women down the center of set while men loop around to right, taking 
> Neighbor's position, facing in), Bal the wave (of Women)(4)*
> 
>   A2: Women reach forward and form a long wave (Right Hand to 
> Partner, L to shadow, W face out) Bal Wave (4) and Swing Partner (12)
> 
>   B1: Circle L 3/4 Sw N (16)
> 
>   B2: Circl L (8), (with same Neighbors) Star L (8) (Look for new N 
> in next Star)
> 
> Notes: *The 3 balances are all done consecutively, that is to say: 
> "balance,2,3,4,balance2,3,4,balance,2,3,4! Needless to say there is little 
> time between balances for the women to drop hands and pick up new ones, and 
> it helps if the balances are more "forward and back" rather than "right and 
> left" so there is some "forward propulsion" going on after each balance! In 
> reality the second and third balances are actually started (feet hit the 
> floor) while the hand change is being made. Here's why I wrote this dance. 
> Every year at NEFFA (New England Folk Festival in Natick, MA), callers are 
> reminded that the dance floors are very crowded and to pay attention NOT to 
> call dances that require a lot of room between sets (since there ISN'T any). 
> I figured I would write a dance that REQUIRED that there be very little room 
> between sets, and this is IT!! My announcement to some Boston area callers of 
> my intention met with great skepticism, but I always DO like to make waves! 
> and the dance works!! Written April 15, 2002.
> 
> 
> This dance has three wave balances, the first two are the same as yours I 
> think, i.e. Balance wave (Men out Women in etc) along the long lines, balance 
> wave of women down the center, BUT no time in between.. (the notes as to 
> "why" heh heh) I called this dance ONE TIME at NEFFA and it worked fine BUT 
> comments after were mostly that it was VERY zesty for the women..
> 
> I am assuming the first wave in A1 is along the long lines.. If so,  4 steps 
> is a LOT of steps to go a pretty short distance.. Maybe I am reading this 
> wrong, in which case I offer the dance as something similar and *different*.
> 
> You might note that when I wrote the dance I had no words "like circulate the 
> wave" in my vocabulary, so I probably just called it what it was, "gents 
> loop, women walk forward" or something like that.. Makes for nice "toung 
> twisters" when actually calling the dance!!
> 
> bill (in Black Fly infested Maine)
> 
> From: Callers  on behalf of Jack 
> Mitchell via Callers 
> Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 6:09 PM
> To: Callers List
> Subject: [Callers] Partial circulate the wave?
>  
> What would you call a circulate like this?  Would it be a partial circulate?  
> Or, in the interest of not adding any more terminology, since only half of 
> the people are going to end up in a wave after each one, would it be better 
> to just say "ladies take 4 steps forward to a long wave of ladies, gents face 
> in", etc?  
> 
> A1Balance Wave
> Circulate (Gents Loop, ladies take 4 steps forward) to a long wave of 
> ladies
>  Balance Wave of Ladies
>  Circulate (ladies walk forward and face in, gents take 4 steps 
> forward) to a long wave of gents
> 
> A2Balance Wave of Gents
>   Gents step forward – N Sw
> 
> -- 
> Jack Mitchell
> Durham, NC
> ___
> 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/

[Callers] Baridhara

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Does anyone call Chris Weiler’s baridhara? 
What kind of music do you ask for? And tempo? 

Here’s the dance. Thanks! 
Baridhara Improper Chris Weiler
A1 Star Right; Neighbor Gypsy 
A2 Circle Single File Left Half (still looking at Neighbor Women lead) (4) 
Neighbor Gypsy (some more) (4); Neighbor Swing 
B1 Give & Take: Women pull Partner back 
B2 Women Chain; Star Left

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

Re: [Callers] freedom

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Thanks Dave! 
I too have that reaction whenever a caller brings up controversy about 
terminology. 

On the flip side, when an older caller tries to adapt pronouns and such without 
making a big deal of it, it’s awesome, even when they make mistakes. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 28, 2018, at 5:29 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Here was my issue, briefly :  I was told to use "walk around" when calling at 
> glen echo.  It also happens that I'm a western square caller and have used 
> "walk around your corner, see saw your taw" for decades.
> 
> It has happened on two occasions when I have mixed up square dance calls from 
> one time period into another or from one tradition to another and have 
> confused the dancers a tad and made them think perhaps I'm an idiot.  
> 
> As far as gypsy is concerned I'd use ANY call as a substitute but not walk 
> around out of fear of saying the wrong thing by habit.  Perhaps it's remote 
> that it would happen but I'm going to avoid looking liking an idiot at all 
> costs!
> 
> Being given that rule by the organizer made my planning for that dance a 
> nightmare.  Do I use dances without gypsies?  I mean it really through a 
> wrench into the way I usually plan because to follow their rule and protect 
> myself I'd have to eliminate far too many good dances to keep from using 
> gypsy.
>  
> And there are more rules that I have to follow or address that I'd rather 
> not, like leaving a couple out at the top when the music ends.
> 
> As far as being sarcastic NO I'm not that kind of person.  I simply thought 
> Ron was being a bully so I wanted to know where he stood.  There are a number 
> of us out there that associate PC with a threat to our freedoms and I'm not a 
> conservative.  Sure I can look up things on the computer and you think I'm 
> being sarcastic because I didn't, but we're different.  I hate computers and 
> only use them when I have to.   I value clear communication and if you 
> carefully read my email you'll see that's what I was asking for.  On several 
> of Ron's emails I see there are a good number of dots that weren't being 
> connected so I wondered what was going on.
> 
> As far as my attitude at Glen Echo is concerned you are reading into it.  If 
> you want to continue this perhaps just between us is the best way.  And here 
> we go, Tom is confused again.  Why are you replying for Ron?
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
>>> >
>>> ___
>>> 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/
>> 
>> ___
>> 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/
___
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?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

In NYC there are more dances now then there ever have been in the past.  They 
are all pretty progressive in Dance roles. Two are gender free and one is not 
but has a significant majority of dancers that dance both roles and lots who 
dance with everyone. 
Attendance fluctuates so it’s hard to tell, but right now we seem to be on a 
slight up taking into account the higher frequency of dances. 

