Responsibility of Dance Organizers- was Re: Is Contra Corners...
Alan R Gedance
To reply, remove the r in my email name to make it agedance-
On 22 Nov 1997, David Guertin wrote:
> "Paul" == Paul J Stamler <psta...@crl2.crl.com> writes:
>
> Paul> But the last time a caller in this town tried to call a
> Paul> triple, he was booed by a small but noisy faction.
>
> Actually *booed*?! Wow, granted, I don't get out to as many dances as
> I'd like these days, but I don't think I've ever heard actual booing
> at a dance. Private grumbling, yes, but not anything so loud.
>
> I wonder if this is just a random group of ill-mannered dancers or
> indicative of some kind of trend.
It appears to be a trend, and part of a larger phenomenon. Many
dancers these days seem to be operating on the basis that the dancing
is at most secondary to very personal and very immediate fun, extended
at most to their partners, and sometimes not even that far. It
doesn't seem to occur to these people that the fun of the dance should
be extended to the other dancers as well, and that contra dancing is
about a roomful of dancers all dancing _together_, not merely all
doing their own things at more or less the same time with little
regard for anyone else on the floor.
We all now regularly see "experienced" dancers exhibit impatience with
walkthroughs even when many beginners are present. In unequal dances
we see the inactives swing in the center when the actives are
swinging, or we see them leap across the set to swing their partners
on the side. We see some swinging so wildly as to put their neighbors
at risk. We see many for whom dancing in time to the music is a
foreign notion.
When this sort of thoughtless (or even rude) behavior occurs regularly
at a dance venue, there's enough blame to spread around- to the
organizers, who should be setting the standards for the venue, to
callers when they don't make the programs fit the venue and when they
don't instruct well, and to all of us on the floor who are willing to
put up with the rudeness around us without any comment.
Having now smeared a bit of blame on us all, I'll focus a bit more
closely. As long as dance organizers advertise the dances as "Anyone
can do it, fun for all, all are welcome" and then don't follow it up
with any effort at all to set the tone of what actually happens on the
dance floor, then what else can be expected?
In the booing incident described by Paul, a number of questions can be
raised. First, did the organizers know that their dancers had such
antipathy toward triple minors, or anything other particular kinds of
dances? If so, it would have been a matter of simple common sense and
courtesy to inform the caller far enough in advance of the gig to
enable a suitable program to be prepared. Second, was the caller
well-prepared and doing a good job, or did he mess up
badly? Third, were the organizers following any sort of program to
acquaint the dancers with a wide variety of dances, and were they
doing anything to encourage improvement in ability? Were they
selectively hiring good, well-prepared callers? And finally, when the
event happened, did any organizer have the guts to take the microphone
and politely, but directly, inform the rude dancers that since they
were so dissatisfied with the program they were welcome to leave to
seek another dance venue better suited to them? If it was early in
the evening, an offer of money back at the door would have been a
salutary move.
No matter how you view the incident, if the organizers did nothing
either to make such a situation unlikely, or if they did nothing _then
and there_ to control the situation, then the they were at fault, and
similar situations are likely to happen there again.
Alan
Don Talley
Alan writes:
>
.... Many
> dancers these days seem to be operating on the basis that the dancing
> is at most secondary to very personal and very immediate fun, extended
> at most to their partners, and sometimes not even that far. It
> doesn't seem to occur to these people that the fun of the dance should
> be extended to the other dancers as well, and that contra dancing is
> about a roomful of dancers all dancing _together_, not merely all
> doing their own things at more or less the same time with little
> we see the inactives swing in the center when the actives are
> swinging, or we see them leap across the set to swing their partners
> on the side. We see some swinging so wildly as to put their neighbors
> at risk. We see many for whom dancing in time to the music is a
> foreign notion.
>
I couldn't agree more. Alan has hit the nail right on the head.
I began dancing in the mid-eighties, and now at age 39,
I am beginning to feel like an old fogey as I find myself
thinking ,"why can't these kids dance like we did back
in the good old days". I try to deal with my nostalgic cynicism
by telling myself that the folk process always involves
changes in styles and tastes in music and dance forms. After
all, at one time, all improper dances were considered "modern
adaptations" and frowned upon by earlier generations.
