Writing Contra dances
Parker
seen before. Generally, these have been written in the recent past
and are challenging, smoothly flowing, and fun.
I want to try my hand at writing a couple of dances but have a hard
time visualizing how moves will blend into each other and getting a
feel for the number of beats to allow for each move.
If you have written successful dances in the past, I was wondering if
you could share any pointers with a newcomer. Do you use props, or
listen to music while going through the moves? Is there a computer
program which will help? Or is it all played out in your mind?
Thanks.
David Millstone
> I want to try my hand at writing a couple of dances but have a hard
> time visualizing how moves will blend into each other and getting a
> feel for the number of beats to allow for each move.
>
> If you have written successful dances in the past, I was wondering if
> you could share any pointers with a newcomer.
You might enjoy reading a long discussion of some of these points by
Cary Ravitz, who is writing quite a few dances these days.
http://www.concentric.net/~ravitz/dance/chor.shtml
As he states in his introduction, "This information is based on my
experiences dancing, calling, and writing dances. It is part fact and
part opinion. For choreographers, I expect that you will disagree with
many parts of it, but perhaps it will give you something to consider."
David Millstone
P Stamler
coins on the table to represent a minor set. Say, quarters for the actives,
nickels for the inactives, heads and tails for the two gender roles.
I also find it useful to always mentally use the same tune for working out
timing. "Arkansas Traveler".
Peace,
Paul
Jonathan Sivier
>I want to try my hand at writing a couple of dances but have a hard
>time visualizing how moves will blend into each other and getting a
>feel for the number of beats to allow for each move.
>
>If you have written successful dances in the past, I was wondering if
>you could share any pointers with a newcomer. Do you use props, or
>listen to music while going through the moves? Is there a computer
>program which will help? Or is it all played out in your mind?
I don't use any props, I visualize the figures in my head. Try to imagine
yourself in each of the positions (active, inactive, man, woman) and visualize
moving through the figures. You can also dance each part in your living room
with imaginary partners and neighbors. If you have a very tricky part you
might want to get some other dancers to help work that part out.
As far as timing if you have been dancing for any time at all you will have
learned the duration of the various figures. One piece of advice would
be that you don't have to use every single beat. You can leave the occasional
bit of slack in the timing of your dance so the dancers can catch up if needed.
For example "circle left 3/4" only takes 6 beats, but if you allow a full
half-phrase (8 beats) then the dance will be a bit more resistant to breaking
down.
Another way to think about dances is not the figures themselves, but the
transitions between figures. The first dance I wrote was based on a workshop
given by Ted Sannella at Knoxville several years ago. He focused on the
nice transitions between various figures. Afterwards I looked at my notes
and realized that if I rearranged the figures from the workshop they could
be made into a dance, with nice transitions between each figure.
David Millstone
with Ted Sannella, so that's a perfect segue into mentioning that Ted's
preferred method was to use the face cards (kings and queens) from a
deck of cards. You have four couples handy for a square, or can place
them into contra lines. If you need additional couples-- perhaps you're
writing a double progression triple minor contra and want to look at
end effects-- you can pair up the jack with another card of your
choice.
David
P Stamler
Then you get the dancer who always does too many twirls -- that would be the
joker, of course. And the one who comes to the dance drunk because he's had too
much gin, and wants to dance the poker.
Peace,
Paul
kgold
>
> Another way to think about dances is not the figures themselves, but the
> transitions between figures. The first dance I wrote was based on a workshop
> given by Ted Sannella at Knoxville several years ago. He focused on the
> nice transitions between various figures.
I agree. It's the transitions that turn a series of calls into a
dance.
In the best dances, one always seems to be going in the correct
direction for the next call, the correct hand always seems to be free,
everyone meets in time to do a balance, etc.
John B. Freeman
Millstone <mill...@valley.no_spam.net> wrote:
I use a set of "Joe People" that I bought at a local store several years
ago. They are toy soldier sized and come in several colors. They are all
dressed for the ball. I believe that Erna Lynne Bogue told me about them.
I must have at least eight couples of them still. An advantage they have
over cards or coins is that you can position them like real people. Once
the "dancers" and I agree, I dance through the dance by myself. If my "Joe
People" and I agree, then I deem a dance ready for a trial run with real
dancers. Those of you who don't Like the "Joe People" idea should be able
to find some toy soldiers or som such to "play" with.
Oh, I once hummed and dance the Levi Jackson Rag, first with a partner,
then by myself. It really helped make sense of this wonderful dance. I'm
not sure what the other folks at the party I was attending thought... :-)
--
Drop one of the "n"s in my email address if you really want to reach me
Karen M.
> I agree. It's the transitions that turn a series of calls into a
> dance.
>
> In the best dances, one always seems to be going in the correct
> direction for the next call, the correct hand always seems to be free,
> everyone meets in time to do a balance, etc.
In the untested (not the best) ones, I can tell the gender of the
author and that he portrayed only the active gent.
--Karen M.
not a fan of "make a wish" figures
Cynthia M. Van Ness
> One thing that helps in working out moves, although not timing, is to put four
> coins on the table to represent a minor set. Say, quarters for the actives,
> nickels for the inactives, heads and tails for the two gender roles.
Though I have never written a dance, I have heard that chess pieces work
well for this, too. Get out the king and queen of both colors and you
have your actives and inactives.
*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:**:-.,_,.-*
Cynthia Van Ness, MLS, af...@bfn.org / http://www.buffaloresearch.com
"There are short-cuts to happiness, and dancing is one of them."
--Vicki Baum
The Martins
news:94ab71c6.0312...@posting.google.com...
> If you have written successful dances in the past, I was
> wondering you could share any pointers with a newcomer.
My sage advice is rarely heeded, even by me, and this will probably
paint me into a corner: Why is it necessary to make up yet more contra
dances? Why not put that creative energy into learning to dance well?