Portland, ME had a thriving gender free dance that as I understand it came 
about as the older, more traditional Dance wound down- maybe someone else with 
more knowledge will jump in. 

The Chicago scene has added two dances in the last year. Their queer dance is 
growing, their regular dance that is very encouraging of people Dancing both 
roles is growing, and the two new series (one revived) are on college campuses. 
 When I was dancing there Several years ago, the groups were less into 
progressive concepts. The groups were smaller.  Correlation? Maybe so. 

Thanks Ron, Louise, Maia and Jen for the thoughtful responses. 


Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 28, 2018, at 2:58 PM, Tom Hinds via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Ron,
> 
> I keep on reading your writing and see that you often give only partial 
> information.  What you write below is interesting:
> 
>> In New England, New York, Seattle, and the Bay Area, many callers have been 
>> examining terminology and changing. Several dance series have gone 
>> genderfree without being specifically chartered as LGBTQ dances. Not 
>> coincidentally, these dances are thriving amidst a decline of attendance of 
>> contra in general.
> 
> My own preference is for you to give more information and not let us fill in 
> the pieces.  For instance in the areas that you list above, was there a 
> decline in attendance while callers were using calls like gypsy and other 
> words like men and women?  If attendance did in fact dip, did it in fact pick 
> up again when alternative words were used? Might be cause and effect or a 
> correlation or simply coincidence.  
> 
> If attendance in these areas have always been strong then perhaps there is 
> something else at work. 
> 
> Ive always expected contra dance to die simply because that's the way it 
> works.  Come on!  Does anyone need me to spell this out?   If you don't 
> believe me, Mr Spock, in one of the Star Trek movies once said, "all things 
> must end" and I think he's pretty smart!
> 
> Ron, I must also ask you about what you wrote below.  It's not perfectly 
> clear and of course nobody is named but my take is that some of us (or 
> me?)have ruined your party by not going along with what you and others want?  
> Perhaps I don't understand.  Would you please care to explain?
> 
>> In the case of this original post, Rich was asking for practical advice, and 
>> there *was no* argument until a couple choice people started throwing shade 
>> at those of us who think changing the lyrics from "she was a young thing" to 
>> "she was a young girl" is an easy swap that doesn't diminish the tradition, 
>> but also reduces the objectification of women.
> 
> What does throwing shade mean?   Does it mean that the sun was shining on you 
> and that someone blocked the sun?  I'm afraid my college degree is from an 
> applied institution so I'd appreciate it if you could keep it simple for me 
> in the future.
> 
> I've had very good conversations with Rich on and off the discussion group 
> and feel that he shares many of my values.  Would you rather that I and 
> others not participate?  Perhaps that is the primary reason that some of us 
> aren't comfortable with PC.  Where does it end and what freedoms am I going 
> to have to give up?  My memory is that this incredible discussion started 
> with a complaint from ONE person.
> 
> Lastly let me suggest this after reading Jeffrey's very good email:  It may 
> be that terms like gypsy (and of course others) are location dependent.  Here 
> in Charlottesville and perhaps DC people don't really care for the gypsy 
> issue.   In other areas perhaps that's not the case.  On the English list 
> people are reminded that folks from many countries are members and that we 
> should keep this in mind.
> 
> You want fries with that?
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Politically Correct?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Often people don’t speak up. It doesn’t mean they like the language. There 
aren’t very many dances that actively solicit feedback and even the ones that 
do don’t get it all the time. There are often callers or phrases that bother 
me. I very occasionally  tell the callers if they are friends of mine or the 
organizers if I know them. Otherwise, I just avoid those dances and callers. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 25, 2018, at 5:48 PM, John Freeman  wrote:
> 
> I have to agree with Tom. The only push back I have ever received was from 
> two female callers I helped get started. This was in the early 90s. I have 
> otherwise never had a complaint about calling singing square dances as they 
> have been traditionally called/sung. 
> 
> That said, I try to know my crowd before I accept a gig. A so-called 
> politically correct dance would likely not be my cup of whiskey. These days I 
> mostly call “barn dances” and "community dances”.  I have learn to adapt my 
> calls to each crowd. This has worked very well for me.
> 
> I only call to live music. This is a long-standing personal choice that has 
> certainly cost me many gigs. These days, I cannot expect most bands to know 
> the music for the singing square dances I grew up with.
> 
> Keep on dancing!
> 
> John B. Freeman, SFTPOCJ
> 
___
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?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

People are not things. I don’t think it’s appropriate for any crowd. 
Try your hand at some new lyrics! 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Mar 25, 2018, at 1:12 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hello folks,
> 
> I have been calling singing squares for years, and there is one I love by 
> Dick Leger titled Billy Boy.  The tag line that is sung during the Promenade 
> is "She's a young thing, that cannot leave her mother."
> 
> Here is a link to a version of the full song, not within a square.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKRJuLHU3Qo
> 
> My question is, is this song appropriate for the contra dance crowd with the 
> tag line above?  (The tag line is the only line that is sung.)
> 
> Any Thoughts?
> 
> Rich
> Stafford, 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] Etiquette of refusing an offer to dance

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

This is Cdny’s etiquette page. It addresses saying no but not in great detail 
in terms of historical practice. 

