How do you re-capture the fun?
Stacy Rose
used to be that callers would come from other areas and say things
like, "You've got the real McCoy here! This is what contra dancing was
intended to be like." Now as we begin our 4th year, the other dance
organizer and I are confused about finding ourselves in this situation
and aren't sure how to salvage what we used to have - a sense of
community and just plain old FUN!
We are having smaller and smaller turnouts, and are not sure why
people aren't coming back. We now have a core of dancers who are pushy
(sometimes physically) with newcomers / less experienced dancers - so
much so that at our last dance, a woman stopped dancing and said to
one of these "helpful" experienced dancers, "Don't touch me like
that!" What do you do about "experienced" dancers who are intolerant
of those less experienced? Just a couple of years ago, we were ALL
inexperienced - laughing at our own mistakes and just having FUN for
the sake of getting together to dance! Is this a natural evolution?
How do organizers in other areas address this problem?
Stacy
South Coast Folk Society
http://mypeoplepc.com/members/stacyr/southwestoregoncontradance/
Mike Prager
> We are having smaller and smaller turnouts, and are not sure why
> people aren't coming back. We now have a core of dancers who are pushy
> (sometimes physically) with newcomers / less experienced dancers - so
> much so that at our last dance, a woman stopped dancing and said to
> one of these "helpful" experienced dancers, "Don't touch me like
> that!" What do you do about "experienced" dancers who are intolerant
> of those less experienced?
Such dancers are immature and need to be educated. The trick
is to do it so you don't turn THEM off.
The caller is the one who controls the tone of your dance.
There are callers around who are willing to take a leadership
role when calling. (Hint: they are often -- but not always --
older, more experienced callers, who call both contras and
squares and know the "chestnuts" [now defined as any dance
more than 2 years old].)
Identify a few of those callers, hire them, and discuss the
problems at your dance. Some enjoyable exercises can be used
that everyone will enjoy and will start to solve this problem.
For examle, one is a free-form contra in which the dancers use
gestures instead of speech or contact to cue others. Fun, and
the lesson gets across.
Most importantly, DON'T WAIT. Lack of leadership causes a
downward spiral, and reversing it takes time. The sooner you
get started, the better.
Mike Prager
North Carolina, USA
(Remove spam traps from email address to reply.)
The Martins
news:4bdcff79.03111...@posting.google.com...
> Sadly, the flavor of our small, rural contra dance is changing.
I hate to hear this, Stacy. I'm one of the callers who thought you had
one of the happiest little dances around. I'll guess that part of the
problem is that you bring outside callers in much of the time. And
these will be people not connected to your community. If you had a
couple of regular local callers who could take a long-range approach
to building the local dance, rather than the one-night-stand approach
of us outsiders, you would stand a better chance.
I know that the last time I called your dance some people were
requesting material that would have been inappropriate for the crowd
that showed up. I have that problem at my dances in Portland. My
choice has been to limit the level of complexity that we will rise to.
And I repeat lots of dances, sometimes in the same evening. That
bothers some, and they go away. But we keep getting bigger crowds at
the Kennedy pub dance because its inviting, fun, and it don't take a
college degree to dance there.
I bet you never thought this could happen to your dance, it was so
much fun at first. Now you know. And its fixable. But, the unavoidable
reality is that you need callers who have a personal commitment to
your dance. Callers who love beginners. That kind of caller will
impart the same tolerant attitude to your dancers over time. If you
stray toward the challenging/elitist/hot-big-city style of dance, its
pretty hard to get the good old days back. You pave paradise, etc.
Bill
P Stamler
level than in being part of a group. The folks who have already posted are
right -- much of the tone comes from the caller(s). Tonight we had an unusually
large influx of new dancers and a BIG workshop; the president of the
organization, as usual, did the workshop, and did it in a non-threatening way,
and said over and over, "We're here to have fun, not to worry about making
mistakes." And most of the dancers danced in a way that backed him up; even
when there was a need to pilot folks through a difficult square (and trust me,
there was a need in one of our squares) they did it with grace and good humor
-- and some very, very inexperienced dancers made it through a square that was
quite hard on the third try, and the experienced dancers in that square whooped
and hollered and the newbies grinned from ear to ear. They will be back.
Just as in a good hospital, the attitude comes from the top.
By the way, one other thing that happened: a brand-new dancer was moving
through a contra when her partner (me) goofed and tried to circle instead of
swing. So I told her, "See? You told me you were completely ignorant, but you
were in the right place and I wasn't." She quit worrying right there. She'll be
back too, new baby permitting.