You could spend years exploring great dancing, losing yourself in the
rhythm and movement, while dancing the same old contra over and over
again. That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant diet of
new. Every new contra dance pushes the genre in the direction of
Scottish Country Dance and Modern Western Square Dancing, where there
is a massive overload of one million forgettable variations on ten
thousand artificial themes, with new dances coming out monthly,
weekly, daily, hourly! What a bloody snore. (It should come as a balm
to your fresh wounds that I am probably staking out a minority opinion
here.)
Bill
Bruce Henderson
> there
> is a massive overload of one million forgettable variations on ten
> thousand artificial themes, with new dances coming out monthly,
> weekly, daily, hourly! What a bloody snore. (It should come as a balm
> to your fresh wounds that I am probably staking out a minority opinion
> here.) > Bill
Amen. And you're not alone in this minority position, Bill.
Bruce Henderson
> I don't use any props, I visualize the figures in my head. Try to imagine
> yourself in each of the positions (active, inactive, man, woman) and visualize
> moving through the figures. (snip)
> Jonathan
> http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jsivier/
Gee whiz! Wouldn't you have to be a rocket scientist or something
to do it like that? Truly impressive!
Happy, happy to all (or bah, take your pick ...)
Bruce Henderson, Wallace NC
Les Francey
"The Martins" <n...@REMOVEbubbaguitar.com> wrote in message
news:vuiusn7...@corp.supernews.com...
> to your fresh wounds that I am probably staking out a minority opinion
> here.)
NOthing wrong with staking out a minority opinion. Although I don't know
if your opinion is really the minority. Even if it is, I value your
opinions. Frequently I do not entirely agree with you opinions but I am
happy to see them here as a representation of a point of view I hadn't
thought of and which should be thought of.
Here again, I don't know if I necessarily share your point view.
There are many dances I dance today that I love and yet they are not
considered to be traditional dances eg Scout House Reel, Shadracks
Delight. I could dance these dances over and over again but where would we
be today if Ted Sanella, Tony Parkes and others decided that we
didn't need any new dances? I am not saying that every new dance that is
composed is worthy of immortality. However, once in a while a new
dance comes along that captures the imagination.
And then:
>You could spend years exploring great dancing, losing yourself in the
> rhythm and movement, while dancing the same old contra over and over
> again. That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant diet of
> new.
That is an interesting definition of "folk dancing" I haven't
see it turn up yet on any of the threads that have dealt with just what
folk dancing is. or have I seen it in any of the articles I have read about
folkdancing. I would have thought that folk dancing is something like
this: dance done by "folks" or the "people " as opposed to dance that
is choreographed for performance purposes for highly trained dancers
or dance that has been designed for spiritual or religious purposes or
dance that is designed for symbolic or ritual purposes ( yikes now the
morris guys are gonna come after me).
That definition is a very broad definition but I wonder if that is even
broad enough because there is a lot of stuff out there that many people
consider to be "folk" dance.
I don't see that definition in conflict with the idea of change or
something new. In fact because it is broad, it allows for a lot of
change to take place with in it. And I believe it is the change in folk
dancing which keeps it alive and vital. Yes, I like the old dances and
wouldn't want to give them up and yes they need to be part of a regular
dance program. OTOH, casting out something new just because it is new
is a little like throwing the baby out with the bath water.
Les Francey
David Kaynor
Bill Martin's right; there is much to be said for high quality
immersion in what already exists in the world of dance. And there is
much forgettable material out there and more being produced every day.
But, regarding "That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant
diet of new":
To me, folk dancing is sort of like an ocean. The rivers which flow
into it are a constant diet of new. Without the constant diet of new,
the ocean would dry up or at least become too salty to support life.
The oceans of folk dancing are at their lowest and least
life-supporting when the rivers aren't flowing in because people dam
them up with too-narrow criteria for inclusion and dry up their
headwaters with discouragement of inspiration and evolution.
You can infer from Bill's post that when he feels the urge to create,
he does so.
Creating is part of learning. It's one of the ways we develop working
relationships with new knowledge. The urge to compose contra dances
is not a universal response to the process of learning about contra
dancing, but nevertheless, it's a natural response and one to be
encouraged when it occurs. Many contra dancers aspire to little more
than being consumers of the experience. Your interest in composing
puts you in a special group of people who've chosen to go beyond this.
Do we need any more mediocre creations? My answer is YES, I think we
need more mediocre creations, because I think exceptional creations
come our way in proportion to our willingness to be part of the
creative process by working with (and on) the unexceptional ones.
Consider what we think of as the masterpieces of Ted Sannella and Bob
McQuillen. It's important to keep in mind that these are not Ted's
and Bob's only creations and they're not the only creations they put
out there in the public arena, either. Not all of Ted's dances and
not all of Bob's tunes are uniformly liked; ome are liked more than
others. Just as we're not obligated to like them all, Ted wasn't and
Bob isn't obligated to make them uniformly likeable.
Their compositions we remember and use today are but a fraction of
their output. Bob has said he's fine with this; I believe Ted was
fine with it as well.
This is not to say that Bob aims low or that Ted aimed low or that one
should strive to be mediocre. Why not strive to do well? Aspiring to
excellence is one of the grandest parts of being human. Aspiring to
excellence which benefits others is doubly grand. But it's important
to not have such rigid expectations that you stifle your urge to
create. What's the point of wanting to do good things if you're so
hard on yourself that you never get anything done? In any area of
creative endeavor, producing anything which will endure may require
producing quite a lot which won't.
For centuries, groups of artists have gathered to learn and gain
inspiration from each other and to support each other. In the world
of social dance, we could do more of this. I'm convinced we would all
be better off if contra dance composers, callers, musicians, and
dancers would gather more often without all the heavy expectations and
consequences associated with big gigs and events which only happen
once in a while. I think a grand undertaking would be to assemble a
musician and some other aspiring choreographers and friends and put
your ideas into action. All you need is a few interested people and a
moderately spacious living room.