http://cdny.org/what-is-contra/contra-etiquette/

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 16, 2017, at 2:39 PM, Kalia Kliban via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Those of us who started dancing 2 or 3 decades back probably remember the 
> rule about sitting out the dance if you turn down a partner offer. A very 
> competent male dancer I know who started around the same time I did (late 
> 80s) recently confessed to me that he never asks anyone to dance because he 
> doesn't want to put folks in the position of thinking "If I don't dance with 
> this guy then I have to sit one out.  Oh crap, guess I'll have to dance with 
> him."  For the record, he's a totally solid and delightful dancer.
> 
> To what extent has that earlier etiquette norm either survived or been 
> replaced, and what has it been replaced with?  In your dance community, do 
> you have a written statement of the etiquette around this?  Our community's 
> statement doesn't directly address this issue.
> 
> Kalia
> ___
> 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] New Dance?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

If you find experienced folks do those moves faster, you could swap the ladies 
chain/dosido for a gents chain and do si do and make the facing star 1 1/4. I 
think that would make it clockwise becket.  Amble on west?

Thanks for working to fix that problem. I often wish my box had dances with a 
pousette, or a ricochet, or a mad robin that had no other non-survey figure and 
also had some built in recovery time. 

Alex

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 2, 2017, at 5:50 PM, Angela DeCarlis via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> Thanks all! I have a video uploading to YouTube now of the dance's debut from 
> last night, I'll post it here when it's done. You'll see that the dancers are 
> using up the music for both the poussette and the star, at least in this 
> crowd. Maybe it would be different for other (more advanced?) crowds, but I 
> encouraged everyone to take their time, and it seemed to work out pretty well!
> 
> While I like the dance of Ryan's, Maia, a big part of why I wrote this dance 
> was because I was struggling to find a contra dance that included a pousette 
> and *didn't* included any challenging figures (mad robins, ricochet hey, 
> etc). I thought about including a walk-around before the partner swing, but 
> the connection is already there, so I decided to just go old-school and let 
> the dancers swing their partners for the full 16 beats.
> 
> Angela
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Maia McCormick via Callers 
>>  wrote:
>> Your dance doesn't look familiar to me (for whatever that's worth)--though I 
>> agree with Dugan's point that experienced dancers will take fewer that 8 
>> counts to do that pousette and fewer than 8 counts to turn the star 3/4 
>> (probably a lot fewer!), so it will potentially be a very, very long swing. 
>> If you care, you could potentially get around that by doing a walk-around 
>> and swing to eat up that extra time. Or just leave it and let the dancers 
>> sort it out!
>> 
>> Agreeing with Dugan yet again, I've been calling that figure a "facing 
>> star", which seems to work well and be descriptive.
>> 
>> And if you're itching for a dance with pousettes and facing stars, I 
>> premiered this one of Ryan Carollo's at YDW this weekend and folks seemed to 
>> dig it:
>> Trip to Saratoga by Ryan Carollo || improper
>> A1: half pousette w/ P (gents pull)
>> facing star 1¼ (gents fwd)
>> A2: P walk-around & swing
>> B1: half hey (gents by L), ladies ricochet
>> N swing
>> B2: long lines & gents roll N
>> half pousette w/ P (ladies lead)
>> Ladies be proactive to catch P's hand in B2. B2 pousette should be leisurely 
>> or ppl arrive at A1 early.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Bill Olson via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Mac, Well "Gypsy Star" and "Gypsy Waves" are two other Ravitz dances that 
>>> have the interwoven long wavy lines and the "Gypsy Star", not sure if there 
>>> are more. Probably.. But as long as you brought it up, the problem I found 
>>> that most dancers had with the figures was NOT the Gypsy Star but rather 
>>> the woven waves which, to many, were a little too "intimate" for comfort..  
>>> Just my observation from admittedly a pretty small sample..
>>> 
>>> 
>>> bill
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Callers  on behalf of Mac 
>>> Mckeever via Callers 
>>> Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 8:53 PM
>>> To: Dugan Murphy; callers
>>> 
>>> Subject: Re: [Callers] New Dance?
>>>  
>>> Cary's dance is Woven Waves.  I really liked it and called it several times 
>>> - and I hav also danced it on several occasions
>>> 
>>> I stopped calling it because I was not getting good feedback on the star 
>>> figure from the dancers.
>>> 
>>> Mac McKeever
>>> 
>>> St Louis
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Monday, October 2, 2017, 3:30:07 PM CDT, Bill Olson via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dugan and all, I don't know if Cary Ravitz actually "invented" the Gypsy 
>>> Star but he wrote a dance entitled that and a lot of others that include 
>>> it. Dugan, you're sort of Cary's protégé, right?, so you must know the 
>>> dance. This is the same figure, correct??
>>> 
>>> 
>>> bill
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Callers  on behalf of Dugan 
>>> Murphy via Callers 
>>> Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 8:16 PM
>>> To: callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>>> Subject: Re: [Callers] New Dance?
>>>  
>>> Hi, Angela,
>>> 
>>> I've been calling the figure a "facing star," when I bother naming it at 
>>> all while teaching or prompting it.
>>> 
>>> Also, nice dance, though I suspect that since experienced dancers tend to 
>>> take fewer than eight beats to do half poussettes and 3/4 stars, I suspect 
>>> that dancers may end up swinging for as many as 20 beats.
>>> 
>>> Dugan Murphy
>>> Portland, Maine
>>> dugan at duganmurphy.com
>>> 
>>> DUGAN MURPHY

Re: [Callers] Contra Dances with Modern Western Square Dance Figures

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Bill Olsen called a dance at dawn dance a while ago with a mini-grand square on 
the diagonal. That was cool. I think he wrote it. 