However, I truly feel that the timeless beauty and joy in
Contra Dance comes from the fact that
1) it is a 'group' activity where everyone in your contra line
is dancing together as a unit rather than just to please
themselves.
2) the movements of the participants are intended to be closely
intertwined with the beats/phrasing of the music.
3) the dance is intended to flow from one movement to the next,
from one foursome to the next, from one phrase of the music
to the next
Within this "structure", there is still lots of room for creativity and
personal expression. In fact, having a couple of simple structural
boundaries (such as the three items above) gives one enormous freedom
to "develop a personal style" while at the same time contributing
to everyone else's mutual enjoyment. Contra Dancing in it's traditional
format does not exclude being expressive, harmless flirting, and
general "cutting up" during the course of the dance. It simply
means doing these things while at the same time paying attention to
the bigger picture of dancing with the whole line, dancing with the
music, and doing the little things to make the dance flow.
Pardon me for waxing philosophical for a moment, but I wonder if the
current trends in contra dance are reflective of trends in modern
society
as a whole. We are not used to "being still" or "inactive". We feel
that we have to be constantly moving. We don't like putting the energy
into working as a group and find it easier to "do our own thing". We
don't care for anyting that smacks of rules or structure even when
they make things easier on us.
Oh well, enought of that.
Don Talley
DTa...@cheta.net
Mary Beth Goodman
> However, I truly feel that the timeless beauty and joy in
> Contra Dance comes from the fact that
> 1) it is a 'group' activity where everyone in your contra line
> is dancing together as a unit rather than just to please
> themselves.
> 2) the movements of the participants are intended to be closely
> intertwined with the beats/phrasing of the music.
> 3) the dance is intended to flow from one movement to the next,
> from one foursome to the next, from one phrase of the music
> to the next
ooooh whatta concept (or 2 or 3)
you're not the only person who has felt like an old fogey out there. The
old timers who were still dancing when I started in the early 80's were
kind of muttering about us!
But seriously, I think the above is a FABULOUS summary of what makes contra
dancing exciting and long lasting. There will always be some muttering
about CHANGE - new dances, new faces, new styles. But the things that
remain the same (see above) connect one generation of dancers to the next.
And this is from someone who stopped going when I didn't find these things
there anymore.
Mary Beth
mc...@vms.cis.pitt.edu
In article <347A01...@cheta.net>, Don Talley <DTa...@cheta.net> writes:
> Alan writes:
>>
> .... Many
>> dancers these days seem to be operating on the basis that the dancing
Not too long ago a freind of mine was complaining that kids had run through
his carefully collected piles of leaves on the street in front of his home.
It WAS discourteous of them. My freind claimed with a perfectly straight
face:
"We never used to do that sort of thing when I was a kid."
I howled with laughter. The look on his face showed me that he did not intend
that line to be a joke: we were NOT amused. Oh, well, hummm, I guess we're
old fogies now.
Here are some of the fine old ways that were around when I started dancing that
seem to be somewhat disappearing due to our disrespect of our roots:
Do you remember dancing in a set where half the people reeked of
pot and were uncontrollably giggling? Do you remember that
they were the GOOD dancers? ?;-)
Do you remember young women whose idea of giving weight in a swing
was slamming herself as hard as she could against the man's right
hand? Do you remeber how many of the dancers were like this?
Do you remember the "swing on the gate" allamand, where both people
leaned back as far as they could?
Our sense of community and belonging was very strong because all the
dancers were JUST LIKE US !!! (except maybe a few that were really
weird, like being 50 years old or something, mostly old
communists ;).
Do you remember whole squares that did "crack the whip" movements
whenever they circled? Do you remember this happening about half
the night?
Do you remember dance weekends where there was a small group of
people that took LSD on saturday night? (extra credit if that
"small group of people" was also known as "the organizing
committee.")
Do you remember that, when the dances were largely people in their
twenties, a dominant part of the "community" was people looking for
sex partners?
THESE DAYS DANCERS JUST DO NOT RESPECT THESE TRADITIONS ! !
Our problems now are different from our problems 20 years ago.
Maybe we should avoid these "dancers today..." threads.