By the way, this is *not* an argument for reducing the number of big
events, but rather, an argument for increasing the number of small
ones. I believe that stronger investment by all of us in the small
events would ultimately make those big events better as well.
The urge to create is a normal human response to happiness and
sadness. Whether you've just had a good time or a bad time, if you
feel like composing a dance yourself, I urge you to do so! Create
first; worry and edit later. Maybe we'll all benefit.
Best of luck.
David Kaynor
The Martins
news:o7lGb.10525$d%1.21...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> There are many dances I dance today that I love and yet
> they are not considered to be traditional dances eg Scout
> House Reel, Shadracks Delight.
Those are good dances, produced in a day when composing wasn't so
glutted. David Kaynor makes a telling counter argument to my rant. I
concede that having a big on-going creative stew is probably the best
thing, but I stand by my stand that a small dance repertoire is
sufficient. Dancing is about connecting with the music, and visiting
with friends. New dances that serve those two needs will get my seal
of approval.
> ( yikes now the morris guys are gonna come after me).
Keep a sharp pocket knife handy. Cut off their bells and morris
dancers gentle down nicely.
Bill
Parker
>
> paint me into a corner: Why is it necessary to make up yet more contra
Egads. Sometimes I think that posting a message saying "oxygen is
good" would get a contrary response from an anaerobic bacterium.
I'd like to write dances because it would be fun, challenging, and
would help me understand dance choreography better. If one or two
should prove to be popular, fine; if they are all dreck and forgotten,
that's fine too.
Yes, there are a lot of dances out there now. Some of the new ones
are good and will become part of the old time tradition, some are
awkward and will be adjusted or die. Your suggestion is similar to
telling John Irving he shouldn't write because we already have books.
Or telling Picasso to put down his brush; Rembrandt already painted.
Or telling all composers after Bach to forget it.
Hubris and whimsy aside, you imply that all good dances currently
exist and to write more is fruitless. I suggest that the act of
creation is how the human race progresses in all fields. You aren't,
by chance, part of the Bush Administration?
Karen M.
> ...Why is it necessary to make up yet more contra
> dances? Why not put that creative energy into learning to dance well?
> You could spend years exploring great dancing, losing yourself in the
> rhythm and movement, while dancing the same old contra over and over
> again. That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant diet of
> new. Every new contra dance pushes the genre in the direction of
> Scottish Country Dance and Modern Western Square Dancing, where there
> is a massive overload of one million forgettable variations on ten
> thousand artificial themes, with new dances coming out monthly,
> weekly, daily, hourly! What a bloody snore. (It should come as a balm
> to your fresh wounds that I am probably staking out a minority opinion
> here.)
Bill, you da man.
--Karen M.
Jon Leech
The Martins <n...@REMOVEbubbaguitar.com> wrote:
>I
>concede that having a big on-going creative stew is probably the best
>thing, but I stand by my stand that a small dance repertoire is
>sufficient. Dancing is about connecting with the music, and visiting
>with friends.
Generalization fallacy. People dance for many different reasons.
Jon
The Martins
news:94ab71c6.0312...@posting.google.com...
> Hubris and whimsy aside,
I've been outed!
> you imply that all good dances currently
> exist and to write more is fruitless.
That sums it up nicely. With the limited number of figures used in
contra dancing, how many good combinations are really possible? Are
there wonderful unborn contra dances kicking to be released, or are
composers just enjoying a little puzzle solving hobby? Believe me, I
am not down on creativity. But why are new dances so prized in
themselves when they are just rehashing the same old territory?
Bill
Rob Lindauer
>
>
> With the limited number of figures used in
> contra dancing, how many good combinations are really possible? Are
> there wonderful unborn contra dances kicking to be released, or are
> composers just enjoying a little puzzle solving hobby?
>
Some music critics said the same thing after Beethoven's death, i.e.,
that there was nothing left to write.
Analogously, I suppose you could say that since there are just 12
semitones in an octave, all the good tunes must already have been written.
--
Rob Lindauer - change "att" to "sbc" for my real email address
mjerry...@yahoo.com
Not all new dances are difficult.
"The Martins" <n...@REMOVEbubbaguitar.com> wrote in message
news:vuiusn7...@corp.supernews.com...
Richard Maurer
With the limited number of figures used in
contra dancing, how many good combinations are really possible?
<< [Rob Lindauer]
Analogously, I suppose you could say that since there are just 12
semitones in an octave, all the good tunes must already have been written.
[end quote] >>
A fairer analogy: All the good 8 count riffs have already been written.
(8 quarter notes in a riff, with some eighth notes allowed,
also some half notes, but nothing else)
-- ---------------------------------------------
Richard Maurer To reply, remove half
Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Parker
> .......... But why are new dances so prized in
> themselves when they are just rehashing the same old territory?
>
> Bill
A good question, and one which is more important than "Should I write
more dances and release them into the wild?" When I started dancing
in the 1970's, I was happy with traditional dances. Doing "Lady of
the Lake" every dance didn't bother me, and I admit that a caller
starting a dance with the comment "Here's one I wrote" was often a
prelude to disaster.
Over the years I've found that the choreography of newer dances has
improved greatly (see my initial post)over what I'd seen earlier. I
admit that some are over the top difficult but these tend to get
weeded out quickly.
I suspect that the biggest reason newer dances are popular is that
"inactive" is no longer descriptive of what the number 2 couples do.
I generally find it more enjoyable to be in motion throughout a dance
than to spend half my time standing still watching the number 1's do
something. It would be interesting to see what other readers think.
Both the modern, symmetrically active dances and the traditional
dances have value. The best dances I've been to mix the two, but
concentrate the traditional dances at the end of the evening when less
strenuous is good for these old legs.
The Martins
> When I started dancing
> in the 1970's, I was happy with traditional dances.
> Doing "Lady of the Lake" every dance didn't bother
> me, and I admit that a caller starting a dance with
> the comment "Here's one I wrote" was often a
> prelude to disaster.
Its the new millenium and I still cringe when I hear that sentence.