And Kathy A called something at flurry last year with a right and left through 
and then the ladies slide right and across the set to take hands in a short 
wavy line across. It was neat. I think she called it a "right and left by" 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 25, 2017, at 9:07 PM, Jacob or Nancy Bloom via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
> The original 4-face-4 with a Grand Square (and the original 4-face-4 in which 
> the couples changed sides during the course of the dance) was my Grand Square 
> Contra:
> 
> Forward and Back, all swing corner
> Sides face, Grand Square
> Reverse
> Side couples pass thru, Head couples pass thru, all swing partner and face 
> original direction.
> 
> Jacob Bloom
> 
> 
>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Bob Green via Callers 
>>  wrote:
>> I have a 4X4 with a grand square, well...half a grand square called Luke, 
>> Your Not My Father. 
>> http://dancevideos.childgrove.org/contra/contra-modern/491-luke-you-re-not-my-father-by-bob-green-4x4
>> 
>> It is not that challenging. however the dance that inspired it is. Luke 
>> Donforth has one where the grand square is on the diagonal that was the 
>> inspiration for my dance. That dance is deceptively challenging...It makes 
>> keeping your role straight on the grand square take serious concentration. I 
>> don;t remember the name of the dance, perhaps you could contact Luke for it.
>> 
>> Bob Green
>> St. Louis
>> 
>>> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Mark Hillegonds via Callers 
>>>  wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 
>>> I'm preparing for a workshop at a dance weekend in November where the theme 
>>> will be contra dances that incorporate square dance moves.
>>> 
>>> I have a number dances with square thrus and swing thrus and box 
>>> circulates. However, these moves are fairly well known at this point. This 
>>> will be an advanced group of dancers so I'm looking for dances that 
>>> incorporate more unique and sophisicated moves.
>>> 
>>> I know Bob Isaacs has several that quality, with dances that use Spin the 
>>> Top and Spin Chain Exchange the Gears.
>>> 
>>> Looking forward to seeing what you may have.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Mark Hillegonds
>>> 
>>> Cell:  734-756-8441
>>> Email:  mark.hillego...@gmail.com
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> Callers mailing list
>>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> jandnbl...@gmail.com
> http://jacobbloom.net/
> View my Arlington Food Pantry fundraiser at 
> https://www.youcaring.com/arlington-food-pantry-621657
> ___
> 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/

[Callers] Difficult dancers as a caller

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Inspired by Marie's other thread, I wonder what tools callers use when they 
encounter a dance floor with such a dancer, especially if there is only one who 
is having so much difficulty but who leaves confused dancers in their wake. Do 
you call to that dancer? Do you call earlier? Do you adjust your program 
accordingly? Something else? 

Thanks,
Alex


Sent from my iPhone

Re: [Callers] Role term survey responses

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Neal, Can you clarify?  Do you mean that you dance differently depending on
which side you begin the dance on? How does your style change?

Thanks,
Alex

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 10:49 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> I have danced at a bunch of genderfree dances, as well as my home dance
> having a lot of people who dance both roles. I can't say I've ever had this
> "diet contra" experience.
>
> My home dance is widely known among musicians and callers as a lively
> crowd who brings good energy to performers. Proper and improper have little
> relevance, but that doesn't stop a seeming endless supply of new
> choreography being generated and called by various callers. Does it really
> matter if I'm allemanding or swinging with a particular gender? I guess a
> person can still choose to only dance with one gender if they really felt
> strongly.
>
> But saying that genderfree dancing is bland? I mean, it's a folk community
> dance. The whole point is we all dance in one big set together. If dancing
> only to swing people of one gender means so much that contra is "diet"
> without it, I would ask what exactly contra means to you?
>
>
> Best regards,
> Ron Blechner
>
>
>
> On Feb 13, 2017 6:17 PM, "Woody Lane via Callers" <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> I basically agree with Neal. I would not want to replace gents and ladies
> with other arbitrary terms. For many of the same reasons.
>
> Woody
>
> --
> Woody Lane
> Caller, Percussive Dancer
> Roseburg, Oregon
> http://www.woodylanecaller.com
> home: 541-440-1926 <(541)%20440-1926> cell: 541-556-0054
> <(541)%20556-0054>
> --
>
> On 2/13/2017 2:51 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers wrote:
>
> I do not want to replace gent and lady as terms, based on my own
> experience.
>
> Some context: I've been dancing for between 29 and 37 years, depending on
> how you count--my parents met at a square dance and I grew up dancing.  I
> started calling about 18 years ago, and dance/call ECD, Scottish, squares,
> contra, ballroom, and folk styles at varying levels of proficiency.  Seeing
> a man dancing the lady's role, or a woman dancing the gent's role, has
> never, ever phased me.  It's fun to swap, requires technical skill, speaks
> well of a dancer who can do it well stylistically, and sometimes is
> necessary to fill out a set.  It is also an important skill for any caller,
> and one callers need to know how to handle when it happens in special
> situations; the callers I grew up with talked about when they first
> encountered gay or one-gender crowds in the 60s and how they struggled to
> adjust on the fly.
>
> That said, I first encountered "gender-free" dancing at a Heather and Rose
> (?) ECD dance outside of Eugene, Oregon about 15 years ago.  I didn't know
> what I was walking into, and thought it was a normal ECD event until they
> lined up and started teaching.
>
> They used several dances I was familiar with; I had been teaching some
> older ECD dances for a graduate folklore class and recently returned from
> Berea's Christmas Country Dance School.  Aside from momentary confusion,
> adapting to the unfamiliar terminology and random line-up was not a problem
> for me.
>
> What I couldn't adapt to was how being made "gender free" changed the
> character of the dances I knew.  They became less elegant, less
> interesting, and were lessened overall.  Switching between an A and a B
> position meant nothing aside from (possibly) a slightly different floor
> pattern.  Proper and improper had no relevance.  There was no stylistic
> mastery needed to switch dance sides because any clue as to historically
> demanded or intended stylistic differences had been stripped out--there
> weren't even ROLES anymore, merely positions; there was nothing to hold
> onto even as a guideline for playacting.  The dances completely lost their
> flavor and character.  They became like Caffeine Free Diet Crystal Coke.
> (I mean, honestly...WHY WAS THAT EVER MADE?  Just drink water!)
>
> Other folks may certainly disagree with me, and I have followed and agree
> with the many counterpoints, but I personally believe that the terms
> "gentlemen" and "ladies" (and their derivatives) positively influence how
> people behave and relate, and definitely how a dance is done.  I don't
> worry about that at special or family events, of course; I just want
> everyone to get up and have a good time.  But encouraging folks to learn
> both roles to become better dancers is only meaningful if there is a
> meaningful difference between the roles.
>
> I am a happily married man and prefer to dance with women as partners and
> corners.  I don't mind dancing with men, but that's not what I go to dances
> for; if I wanted to get close to a bunch of sweaty guys, I'd play
> football.  If we're honest, we can admit that the vast majority of our
> general dancers (both new and old) are probably similar.  So why not let
> the dance 