Peace,
Paul
Marjorie Power
beginner say those very "don't touch me words" to me this weekend. I
felt bad then and I still feel bad about having done something to cause
them to be said.
Not being a caller, I am not sure how to cure the situation that brought
it about, since in general I do pretty well with beginners and always
enjoy dancing with them. In this case I did not know how to handle being
the only experienced dancer in a triplet with a couple of intermediate
dancers and the rest beginners, one of whom did not move at all unless
he was absolutely sure he knew where he was supposed to be going and
therefore stood rooted. You can't just walk out on the set, so I was
trying desperately to save the dance from a total train wreck, but it
was beyond me. (Triplets are hard for inexperience dancers. I remember
my first experience with them all too well.)
Maybe incidents like this have happened too frequently at your dance.
My observation is that the best dances with beginners are the ones where
the dances are simple enough for the beginners to dance relatively
successfully without too much stress or them or on the experienced
dancers. Where there are a preponderance of experienced dancers, they
can handle the beginners in most dances (except some reunion dances),
but otherwise the dances should be kept very simple. There is a summer
dance series near us which is generally attended by a large number of
non-dancers from away. We refer to it as "Dancing with Tourists", but a
surprising number of experienced dancers go to every one and have a very
good time dancing easy dances to good music.
We have visiting callers at our regular dance and in general they start
easy until they have the measure of the dancers' capability. We have
had at least one caller who did not pay any attention to what was
actually happening on the dance floor. She called whatever she wanted
with a hurried walk through, dropped out early, did not start calling
again even when a set broke down. (She has not been invited back.)
Fortunately, my experience is that such callers are in the minority.
PM
>
> Not being a caller, I am not sure how to cure the situation that brought
> it about, since in general I do pretty well with beginners and always
> enjoy dancing with them. In this case I did not know how to handle being
> the only experienced dancer in a triplet with a couple of intermediate
> dancers and the rest beginners, one of whom did not move at all unless
> he was absolutely sure he knew where he was supposed to be going and
> therefore stood rooted. You can't just walk out on the set, so I was
> trying desperately to save the dance from a total train wreck, but it
> was beyond me. (Triplets are hard for inexperience dancers. I remember
> my first experience with them all too well.)
>
The caller was Lisa Greenleaf, who is an excellent caller and usually
very good with beginners. 90% of the dancers in the hall were
experienced & most of the squares were more-or-less getting it. But
as is often the case, several beginners ended up in a square together,
out on the edge of the hall. And it only takes one or two to derail a
square, if they are inclined to freeze up when they get confused.
Twenty-five years ago, if you went to a "contra dance" in New England,
you were likely to get a couple of square sets thrown in and, if the
caller were Ted Sannella, a triplet or two. I think one of the
reasons the dances are now mostly 100% contras, is that they are
mostly immune to this train-wreck phenomenon - if one or two people
just don't get it, then you have a knot of confusion moving up and
down the line, but the line keeps dancing.
The Martins
"PM" <goo...@pmasters.com> wrote in message > >
> I think one of the reasons the dances are now mostly 100%
> contras, is that they are mostly immune to this train-wreck
> phenomenon - if one or two people just don't get it, then you
> have a knot of confusion moving up and down the line, but
> the line keeps dancing.
That is one reason I like to use the southern big circle type square
dances. They can be compared to a sicilian circle - each time through
the dance you move on to a new couple. But that is no reason to avoid
the 4-couple squares, train wrecks or not. I'm sure that one reason
contra corners is rarely seen at contra dances is because it is so
prone to derailment. Great old figure, though, and fun to struggle
with if the crowd is not uptight.
Bill
Bruce Freeman
much of the trouble I had learning to dance, and have made suggestions
over this forum as to how beginners could better be brought into the
dance community.
But the problem is not just in the beginners, but in the general dance
community. If everybody "helped," beginners could be brought up to
speed more quickly. Unfortunatly, the callers usually discourage this
by discouraging the experienced dancers from helping the inexperienced
dancers. I see this repeatedly in the walk-throughs and in the
beginners lessons. Callers seem to want to control the "lesson" and
input from other participants is not welcomed. This is doubly
destructive because we often learn best what we teach.
In addition, I find that dancers in general just don't seem to
understand certain things about contra dancing that to me seem
obvious. One of these is leading. When I contra dance, I lead
constantly, and I expect to be led in turn. Leading is generally
subtle, but important. It can consist of something as obvious as
putting your right hand up for right allemand. (How often have you
almost muffed a figure because your opposite put up the wrong hand?