Too often it is followed by a convoluted, disjointed waste of
dancing time. But the experimental owner-built contra dance
is certainly "new" and "different". Whoopee.
Bill
Rob Lindauer
>
> << [Rob Lindauer]
> Analogously, I suppose you could say that since there are just 12
> semitones in an octave, all the good tunes must already have been written.
> [end quote] >>
>
> A fairer analogy: All the good 8 count riffs have already been written.
> (8 quarter notes in a riff, with some eighth notes allowed,
> also some half notes, but nothing else)
>
Bruce Henderson
(snip)
I suspect that the biggest reason newer dances are popular is tha
> "inactive" is no longer descriptive of what the number 2 couples do.
> I generally find it more enjoyable to be in motion throughout a dance
> than to spend half my time standing still watching the number 1's do
> something. It would be interesting to see what other readers think.
(snip)
I can't remember leaving a dance saying "we did too many chestnuts
tonight". I'm *always* happy to do more. And there's something that
appeals to me to do a dance that has it's own tune associated with it
-- can't explain why. And I'm not particularly fond of English
Country ("Playford") so there doesn't seem to be much connection
there. The old dances just make me feel good and this doesn't seem
related to the amount of "active/inactive" mix there is. But I have
heard dancers who've been dancing less time than I have (and only
exposed to "MUCky dances") expressing the "I don't like those
standing-around dances" feeling.
And it's not just that I'm a curmudgeon (as much as I'd love to be)
-- I thought that David Kaynor's description of the contra/folk
environment being like an ocean fed by rivers of creativity to be a
wonderful image.
Dave Goldman
<n...@REMOVEbubbaguitar.com> wrote:
> "Parker" <sethg...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:94ab71c6.03122...@posting.google.com...
>
> > ...
> > and I admit that a caller starting a dance with
> > the comment "Here's one I wrote" was often a
> > prelude to disaster.
>
> Its the new millenium and I still cringe when I hear that sentence.
What are you talking about, Bill? When was the last time you attended a
contradance to hear this, or any other, sentence?
> Too often it is followed by a convoluted, disjointed waste of
> dancing time. But the experimental owner-built contra dance
> is certainly "new" and "different". Whoopee.
Obviously you've not been attending dances with callers such as Becky
Hill, Susan Kevra, etc, etc, etc.
It's worth remembering Sturgeon's Law. For those of you not into science
fiction, the story is that someone once complained to author Ted Sturgeon,
"95% of science fiction is crap." To which Sturgeon replied, "That's true.
But 95% of EVERYTHING is crap!"
My experience is that far fewer than 95% of newly-written contras are crap
-- so contra composers actually seem to be beating the odds.
Still, contra _callers_ remain responsible for picking good dances,
regardless of their vintage. Having a larger pool from which to extract
the 5% good dances isn't a problem; the important challenge is for callers
to consistently choose 100% each evening.
- Dave Goldman
Portland, OR
David Kaynor
I wrote an essay in response to what Bruce wrote, the other thread on
writing contra dances, and things others have written both recently
and over the years. The essay has to do with assumptions.
It kept getting longer and longer. Now, it is so long I decided I
shouldn't post it, so I put it on my website. You can read it in its
entirety at http://www.davidkaynor.com/assumptions.html.
If, after wading through it, you have an opinion about whether or not
I ought to go ahead and post it on r-f.d in spite of its length, let
me know. I'm definitely more interested in public discourse than in
private discourse on the topic.
David Kaynor
Dan Pearl
> > paint me into a corner: Why is it necessary to make up yet more contra
> > dances?
Of course it isn't necessary. I'd guess that there are on the order of 3000
or so sequences out there and that if I danced 12 dances an evening and
danced one evening a week, it would take me almost five years to dance 'em
all. But not all of them are good. I like to dances that flow well, are
interesting (not just figures strung together with no rhyme or reason), but
not so intellectually challenging that I need to concentrate on the dance
sequence instead of my partner, neighbors and the music. That probably
leaves at least several hundred dances that suit ME perfectly. Of course a
completely different set of dances may suit the next person. That is why we
don't just do MY favorite 300 dances.
It is DESIRABLE to allow dances to be written for reasons other posters have
eloquently stated. For instance, it is a creative outlet, it allows people
to learn more about how dances work, and provides an opportunity to provide
a gift for a special occasion (wedding, housewarming, whatever).
> > Why not put that creative energy into learning to dance well?
Different people have different interests and aptitude. If it makes any
difference, in my opinion, people whose dances I admire are excellent
dancers.
> > You could spend years exploring great dancing, losing yourself in the
> > rhythm and movement, while dancing the same old contra over and over
> > again. That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant diet of
> > new.
It is hard to say what "folk dancing" is and is not. I believe that folk
dances do change over time -- their styling and patterns are not frozen like
some museum piece. We can do folk dances the way that they used to do in
Serbia in the 1950's, but that is not necessarily the way the 'folks' do the
dancing now. You wouldn't believe what is going on! It would curl your
hair! They are dancing to rock music! These kids today: Sheesh!
> > Every new contra dance pushes the genre in the direction of
> > Scottish Country Dance and Modern Western Square Dancing, where there
> > is a massive overload of one million forgettable variations on ten
> > thousand artificial themes, with new dances coming out monthly,
> > weekly, daily, hourly! What a bloody snore. (It should come as a balm
> > to your fresh wounds that I am probably staking out a minority opinion
> > here.)
I tend to think that forcasts for the death of contra dancing are premature.
Whenever things get too complex for their own good, one of two things
happen: 1) someone takes these complex dances to a series targeted for more
experienced dancers, or 2) the essential nature of contra dancing reasserts
itself, to wit: you can show up at your first dance ever and be a dancer.
It took decades for the Hey to be (re)introduced to contra dancing in any
widespread manner. Once dancers and composers got the hang of what heys
were about, they realized that they weren't that hard to do or comprehend.