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

It seems to come and go

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Jeff Kaufman 
wrote:

> Looking at https://www.facebook.com/ContraChicago and
> http://lcfd.org/queer-contra-dance-chicago.html it looks like the
> Chicago dance is defunct?
>
> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 12:16 PM, Alexandra Deis-Lauby
>  wrote:
> > There's also a gender free LGBTQ dance in Chicago.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Jan 30, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers
> >  wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Donna Hunt 
> wrote:
> >
> > Is there any data
> >
> > that reflects where in the country the LGBTQ gender-free dances are and
> >
> > where the communities that use gender-free terminology are?
> >
> >
> > The gender free dances are split into explicitly LGBTQ ones and ones
> > that are gender free but not explicitly LGBTQ.
> >
> > I believe it's:
> >
> > LGBTQ:
> > * Oakland CA
> > * Aptos CA (camp)
> > * Woodstock CT (camp)
> > * Becket MA (camp)
> > * Boston MA
> > * Montague MA
> > * New York City NY
> >
> > Other gender free:
> > * San Jose CA
> > * Berkeley CA
> > * Hayward CA
> > * Portland ME
> > * Montpelier VT
> > * Amherst MA
> > * New York City (NY)
> > ___
> > Callers mailing list
> > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>

Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

There's also a gender free LGBTQ dance in Chicago. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 30, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers 
>  wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Donna Hunt  wrote:
>> Is there any data
>> that reflects where in the country the LGBTQ gender-free dances are and
>> where the communities that use gender-free terminology are?
> 
> The gender free dances are split into explicitly LGBTQ ones and ones
> that are gender free but not explicitly LGBTQ.
> 
> I believe it's:
> 
> LGBTQ:
> * Oakland CA
> * Aptos CA (camp)
> * Woodstock CT (camp)
> * Becket MA (camp)
> * Boston MA
> * Montague MA
> * New York City NY
> 
> Other gender free:
> * San Jose CA
> * Berkeley CA
> * Hayward CA
> * Portland ME
> * Montpelier VT
> * Amherst MA
> * New York City (NY)
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] tips for teaching dancing the "other" role?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

:)

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 3:36 PM, Dale Wilson  wrote:

> Exactly, it's the hand that confuses me.
> On Jul 6, 2016 1:40 PM, "Alexandra Deis-Lauby" 
> wrote:
>
>> Left hand?
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Dale Wilson via Callers <
>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> When I'm dancing the lady's role the only thing I consciously think
>>> about is putting my right and on the Gent's shoulder as we start to swing.
>>> If I get that right, everything else seems natural (to me).
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:13 PM, tavi merrill via Callers <
>>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
 Regarding swing position: With good frame, differences between the
 roles in giving weight are slight. But not all dancers are accustomed to
 good frame.

 I find a mirrored ballroom hold (both dancers have right hand on the
 other's shoulder blade, left hand on the other's shoulder) offers several
 advantages:
- In general, it's a good hold for dancers to know as it saves
 space in crowded halls.
- It facilitates spinning out from a swing, useful when dancers
 encounter "string of swings" choreography
- It allows both dancers to experience both sides of good frame
 The one challenge is that dancers need to remember which side they are
 ending the swing on, as it removes "pointer hands" from the equation.

 This a bit of a tangent, but related to the chain: If we just called
 gents chains (by either hand! the courtesy turn for a left-hand chain isn't
 REALLY that complicated, folks) more often, role differences WRT chain
 would be a moot issue, and both roles would be better equipped to
 understand/offer/ask/decline flourishes. All for the effort of teaching one
 move well, one move that's out there in good choreography waiting to be
 used.