Michael Young
Pittsburgh, PA
Joe Niemczura
and I enjoy this newsgroup - let's not take oursleves too seriously!!!
--
**** jos...@acadia.net
**** Joe Niemczura
**** (n'yem - CHOOR - ah)
**** (207) 667 0260 (h)
Barbara Malkiel
> And finally, when the
> event happened, did any organizer have the guts to take the microphone
> and politely, but directly, inform the rude dancers that since they
> were so dissatisfied with the program they were welcome to leave to
> seek another dance venue better suited to them? If it was early in
> the evening, an offer of money back at the door would have been a
> salutary move.
Recently a caller from Kentucky came to call the Glen Echo dance. When he
announced that the first dance was a circle dance, the dancers that had
already lined up for a contra dance grumbled. I was very glad that the
park ranger, who is a dancer, raised the consciousness of
the crowd in
quite an appropriate way, saying that as dancers, we should welcome the
inclusion of traditions from other dance communities, to enrich our
dancing experience. I thought that was a wonderful way of
addressing the rude behavior and enlightening us all.
Barbara
> Alan
>
>
Nancy Mamlin
In article <Pine.SOL.3.96.97113...@umabnet.ab.umd.edu>, Barbara Malkiel <bmal...@umabnet.ab.umd.edu> wrote:
>> And finally, when the
>> event happened, did any organizer have the guts to take the microphone
>> and politely, but directly, inform the rude dancers that since they
>> were so dissatisfied with the program they were welcome to leave to
>> seek another dance venue better suited to them? If it was early in
>> the evening, an offer of money back at the door would have been a
>> salutary move.
Once upon a time, in a life I used to live, I organized one of the series of
dances at Glen Echo.(Someday I may share my philosophy of balancing programs
in a "melting pot" community) For one particular dance, I had hired Dolores
Heagy, who only calls square dances. (Hey- if you call them that well, why do
anything else?) The band that evening was the Red Mules from the NE Ohio area.
Anyway, the dance was publicized in advance as being an "all-squares" evening,
and I also put it on the the white board so people would see it as they came
in. (I wanted to keep the riff-raff out. :) Anyway, one woman came in who had
been in my beginning contra/square dance classes (mostly contra-oriented)
several months earlier. (These were classes sponsored by the other dance
organization and I taught a month series for them). The point is, I knew that
this woman had very little experience with squares. Therefore, when she came
in and said "Oh, I don't like squares!" I knew that she was just repeating
what she had been told by various snobs in the community. I told her that she
should give them a try, that she could come in and dance the first two dances,
and then, if she wanted to stay, could come back to the table and pay. I have
no idea whether or not we ever made our $5 that night from her, but she was
still dancing in the second half of the evening!
>Recently a caller from Kentucky came to call the Glen Echo dance. When he
>announced that the first dance was a circle dance, the dancers that had
>already lined up for a contra dance grumbled.
I have called at Glen Echo, and surrounding areas, many times. Those folks who
line up for the first contra know me. I ALWAYS call a circle dance for the
first dance. They ALWAYS are lined up for a contra, no matter what clever
trick I pull to get them to do otherwise (like going to each person while the
sound is still being set up and saying, "We will start in a big circle this
evening.")
Whether or not they grumble I have no idea. I have, however, noticed that they
continue to dance whether or not they grumble about the shape they have to
stand in to do it. That way, I figure their rude behavior can shorten their
life, and not mine.
I was very glad that the
>park ranger, who is a dancer, raised the consciousness of
>the crowd in
>quite an appropriate way, saying that as dancers, we should welcome the
>inclusion of traditions from other dance communities, to enrich our
>dancing experience. I thought that was a wonderful way of
>addressing the rude behavior and enlightening us all.
Stan was correct in doing this, and I know that he and the other organizers of
that dance have also spoken to individuals about their attitudes on ocassion-
they are "intolerant of intolerance", in other words. Besides, of the mix of
stuff that happens at contra and square dances across the country, which part
would be considered "traditional" in DC? (I have a real answer to this, btw,
which I don't think would make the regular dancers there very satisfied.)
So much more to say, but I'll leave it at that for now.