The folk process applies to contra dancing. For every movement that has
caught on in contra dancing, there are dozens that just don't make the cut,
and not because of any offical body. People figuratively vote with their
feet.
For me, the joy of contra dancing is discovering sequences that find a new,
interesting relationship between standard figures. When I dance it, I learn
something about dancing, and it makes me smile.
Mario Herger
> "inactive" is no longer descriptive of what the number 2 couples do.
> I generally find it more enjoyable to be in motion throughout a dance
> than to spend half my time standing still watching the number 1's do
> something. It would be interesting to see what other readers think.
>
> Both the modern, symmetrically active dances and the traditional
> dances have value. The best dances I've been to mix the two, but
> concentrate the traditional dances at the end of the evening when less
> strenuous is good for these old legs.
For me the questions is more: is the contra-dance going to develop to new
times or staying in the same old style ? Sometimes breaking the rules brings
civilization forward and to achieve that, hundreds of failures have to
happen before. So writing a dance is nothing bad and necessary (like with
music or paintings or photographs ....). Once in a time there will be a good
one and even less frequently a choreography will bring contra to a turning
point and lead to new paths and make it survive the ages.
Examples for that can be found in many other areas (Tango -> see Astor
Piazzolas new way of composing tango-music), etc.
Great choreographers, composers, painters, inventors,... do not just repeat
the old stuff, they know their craft and break the rules at the right
places. Finding these places is the challenge.
I give you some video-examples of "new choreographies": first some
contra-forms from Germany, which do nothing new, but just keep the
traditional style and rearrange it to more and more sophisticated forms:
Jubiläumspolka
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip712.wmv
Hermsdorfer Dreikehr
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip713.wmv
Ponypferdchen
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip714.wmv
Wittenauer Tortanz
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip715.wmv
Der Kringel
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip716.wmv
Lübarser Reihentanz
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip717.wmv
Neunertanz
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip718.wmv
Lustiger zu Dritt
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip719.wmv
Lustige Trabanten
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip720.wmv
Reinickendorfer Mühle
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip721.wmv
Großes Triolett
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip722.wmv
Schaumburger
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip723.wmv
Walzerkanon
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/de/dg/rd/001/Clip724.wmv
Second some examples from France, were Bernard Coclet brings the Bourrée to
new forms by breaking rules and adding new items to the dance:
Les Saltimbanques
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/fr/dg/credanse/001/Clip374.wmv
Accordage
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/fr/dg/credanse/001/Clip375.wmv
Les Origines ?...
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/fr/dg/credanse/001/Clip376.wmv
Le Grand Combat
http://videos.dancilla.com/m/v/fr/dg/credanse/001/Clip377.wmv
Watching those videos you will understand what I meant. I prefer the new
Bourrée versions, that's also how the choreographies should go, IMHO
Mario
http://www.volkstanz.at/
http://www.dancilla.com/
http://www.gstanzln.com/
http://www.wienerlieder.at/
David Smukler
I enjoyed reading your piece, and would not mind at all if you were to post
it here.
I also want to raise a point concerning the creation of "new" dances that I
don't think has come up in this discussion yet: adaptation. I think the
reason we create new dances often has nothing to do with the idea of
creating something immortal, but much more with creating something that will
do.
For example, you get to the dance, decide on a dance you think would fit
perfectly, and then realize that it has some important flaw from a
programming point of view. Maybe you've done R&L thru in the previous 3
dances. Well, here you have already walked everyone through the A-parts, and
what are you going to do? So you adapt and change the R&L to a promenade
across (easier) or a balance and square thru 2 (harder), and it works just
fine for that moment in that place.
Or you start teaching and forget how the B2 "really" goes, so you create
another that at least works out. It may end up feeling like an improvement
on the "original," or perhaps it is not quite as good, but then you'll know
next time. (I get into these situations a lot because I prefer not to be
distracted by notes when I call and my memory isn't as good as David
Kaynor's is, even after his adventures in the 1970s.)
Or it's obvious during the walk-thru that you chose a dance that was too
hard for the group, so you simplify the ending. Again, it sometimes happens
that you end up with a stronger dance, not only for that situation, but for
other later ones.
My respect for adaptation not only relates to situations that require quick
thinking during a walk-thru. Maybe you know a dance that you absolutely
adore for 3/4 of the sequence, but find one bit that might benefit from a
little tweaking.... As I look at dances sequences that I admire, I often am
aware that they are not entirely unrelated to other dances in the
repertoire. Dances are not created anew; they evolve.
Most of the choreography I've had any hand in has this quality, that it is
stolen from -- er, I mean adapted from elsewhere. On my own behalf I will
say that I always make an effort to credit those from whom I've borrowed.
If you've read this far -- thanks,
David Smukler
P Stamler
Look, I've been concerned that the contra-dance scene has shifted in the last
twenty years, at least in my region, to the point that 95% of the dances are
new. I'm worried that we'll become detached from the roots of where we came
from. But the solution is not to stop writing new dances; I for one, would hate
to be without "Roll in the Hey" or "Kimmswick Fixx". The solution is for
callers to keep a good balance between new and old, and always be aware of
where we came from as well as where we are.
Peace,
Paul
The Martins
in message
news:dave-25120...@ip142.209-63-24.dial-eli.eli.iinet.com...
>
> What are you talking about, Bill? When was the last time
> you attended a contradance to hear this, or any other, sentence?
My name isn't in your database because I'm deeply involved in the
under-the-radar dance scene around the Northwest - small towns, grange
halls, Hicksville, etc. Darn my bad luck, I hope I'm not going to get
ticketed.
I enjoy a passionate discussion and argument about aspects of this
activity that I love and deeply respect. My own opinions are often
about 1/3 tongue in cheek, but my other 2/3 is curious and wanting to
explore and goad. I come from a large family that enjoys the hell out
of arguing over politics and religion - we must seem like a bunch of
idiots. We rage on, but we listen to each other, too. Here in
r.f.dancing I enjoy doing Satan's bidding. The Evil One has assigned
me to agitate, though I seem to falter in confusion with spent stinger
after I've done my dirty job.