 Susan, I'm assuming this workshop is at a gender-free series, but
 geared to encourage attendance by dancers who aren't yet accustomed to
 gender-free dance? Having danced both roles widely and called a bit of
 gender-free, I'd be happy to chat by phone or IM. Feel free to ping me on
 facebook - Tavi Merrill



 On 7/5/2016 11:32 AM, Susan Pleck via Callers wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I'm to lead a workshop/extended intro lesson at a local dance this
> > Saturday on gender-free dancing/dancing the "other" role/switching
> > roles.  Not having done this before, I'd appreciate any thoughts or
> > advice about what this should include.  For the gender-free aspect,
> > I'm not sure there's much to discuss, really; ir'd be more just
> giving
> > dancers a chance to practice responding to different terms.  For
> > dancing the other role, though, what points of emphasis do you think
> > would be most useful?  Two that come to mind are swing
> > positioning/giving weight, and figures such as a chain where the
> > actions of the two roles are different.
>
>
 ___
 Callers mailing list
 Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
 http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Turn Observation into Data. Turn Data into Information
>>> . Turn Information into
>>> Knowledge. Turn Knowledge into Wisdom. Turn Wisdom into Beauty. Turn Beauty
>>> into Love .
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Callers mailing list
>>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: [Callers] tips for teaching dancing the "other" role?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Left hand?

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Dale Wilson via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> When I'm dancing the lady's role the only thing I consciously think about
> is putting my right and on the Gent's shoulder as we start to swing.  If I
> get that right, everything else seems natural (to me).
>
> Dale
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 9:13 PM, tavi merrill via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Regarding swing position: With good frame, differences between the roles
>> in giving weight are slight. But not all dancers are accustomed to good
>> frame.
>>
>> I find a mirrored ballroom hold (both dancers have right hand on the
>> other's shoulder blade, left hand on the other's shoulder) offers several
>> advantages:
>>- In general, it's a good hold for dancers to know as it saves
>> space in crowded halls.
>>- It facilitates spinning out from a swing, useful when dancers
>> encounter "string of swings" choreography
>>- It allows both dancers to experience both sides of good frame
>> The one challenge is that dancers need to remember which side they are
>> ending the swing on, as it removes "pointer hands" from the equation.
>>
>> This a bit of a tangent, but related to the chain: If we just called
>> gents chains (by either hand! the courtesy turn for a left-hand chain isn't
>> REALLY that complicated, folks) more often, role differences WRT chain
>> would be a moot issue, and both roles would be better equipped to
>> understand/offer/ask/decline flourishes. All for the effort of teaching one
>> move well, one move that's out there in good choreography waiting to be
>> used.
>>
>> Susan, I'm assuming this workshop is at a gender-free series, but geared
>> to encourage attendance by dancers who aren't yet accustomed to gender-free
>> dance? Having danced both roles widely and called a bit of gender-free, I'd
>> be happy to chat by phone or IM. Feel free to ping me on facebook - Tavi
>> Merrill
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/5/2016 11:32 AM, Susan Pleck via Callers wrote:
>>> > Hi folks,
>>> >
>>> > I'm to lead a workshop/extended intro lesson at a local dance this
>>> > Saturday on gender-free dancing/dancing the "other" role/switching
>>> > roles.  Not having done this before, I'd appreciate any thoughts or
>>> > advice about what this should include.  For the gender-free aspect,
>>> > I'm not sure there's much to discuss, really; ir'd be more just giving
>>> > dancers a chance to practice responding to different terms.  For
>>> > dancing the other role, though, what points of emphasis do you think
>>> > would be most useful?  Two that come to mind are swing
>>> > positioning/giving weight, and figures such as a chain where the
>>> > actions of the two roles are different.
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Turn Observation into Data. Turn Data into Information
> . Turn Information into
> Knowledge. Turn Knowledge into Wisdom. Turn Wisdom into Beauty. Turn Beauty
> into Love .
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] tips for teaching dancing the "other" role?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Everything Maia said!

Also, if you find you are teaching to people who are doing well with both
roles, and want to learn when they can switch within a dance other than in
a swing, the easiest places are in Long lines if one is across from your
partner, (do like a hole-in-the wall gypsy), in Long lines, if one is next
to your partner (add a roll away) and then adding or subtracting a 1/2 turn
in an allemande or do si do w/ partner.

I would also remind dancers that all flourishes are offers and should feel
like offers, and dancers should talk about flourishes with their partner
and whether or not they would like any.

Have fun!

A


On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Maia McCormick via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> I find that a lot of people who have danced mostly the gent's role, when
> they start dancing the lady's role, think that when they swing, they're
> supposed to go backwards or sorta sideways... I mean, hell, a lot of people
> think that's how a lady swings when they first start dancing that role!
> But, I emphasize that you're both walking (or buzz-stepping) *forward*,
> roughly aiming at a point over your partner's shoulder. In fact, *the
> footwork for a swing for both roles is exactly the same!!!* A good way to
> emphasize this might be to have participants do a gender-neutral swing
> (e.g. right hand on shoulder blade, left hand clasped with partner above
> the heads) and then change the hand position into your classic ballroom
> swing (perhaps even trying out ballroom position with person A leading,
> then with person B leading) and noting how the footwork stays the same.
>
> Ending the swing on the opposite side also takes some getting used to.
> Instead of emphasizing which role ends where ("gent ends on the left... oh
> god, am I the gent??"), I find it useful to talk about ending the swing
> with the "pointy end" pointing in the direction you want to be facing, and
> releasing from there--works for both roles, so no scrambling to remember
> what role you're dancing and what side you're supposed to end up on.
>
> You might lean towards selecting dances where tricky gendered stuff (e.g.
> the courtesy turn, which many people will be learning for the first time in
> their new role) happens with a neighbor. If it happens that you and your
> partner are both confused about how to do a courtesy turn in your new role
> and the only courtesy turns happen with your partner, you're not going to
> get any help.
>
> Lastly (and this is something that I urge all you folks on the
> listserv to do, even if you're not calling specifically gender-neutral
> dances): use gender-neutral language to describe the roles! I find this
> every effective for breaking down role gender expectations, even if the
> role names themselves are gendered. So rather than "gents, take that
> neighbor lady and scoop her around in a courtesy turn", say, "scoop *them* 
> around
> in a courtesy turn".
>
> Good luck! Let us know how it goes, and what did or didn't work well!
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
>
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Chris Page via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> One subtle thing that's different is progression instincts -- typically
>> men's
>> role progress on the left, women's on the right. (Like with a final B2
>> of circle left 3/4, pass through).
>>
>>
>> The few times I've had everyone do a gender swap, I've gone with the
>> dance "Bicoastal Contra" by Pete Campbell.
>>
>>
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/2008-April/009516.html
>>
>> Two swings, one courtesy turn, a men's allemande, fairly simple
>> choreography -- and neither swing need end with the correct person on
>> the right.
>>
>> -Chris Page
>> San Diego, CA
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Susan Pleck via Callers
>>  wrote:
>> > Hi folks,
>> >
>> > I'm to lead a workshop/extended intro lesson at a local dance this
>> Saturday
>> > on gender-free dancing/dancing the "other" role/switching roles.  Not
>> having
>> > done this before, I'd appreciate any thoughts or advice about what this
>> > should include.  For the gender-free aspect, I'm not sure there's much
>> to
>> > discuss, really; ir'd be more just giving dancers a chance to practice
>> > responding to different terms.  For dancing the other role, though, what
>> > points of emphasis do you think would be most useful?  Two that come to
>> mind
>> > are swing positioning/giving weight, and figures such as a chain where
>> the
>> > actions of the two roles are different.
>> >
>> > thank you!
>> > Susan Pleck
>> > Oakland, CA
>> >
>> > ___
>> > Callers mailing list
>> > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>> >
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> 