Nancy Mamlin
leda shapiro
In a previous article, maml...@appstate.edu (Nancy Mamlin) says:
>
> I was very glad that the
>>park ranger, who is a dancer, raised the consciousness of
>>the crowd in
>>quite an appropriate way, saying that as dancers, we should welcome the
>>inclusion of traditions from other dance communities, to enrich our
>>dancing experience. I thought that was a wonderful way of
>>addressing the rude behavior and enlightening us all.
>
>Stan was correct in doing this, and I know that he and the other organizers of
>that dance have also spoken to individuals about their attitudes on ocassion-
>they are "intolerant of intolerance", in other words. Besides, of the mix of
>stuff that happens at contra and square dances across the country, which part
>would be considered "traditional" in DC? (I have a real answer to this, btw,
>which I don't think would make the regular dancers there very satisfied.)
What is this answer, Nancy
>
and , if you forgive the digression..
I recently called in Glen Echo, which seems to have one of the
largest (if not the) attendance
regularly at a weekly dance series. The only thing I noticed to be
substanially different than any otherplace I have danced is the hour long
lesson prior to the dance. This is quite unlike the 20-30 minute summary
we do before our dances. Both this and the push toward inclusive behavior
(I called at the Friday night dance) seems to be related??
What do others think who dance or call there???
Leda
P.S. There were some dancers who asked about the book California Twirls
and the email address I gave it turns out, is not the correct one. Please
email me if anyone else wants this book.
--
Nancy Mamlin
In article <1997Dec8.0...@lafn.org>, ac...@lafn.org (leda shapiro) wrote:
>
>In a previous article, maml...@appstate.edu (Nancy Mamlin) says:
>
>>Stan was correct in doing this, and I know that he and the other organizers of
>
>>that dance have also spoken to individuals about their attitudes on ocassion-
>>they are "intolerant of intolerance", in other words. Besides, of the mix of
>>stuff that happens at contra and square dances across the country, which part
>>would be considered "traditional" in DC? (I have a real answer to this, btw,
>>which I don't think would make the regular dancers there very satisfied.)
>
>What is this answer, Nancy
Well- and this is just my semi-informed opinion- I'd say that dances done in
four-couple square formations are probably more traditional to N.VA. and MD.
Isn't the contra formation from New England? Some folks down here think of DC
as "North", but that's really only in attitude, not geography. Actually, when
I lived there, I sensed the "Southerness" of the place compared to where I had
spent the previous 20 years.
On the other hand, DC has been the country's melting pot since about the
beginning....
>>
>and , if you forgive the digression..
>I recently called in Glen Echo, which seems to have one of the
>largest (if not the) attendance
>regularly at a weekly dance series. The only thing I noticed to be
>substanially different than any otherplace I have danced is the hour long
>lesson prior to the dance. This is quite unlike the 20-30 minute summary
>we do before our dances. Both this and the push toward inclusive behavior
>(I called at the Friday night dance) seems to be related??
>
>What do others think who dance or call there???
The hour-long lesson you witnessed was part of a "lesson series"- folks sign
up to take a month of lessons and they're taught by various local callers.
(Though last time I was there a non-caller was teaching. Very bad idea, I
think- you need someone to explain the music/dance connection...)
Yes, the Friday Night Dance is one of the largest. I don't like the
lesson-before-the dance idea in general, but for someone who is a newcomer, I
think taking those lessons could be reassuring. It also decreases the chances
of those folks picking up bad habits (unless the teacher has them). The reason
I don't like those before-the-dance-lessons, btw, is that it can promote more
exclusivity- the idea that somehow this is a difficult thing that needs more
instruction than the caller will provide. But, I teach them when I'm asked to,
just the same.
In answer to your last question- I started dancing there probably four times a
year for a few years before I moved there. I lived in the area for 6 years,
and called, danced, and played there during that time. Since leaving, I have
called and played there. So- I have a lot of vantage points from which to view
this dance. (Oh- I also organized the Sunday Night Dances for two years.) If I
had my druthers, I'd rather play there than call there, and would rather call
there than dance there, even if all three activities paid me the same amount
of money.
I have to go meet my class or y'all might hear more.
Hey! This is the next to last day of classes!
Nancy Mamlin