Though we are corresponding in a rarified and effectively irrelevant
forum, thoughtful and articulate argument and discussion by fans with
different backgrounds and motivations can be rewarding and edifying,
and irritating. (I'm always amazed at how often the real point of my
argument is enitirely missed by correspondents in this newsgroup.Which
leads me to believe that I, too, am probably reading through glasses
thickly tinted by my own inherited world view and limited experiences
rather than really listening... Nah! You guys are bunch a loozahs!)
Which leads to David Kaynor's piece at
http://www.davidkaynor.com/assumptions.html. David, by all means post
it here. It does make me squirm in discomfort, but, as you wrote,
contra dancing is rich, mult-level and widespread and it ain't dying
out. We're not going to hurt it by bitching about it or dissecting it,
might even have some fun and gain some insight in the process. And
bore any hapless dancers who stumble across us.
Bill
ElissaAnn
"David Kaynor" <daka...@umassk12.net> wrote in message
news:8b2860c7.03122...@posting.google.com...
Post!
BTW, I agree with you about there being plenty to do when I'm
an inactive.
But then, I'm one of odd creatures who loves the time out at the
top, because I can watch and listen to the music and show my
appreciation if any of the band members happen to look up.
Elissa
Les Francey
"ElissaAnn" <eli...@everybodycansing.com> wrote in message
news:bsk5p4$dtif2$1...@ID-120914.news.uni-berlin.de...
> But then, I'm one of odd creatures who loves the time out at the
> top, because I can watch and listen to the music and show my
> appreciation if any of the band members happen to look up.
>
live music and having a relationship between the dancers and the band? I
too love the time out at the top of the set and often wish it was longer or
the line shorter so I can get to the top more often.
Les Francey
David Kaynor
Having caught a hellacious cold, I'm homebound with arguably a little
too much time on my hands. I'm concerned about some assumptions I
believe are too wholly accepted without discussion.
One assumption is that recently-composed contra dances are uniformly
"symmetrical" or "activity balanced"; there's no difference between
the #1 couples and the #2 couples in terms of who does what.
Agreed: Many are. But not all. I believe Ted Sannella composed a
number of "activity differentiated" contras in which the #1s did more
things than the #2s. Some dances by Tony Parkes, Gene Hubert, John
Krumm, and my cousin Cam Kaynor, to name a few, are "active-inactive"
or "asymmetrical". I've composed a few myself.
Another oft-heard assumption: Recently-composed contras are physically
and mentally more taxing than older and "traditional" contras.
In my experience, recent compositions tend to be reasonable in terms
of physical and mental challenge. To be sure, there are exceptions.
Still, when a succession of modern contras leaves you feeling tired,
it's possible that the fault lies not with the dances themselves, but
with the caller, who perhaps chose too many in a row which contain
numerous allemandes and consecutive-phrase swings for everyone (e.g.
swing your neighbor; gents allemande left 1 1/2 and swing your
partner) and perhaps let them run too long as well. Leaving aside the
question of how you, yourself, chose to exert as you danced, I believe
the real issue here is the caller's sense of programmatic pacing
rather than the age of the compositions.
A number of callers and dancers have observed that many
recently-composed dances are comparatively easy to both teach and
dance well. Why? Partly, we think, because the dancer is moved from
one action and position to the next by the choreography itself rather
than by his or her own memory of when and how to start doing something
or going somewhere. Plus, in an "activity undifferentiated" dance,
everyone learns all of the choreography in the walk-through. And, you
don't encounter new things when you re-enter the dance after waiting
out at the end.
What do you think about this newsgroup's commentary in verse and prose
on "Modern Urban Contra Dancing" and the caricaturizations of people
who enjoy it? As I read it, a large category of dances and the dancers
who enjoy them are sweepingly dismissed as "MUCky", inconsequential,
socially challenged, crazed, and worse. I feel I'm reading that "real"
folk dancing and "good" folk dancing are on some kind of moral high
ground because of promoting socializing more than learning
choreography, while "Modern Urban Contra Dancing", because of doing
the opposite, is in the toilet. In my opinion, it's this thinking
which is perilously close to the toilet. I've been on a lot of stages
and a lot of dance floors where I've seen copious evidence that these
much-maligned modern compositions contribute significantly to the
enabling of a growing number of people of diverse ages and abilities
to learn choreography while *enhancing* desirable social interaction.
We could do worse than to let go of the notion that if it's recent,
it's for the college-educated software engineers, human services
people, and sensation junkies to the exclusion of the less formally
educated tradespeople and farmhands and people who unacademically
treasure the past. I don't know of any solid evidence which supports
this.
Another oft-heard assumption: Recently-composed contras have few
distinctive figures or qualities and won't endure like "Hull's
Victory" and "Chorus Jig".
Agreed: A lot of modern compositions don't have readily-identifiable
distinctive figures. How fortunate we are to have live music. Our
musicians can learn how to instill dance figures with distinction
through their playing. But in any case, distinctive figures were
neither used up by the composers of the "chestnuts" nor are owned by
them; they're in the public domain and being worked into recent
compositions, and more are being invented, too. And who's to say when
incorporating a distinctive figure from a "chestnut" (like Ted
Sannella's "petronella turn" in "Fiddleheads") into a composition
amounts to "rehashing"?
I feel pretty sure that a goodly number of recently composed contras
will be enjoyed for many years to come.
Another oft-heard assumption: When you're inactive, you're inert;
there's nothing to do but stand around.
If you really and truly feel like you're standing around, maybe the
musicians aren't doing the music justice or you just haven't gotten in
touch with your Inner Inactive yet.