Re: [Callers] Grand Square in a contra?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Oooh! Bill Olson called a dance a little like that at Dawn dance last time
he called. It was cool.

Alex

On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> Several years ago (2013?) while at the fabulous DEFFA festival in Maine, I
> danced a contra that had a grand square. I think it was on the diagonal.
>
> But that's about all I remember about it.
>
> Anyone know the dance? Or can give me more of a lead like the caller or
> such?
>
> I don't think it was a 4x4. I'm not sure if it had the full 16 beats one
> way, then reverse and 16 beats the other way; because that'd be half the
> dance...
>
> Now that I'm thinking about it, as a 4x4 with a full grand square and
> still following somewhat typical 4x4 conventions:
>
> A1
> Lines of 4 go forward and back
> Corner Swing
> A2
> Grand Square: Heads start forward, sides split
> B1
> Reverse: sides start forward, heads split
> B2
>
>- Option 1: Heads pass straight through, sides pass straight through;
>find partner
>- Option 2: Pass new corner right, next left; find partner
>- Option 3: Gents left hand star promenade with corner, ladies go
>~1/2, turn back to partner
>
> partner swing, face line of direction
>
> I'm now really confident it wasn't a 4x4 contra, but I still don't
> remember what it was. Any help would be appreciated.
>
> If I can't find it I may try it as a 4x4, but it seems like you'd be
> further ahead with a simple square to have a little more variety than just
> grand square and two swings...
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Dolphin Heys in contra dances

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Nice!  I love Dolphin heys!

As an aside, I was thinking how great it would be if contra dancers had hey
for 3s in their rep so they could more easily adapt a dance if one of their
hands-four dropped out for some reason.  Then the other couple wouldn't
have to go to the bottom.  Kind of like when at the end of a 4 x 4 people
do it with just the 4 dancers.

A

On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I'm sharing a link to a pod of dances I recently wrote:
> http://www.madrobincallers.org/2016/06/13/dolphinheys/
> rather than putting all 5 and the descriptions up here. I'll put one at
> the bottom.
>
> I was at the English Country Dance in Brattleboro before the Dawn Dance,
> and Nikki Herbst called a dance with a dolphin hey; and it was such fun I
> decided to write contra dances with it.
>
> For those of you (like recently me) not familiar with a dolphin hey, it's
> 4 people doing a hey for 3; with the 1s acting as a unit and trading leads
> (like a school of fish) when the reach either end and loop back in. For
> instance, at 1:32 in this lovely video of Sapphire Sea:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-8LyExynvA
>
> ​I don't have video of the contra dances (although I have called a couple
> of them at contras and they've worked).​
>
> ​Also, if you just search Dolphin Hey on google, you find:​
>
> ​​
> ​Which, given how much time I've spent navel gazing about the move, I
> admit to thinking is hilarious. ​
>
> My favorite
> ​(so far) of the 5 I've written is below. I'm curious if anyone else has
> already ported this move from ECD into contra.
>
> Enjoy:​
>
>
> Kinematic Dolphin Vorticity
> Luke Donforth
> Type: Contra
> Formation: Duple-Improper
>
> A1 ---
> (8) Long lines, forward and back
> (8) 2s hand cast the 1s down through the middle to a line of 4
> 1s turn to face lady 2
> A2 ---
> (16) Dolphin hey for 3, 1s (gent starting in lead) pass lady 2 by left
> 7 changes, until at gents home side with partner second time
> B1 ---
> (16) Partner gypsy and swing
> B2 ---
> (6) Circle Left 3/4
> (10) Swing neighbor
>
> Notes: The dancers will probably get to the partner gypsy a little early.
> They can get a little more gypsy, or swoop wideley on the hey.
>
> Other Notes: The title comes from Carol Ormand’s Kinematic Vorticity,
> which has the same A1 and B2. ​
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> calling.l...@gmail.com
> 
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

[Callers] Simple Revolving door dances?

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

Anyone have any beginner or intermediate revolving door dances?

Thanks,

Alex

[Callers] Easy petronella with long lines

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

I've had a request for a dance for a flash mob that has petronellas, Long
lines, and if possible, a do si do.  Most of the people learning it are
folk dancers but not contra dancers.
Does such dance exist?