Better they should put up neither hand and let YOU give the lead.)
Leading can be stronger than this, however. For example, I may lead a
woman back to the center after a courtesy turn. Or, after a long-line
F&B, I may lead both adjacent women back into the center with a slight
motion of my hands - a reminder, more than anything else. Then, too,
I may lead a woman into a twirl - which is one lead most people
understand.
I feel leading is very important because it transmits to the
individual the group memory of the dance being danced. When I first
started contra dancing, I tried to come up with ways to remember the
sequence of figures in a dance. I never succeeded. Sometimes by
considerable effort I can do so, but I've discovered (as has everybody
else, no doubt) that it's completely unnecessary to remember the
figures.
Part of the reason for this is that the dancers up and down the entire
line communicate with each other throughout the dance. Each dancer
has a gist of an idea of the next figure, and between the gists, a
complete memory is formed. Beginners screw up more often not because
they don't remember the next figure, or don't know how to do it, but
because they don't know how to participate in this group
communications.
The receiving end of the communication is principally visual: Looking
at what your opposite is doing. Looking at what everybody else is
doing. Looking for leads. It is also partly touch: feeling the lead
given to you. (The "sending" end consists of the leads I mentioned
above plus just being in the right place and doing the right thing at
the right time.)
Beginners screw up the group communication principally by not looking
at other people. You can often pick out the beginners by how little
they seem to be aware of the other dancers, until they blunder into
them. I tell beginners constantly to look at the other dancers, that
that helps them do the dance more than most anything else they could
do.
Now, coming back around to one point originally raised. The leads CAN
be overdone, and it is vexing when they are. Three examples come to
mind. (1) The fool who waggles his hand he puts up for an allemand.
(2) The "mother" who grabs you with what should be her (or his -
"mother" is figurative here) free hand and helps you like she'd help a
toddler. (Neither previous poster says so, but I expect it is this
sort of touch that precipated the negative reactions mentioned above.
I know that to ME, it feels like an extreme put-down, and I will NEVER
ask a woman to dance who treats me like that.) And, worst, (3) the
"coach" who usually is not in the line at all, but follows a beginner
up and down the set, outside the set, and back-seat-drives his every
move. This always screws up not only that dancer, but everybody
around him as he progresses through the dance.
But there's also a problem of experienced dancers who don't seem to
understand leads and don't provide them. I recall one dance in which
two figures in close succession were similar, but in one the women
were active and in the other both partners were active. I kept
getting left behind in the latter figure because my partner (a
caller!) wasn't giving me the right lead. (It would be very difficult
to describe what that lead should be, so I won't try.) It wasn't
until this happened several times that I realized she was
communicating "stay" when she should have been communicating "come."
Having observed this much, I do not say that I could provide training
in proper leads. However, I figure that, if I alert others to this
notion, maybe someone will come up with a way of teaching dancers to
lead and to accept leads -- i.e., to communicate the dance without
memorizing it.
The point of all this is that if the entire dance community is brought
"up to speed" on how to bring beginners up to speed, then it would
beccome more of a real community. I do not feel that most callers do
much to facilitate this, which is not to blame them for the problem,
but merely to point out that they may be in a position to help fix it.
Bruce Freeman
Bruce Henderson
(snip)
> the 4-couple squares, train wrecks or not. I'm sure that one reason
Train wrecks undermine the dance community.
PM
where you started, and takes a full eight bars to do so, so even when
people have trouble with it they usually end up progressed. I
attribute its rarity to the fact that it starts from a proper
formation - which takes some contrivance when you start improper. All
the old dances that featured contra corners were proper, and very
unequal (ie the actives got to dance a lot more than the inactives),
and I would guess that that is the main reason they have fallen out of
favor.
"The Martins" <nkmR...@bubbaguitar.com> wrote in message news:<vrkn2bl...@corp.supernews.com>...
The Martins
"Bruce Henderson" <NCPartis...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >
> Train wrecks undermine the dance community.
Hogwarsh. Train wrecks are a natural part of social dancing. Its the
quality of the response of the caller and the rest of the dancers
toward the train wrecks that builds or undermines community.
Bill Martin
Dave Goldman
<nkmR...@bubbaguitar.com> wrote:
Um, Bill, I don't think you needed to respond to Bruce's post. (He's on a
roll lately; I'm assuming that it's either a form of attempted humor or
else a sign of bitterness.)