When the musicians are at their best and the dancers around me are
animated, I have an *incredible* amount to see, hear, do, and be when
inactive. There's never a dull moment! And in case you want to dismiss
this statement as coming from someone who did too many drugs in the
60s or is too soft and out of shape for really active contra dancing,
I'll hastily point out that, first of all, it was the 70s, not the
60s; second, I've still got a reasonable amount of brain cells
working; third, I'm still pretty quick on my feet; fourth and more to
the point, my statement is echoed by a goodly number of folks with a
lot more brain cells and strength and stamina than I have.
Yet another oft-heard assumption: Recently-composed contras are not
associated with specific tunes in the manner of "Hull's Victory",
"Lady Walpole's Reel", "Chorus Jig", etc.
Generally, I agree. Although presumably, I'd be flexible when working
with musicians who don't know them, I think about associating specific
tunes with my compositions. I greatly admire Cam Kaynor who has been
doing this for decades, even to the point of writing some
unconventionally-phrased tunes and dances which only work with each
other.
Many dancers say they enjoy recognizable tune-dance pairings, and, in
fact, seem to dance better when they strongly associate the music with
the movements.
Still another assumption: The continuing flood of new compositions
will push the older dances still further out of common usage.
Possibly. I think Hank Bradley, in his great little book, wrote
something about the difference between tradition and history to the
effect that If it can't survive on its own without help, it's history.
I think it's a perfect statement and one of the greatest of all time.
That some tunes and dances don't survive off life support might be due
to some inherent character flaw in human beings, or it might not.
Sometimes it seems inexplicable, how some things pass away while
others don't. At any rate, I believe that for the older dances to
remain in common usage, a critical mass of inspired musicians,
*infectiously* devoted dancers, and callers who maintain programmatic
astuteness and sharp teaching skills will be required.
Just as individual tastes vary, some age groups, some whole dance
crowds and even some entire regions have strong preferences with
regard to programming, characteristics in their music, and stylistic
matters like flourishes and embellishments. We're all entitled to like
some and dislike others, but who's sufficiently informed to pronounce
which ones are fundamentally bad?
Our many local dance scenes and the American contra dance scene as a
whole are a very richly detailed patchwork quilt. It's getting more
richly detailed all the time. Although I have my share of concerns and
complaints, the bottom line is that I'm more and more proud of it, and
us, all the time. To create is to invest in our experience of living.
Let's *really* be alive; let's *really* create. I don't care if the
ratio of mediocrity to excellence in new contra dance compositions is
100 to 1. I say, what are we waiting for? Let's get to it! Let's
compose 1,000!
Sure, we risk having 990 experiences of mediocrity. But remember:
Mediocrity is not only survivable; it's forgettable. We may well
forget we experienced it. It's a miniscule price to pay for the pride,
joy, and enduring delight which 10 excellent compositions can
generate.
David Kaynor
Rob Lindauer
> What do you think about this newsgroup's commentary in verse and prose
> on "Modern Urban Contra Dancing" and the caricaturizations of people
> who enjoy it?
...
> I don't care if the
> ratio of mediocrity to excellence in new contra dance compositions is
> 100 to 1. I say, what are we waiting for? Let's get to it! Let's
> compose 1,000!
>
> Sure, we risk having 990 experiences of mediocrity.
I think the poet is still well within his 990.
I think he knows nothing about me and is hardly in a position to
characterize my views on anything.
I admire people who clearly, compellingly, and positively advocate a
position - but not those who focus on denigrating others' views.
The Martins
news:CQuGb.44627$ax4....@newssvr31.news.prodigy.com...
>
> Analogously, I suppose you could say that since there are just 12
> semitones in an octave, all the good tunes must already have been
written.
Judging by the demise of discernible melody on contemporary pop, rock,
blues and country music radio, I think I could make a plausible
argument :-)
Bill
David Smukler
Martins" <n...@REMOVEbubbaguitar.com> wrote:
When I was in high school (late 1960s) I had a music history teacher who
actually asserted that this was true. He said, "Now I know there are those
who will disagree with me, BUT..." and proposed to us that music reached a
sort of pinnacle in the early romantic era, and has been sliding downward
ever since. He was convinced, he said, that the reason more recent styles of
composition were forced to resort to using unusual modes, twelve tone
techniques, and other degenerative practices was that by the mid nineteenth
century they had "used up all the good tunes(!)" This guy was promoting this
view in a public school.
P Stamler
It was in the 1980s, when "Nail That Catfish to a Tree" was written.
Peace,
Paul
kgold
>
> But, regarding "That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant
> diet of new":
>
> To me, folk dancing is sort of like an ocean. The rivers which flow
> into it are a constant diet of new.
Here's my perspective as an IFD (international) dancer as well as
contra dancer.
1 - Israeli folk dance has split in many places into modern, and
vintage and those done at IFD dances.
The modern dance sessions have a steady diet of new works created
mostly by Israeli choreographers. To me, they're more complicated,
and have more of a modern dance or ballet feel, than the vintage
dances. It's not my thing, but retains popularity.
The vintage sessions, as a reaction, do mostly older dances. These
are done at IFD sessions as well.
2 - IFD also combines some very traditional dances with some that are
obviously choreographed. Here the choreographed dances are often
gleaned from national performing groups.
IFD'ers tend to do a combination of both. Most of the choreographed
dances are taught at a workshop and then fade pretty quickly. But
some stick and become part of the repertoire. The folk process at
work.
Dave Goldman
<dsmu...@dreamscape.com> wrote:
> When I was in high school (late 1960s) I had a music history teacher who
> actually asserted that this was true. He said, "Now I know there are those
> who will disagree with me, BUT..." and proposed to us that music reached a
> sort of pinnacle in the early romantic era, and has been sliding downward
> ever since. He was convinced, he said, that the reason more recent styles of
> composition were forced to resort to using unusual modes, twelve tone
> techniques, and other degenerative practices was that by the mid nineteenth
> century they had "used up all the good tunes(!)" This guy was promoting this
> view in a public school.
Actually, I believe that this was the view espoused by the _creator_ of
twelve-tone music, Arnold Schoenberg, who felt that Wagner had finally
exhausted the possibilities of tonality.