Thanks in advance!

Alex

Re: [Callers] Becket Formation

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

If confronted with that bias again, one could always point out that many
improper dances if started in the b section instead, become Becket dances
and vice versa.

On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Actually, I can see this.
>
> As others suggested, it is probably a matter of the couple's prior poor
> experiences with dances in Beckets.  That said, there are two fairly common
> tendencies in Becket formation choreography which are somewhat aggravating
> and another which absolutely drives me up a wall.  Other callers and
> dancers don't seem to mind so much, but were it possible I would completely
> avoid the dances which have the last one.
>
> 1. The first tendency has to do with diagonal figures, even though I like
> them myself.  They are often scrunched and uncomfortable, particularly
> right and left throughs; people run into each other.  Add to this the
> slight disorientation for someone not used to diagonal figures, and it can
> be unpleasant.  In a nice open hall, they're perfectly fine.  Not a problem
> so much with the formation as with the fact that everyone is in the middle
> all at once and it's confusing.
>
> 2. The second is what I like to call the "DeBecketize Manuever."  How many
> beckets start with, "Circle left 3/4 (and usually swing your neighbor" and
> end with "Partner swing on the side!"  (answer: TOO MANY)  If all you are
> going to do with the first move is take the dance out of Becket, it seems
> like a cheap trick done just to make the dance "different."  Again, not an
> inherent problem of the formation, just a problem of choreographic
> selection.
>
> 3. The third choreographic tendency is often tied to dances which feature
> swings at the end of the dance: *partial or non progression*.This
> problem, unlike the others, is actually made possible because of the
> formation: such a difficulty isn't possible in a regular duple minor, and
> it drives me absolutely NUTS.  I have experienced a number of dances in
> which the caller instructs the dancers to "fudge" or "maneuver" or "sludge"
> or some such to make the dance work.  The contra doesn't actually progress
> the couples down the line, but leaves them 1/2 progressed or
> non-progressed--usually swinging partners on the outside, but not always.
> Sliding up the outside from a circle is one thing; swinging on the outside
> and fudging down the hall is another.
>
> The annoyance of a non-progression can be mitigated if the caller teaches
> it well (end facing across, look left and...), but to me the partial
> progression problem always jars and simply seems to be excessively lazy
> choreography.
> Beak
>
> Neal Schlein
> Youth Services Librarian, Mahomet Public Library
>
>
> Currently reading: *The Different Girl* by Gordon Dahlquist
> Currently learning: How to set up an automated email system.
>
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 6:26 PM, John W Gintell via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> My favorite progression requires Becket  formation: circle left and then
>> slide up/down and circle with the next pair.
>>
>>
>> > On Dec 10, 2015, at 6:43 PM, Greg Allan via Callers <
>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > That is a somewhat familiar story from my point of view. I dance in a
>> number of different folk dancing communities - a varied program here in
>> Winnipeg. It's quite common, as people from one group attempt to get
>> interest from other dancing groups, that some people know what they like
>> and what they don't like, and that's that. For example, people who English
>> country dance often don't like contra because of the increased exertion and
>> tempo. Personally, I'm not much of a fan of triple minor dances. Everyone's
>> got their thing. But there's always a reason for it. It could be a bad
>> experience, or it could be a stylistic feature of a region, where everyone
>> does a figure in a way you find unpleasant. Hard to say. To leave an event
>> because someone programmed something you didn't like? ... I'm not sure to
>> make of it. You don't like it you don't like it, I suppose.
>> >
>> > We don't do Becket formation here at all, really. If someone left at
>> the end of a night because of Becket formation, I would assume they didn't
>> want to start learning new things late in the evening.
>> >
>> > Greg
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ___
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>

Re: [Callers] Suggestions welcome

[Alexandra Deis-Lauby via Callers]

If you get mostly advanced square dancers, Bill Olson called a great contra
at Brattleboro that had a mini-grand square on the diagonal. It was cool!
You sacrifice the neighbor swing I think, but it was a cool figure.

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 1:52 PM, Aahz Maruch via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015, Michael Barraclough via Callers wrote:
> >
> > The regular Phoenix 2nd Saturday Contra is having a contra dance with
> > the Desert Valley Squares Club (an LGBT MWSD group). In addition, the
> > Desert Valley Squares have been advertising this dance heavily in the
> > local LGBT community as part of their recruitment drive.
> >
> > Any suggestions as to how best to handle this mix (regular contra
> > dancers, MSWD dancers and non-dancers) would be most welcome.
>
> I'd do one, maybe two MWSD tips as demos (assuming you call MWSD).
> Otherwise, treat basically the same as any other contra night that has
> lots of beginners (maybe with more mixers).  The square dancers will be
> more experienced than the non-dancers, but they will struggle a bit with
> the differences in styling and the phrasing focus (unless they've had
> previous contra experience).
>
> If you have a chance ahead of time, maybe rehearse contra-style buzz-step
> swing with the square dancers (definitely make clear that they can do a
> walking swing instead).
>
> You might want to send this to the square dance club, it explains how
> contra dances work from a square dancer perspective:
>
> http://www.tiac.net/~mabaker/how-contra-dances-work.html
>
> Because gay MWSD almost exclusively uses gendered terminology to
> interoperate with straight squares, your choice whether to make this a
> gender-free dance (I'd consult with the club).
>
> You might ping Kris Jensen (gay square caller in ABQ who also does
> contra), she may have specific suggestions due to some familiarity with
> Desert Valley.
>
> http://krisjensen.com/
> k...@squarez.com
> --
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
>   <*>   <*>   <*>
> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>