So I, for one, am not at all SHOCKED, I SAY SHOCKED at a music history
teacher bringing this up sixty years later.
This concern with the exhaustion of an art form is a common theme through
the late-nineteenth and the twentieth centuries, from painting to
literature to theater.
It tends to be a theme that makes more sense to (some) creators of art
than to (most) viewers. The latter are perfectly happy to enjoy hummable
tunes, linear stories, and representational images, even if their creators
are doing nothing that hasn't been done by a thousand other creators
before them. Some creators, though, feel unfulfilled if they fail to break
new ground in their field.
You can see this pattern even in late-20th-/early-21st-century contradance
music. There are certainly dancers (and musicians) who feel that fiddle
tunes composed in the nineteenth century, played as in the nineteenth
century, are what we should be dancing to today -- bands (here unnamed)
that accompany these tunes with, say, Afro-Caribbean rhythms are anathema.
Meanwhile, some musicians (and dancers) grow bored with the restrictions
of tradition, and experiment with new approaches.
My personal feeling is that I'm glad that there are so many active
musicians and other artists out there that I can rest assured that some
are maintaining the traditions while others are pushing the boundaries.
Which, I guess, is why my favorite dance events/series (within the
contra/square genre) are those that include both traditional dances
(triple minors, inactive inactives, visiting-couple squares) and also
recently-composed everybody-always-active-with-partner-and-neighbor-swings
contras.
(Well, maybe not so much the visiting-couple squares...)
David Smukler
dave-28120...@ip34.207-173-100.dial-eli.eli.iinet.com, "Dave
Goldman" <da...@remove-this-bit-ResearchSoftwareDesign.com> wrote:
> In article <BC1477E9.4D4%dsmu...@dreamscape.com>, David Smukler
> <dsmu...@dreamscape.com> wrote:
>
>> When I was in high school (late 1960s) I had a music history teacher who
>> actually asserted that this was true. He said, "Now I know there are those
>> who will disagree with me, BUT..." and proposed to us that music reached a
>> sort of pinnacle in the early romantic era, and has been sliding downward
>> ever since. He was convinced, he said, that the reason more recent styles of
>> composition were forced to resort to using unusual modes, twelve tone
>> techniques, and other degenerative practices was that by the mid nineteenth
>> century they had "used up all the good tunes(!)" This guy was promoting this
>> view in a public school.
>
> Actually, I believe that this was the view espoused by the _creator_ of
> twelve-tone music, Arnold Schoenberg, who felt that Wagner had finally
> exhausted the possibilities of tonality.
That's a little different than saying all the possible tunes that are any
good have already been thought of. For one thing my teacher would have
lumped together Wagner's complex modulations and Schoenberg's tone rows. For
another, innovative composers (in any genre) typically represent themselves
as either building on the past or going beyond it. My teacher believed that
they were simply unlucky enough to be born after all worthwhile combinations
of notes had been previously reserved by Mozart and Beethoven. What a thing
to be teaching the teenagers! Can you imagine Schoenberg saying, "Dang! I'd
like to compose a good tune, but Mendelssohn got the very last one. So I
guess I'll have to settle for a tone row instead." ?
Anyway, that having been said, I agree with you about enjoying both
tradition and innovation in our dance and music communities. I even like
those visiting couple squares :-) It's all context.
David Smukler
Dave Goldman
<dsmu...@dreamscape.com> wrote:
> What a thing to be teaching the teenagers!
I'm not a teacher, but I once (if I can trust my fading memory) was a teenager.
With this sort of issue, I don't think that a high school teacher
"teaches" teenagers, but rather challenges them to think about things for
themselves.
So I wish I'd had that teacher.
Cynthia M. Van Ness
> My sage advice is rarely heeded, even by me, and this will probably
> paint me into a corner: Why is it necessary to make up yet more contra
> dances? Why not put that creative energy into learning to dance well?
> You could spend years exploring great dancing, losing yourself in the
> rhythm and movement, while dancing the same old contra over and over
> again. That's what folk dancing is all about, not a constant diet of
> new. Every new contra dance pushes the genre in the direction of
> Scottish Country Dance and Modern Western Square Dancing, where there
> is a massive overload of one million forgettable variations on ten
> thousand artificial themes, with new dances coming out monthly,
> weekly, daily, hourly! What a bloody snore. (It should come as a balm
> to your fresh wounds that I am probably staking out a minority opinion
> here.)
I love contrarian, counter-intuitive views, but sheesh! By this logic, no
one should bother writing another novel, painting another painting,
inventing another recipe, or composing another song.
*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:**:-.,_,.-*
Cynthia Van Ness, MLS, af...@bfn.org / http://www.buffaloresearch.com
"There are short-cuts to happiness, and dancing is one of them."
--Vicki Baum
Cathi Marshall
There's an HTML application at http://seattledance.org/contra/design/
which serves as a Contra Dance Designer. It's on on-line app, but if
you go into the help file (button), at the end of the Help text, is
the address to download a ZIP file of the html and accompanying files.
You can install it into a folder for use off-line.
The app only works in Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0 and above (and
not Netscape). There are a few samples at the above address to see the
action of the app, and the Help file explains how to create your own
dance sets.
Not super user-friendly, but it seems easy enough once you get the
knack of it. Probably better than nothing, until a more sophisticated
app comes along.
Cheers!
Cathijay
On 18 Dec 2003 17:31:45 -0800, sethg...@hotmail.com (Parker) wrote:
>It seems like every contra dance I go to there are dances I have never
>seen before. Generally, these have been written in the recent past
>and are challenging, smoothly flowing, and fun.
>
>I want to try my hand at writing a couple of dances but have a hard
>time visualizing how moves will blend into each other and getting a
>feel for the number of beats to allow for each move.
>
>If you have written successful dances in the past, I was wondering if
>you could share any pointers with a newcomer. Do you use props, or
>listen to music while going through the moves? Is there a computer
>program which will help? Or is it all played out in your mind?
>
>
>Thanks.