- Dave Goldman
Portland, OR
Dave Goldman
fre...@hotmail.com (Bruce Freeman) wrote:
> But the problem is not just in the beginners, but in the general dance
> community. If everybody "helped," beginners could be brought up to
> speed more quickly. Unfortunatly, the callers usually discourage this
> by discouraging the experienced dancers from helping the inexperienced
> dancers. I see this repeatedly in the walk-throughs and in the
> beginners lessons. Callers seem to want to control the "lesson" and
> input from other participants is not welcomed. This is doubly
> destructive because we often learn best what we teach.
I'm not sure exactly what you have in mind here. But if you're complaining
that callers discourage experienced dancers from explaining things at
length and/or giving little mini dance lessons at the same time that the
caller is trying to teach the whole room a figure or a dance, then you
might want to come up on stage sometime and watch how badly that generally
works out.
On the other hand, if an experienced dancer wants to work with an
inexperienced dancer between dances, or during the break, or out in the
hall, I can't imagine any caller ever objecting.
> In addition, I find that dancers in general just don't seem to
> understand certain things about contra dancing that to me seem
> obvious. One of these is leading. When I contra dance, I lead
> constantly, and I expect to be led in turn. Leading is generally
> subtle, but important. It can consist of something as obvious as
> putting your right hand up for right allemand.
Consistent with the rest of your post, if for "leading" you would
substitute "communicating with, anticipating, and helping one's
partner-of-the-moment", then I'm in total agreement with you.
> (How often have you
> almost muffed a figure because your opposite put up the wrong hand?
> Better they should put up neither hand and let YOU give the lead.)
I'm guessing that you didn't intend the irony here.
I don't know about you, but out of the thousands of times that I have
helpfully "led" my opposite by holding up a hand, I have to admit to one
or two occasions in which I did indeed hold up the incorrect hand.
In your example, your opposite was trying to do exactly what you
recommend: leading. Your opposite did it suboptimally this time. So what
are you saying here -- that we should all constantly "lead", but only if
we're guaranteed to do it correctly every time?
> (2) The "mother" who grabs you with what should be her (or his -
> "mother" is figurative here) free hand and helps you like she'd help a
> toddler. (Neither previous poster says so, but I expect it is this
> sort of touch that precipated the negative reactions mentioned above.
> I know that to ME, it feels like an extreme put-down, and I will NEVER
> ask a woman to dance who treats me like that.)
You're missing an opportunity!
I've had this experience a few times when dancing away from my usual
geography. Somebody sees this stranger, me, coming toward them and thinks
"I don't recognize this person as a regular dancer, so he must be a
beginner. I'll be very very helpful." She carefully leads me through the
complexities of our allemande or box-the-gnat, and then smilingly lets me
proceed on my bumbling way.
In such cases, it can be great fun to make a point of dancing with that
woman again, and without comment (and with a friendly smile) demonstrating
that I actually do know how to dance, even though she hasn't met me
before.
Dave Goldman
<nkmR...@bubbaguitar.com> wrote:
> I'm sure that one reason
> contra corners is rarely seen at contra dances is because it is so
> prone to derailment. Great old figure, though, and fun to struggle
> with if the crowd is not uptight.
Bill, you should try contradancing here in Portland! (Perhaps some evening
when you're not calling a fun dance across town.) I'd guess that a
contra-corners happens in maybe two out of three of our regular dances.
(I note, without criticism, an inconsistency in your posts. Today, it's
too bad that we don't do great old derailment-prone figures such as
contra-corners. Previously, the major change you would have us make in our
dance evenings would be to eliminate confusing, beginner-unfriendly
figures.
If you're just expressing ambivalence about preserving great figures vs.
hosting beginner-friendly dances, then I understand and can relate. That's
it, right? You wouldn't merely be expressing a desire for great old
figures but a disdain for equally-complex but newfangled figures, right?)
The Martins
in message >
> Um, Bill, I don't think you needed to respond to Bruce's post.
> (He's on a roll lately; I'm assuming that it's either a form of
> attempted humor or else a sign of bitterness.)
Dang. My own bitterness caused me to have a literal moment. I must be
on a roll, too.
Bill
The Martins
in message >
> Bill, you should try contradancing here in Portland!
> (Perhaps some evening when you're not calling a
> fun dance across town.)
You mean the other side of the tracks? Har har har!
> If you're just expressing ambivalence about preserving
> great figures vs. hosting beginner-friendly dances, then
> I understand and can relate. That's it, right? You wouldn't
> merely be expressing a desire for great old figures but a
> disdain for equally-complex but newfangled figures, right?)
I don't scowl at the inclusion of challenging material in a dance
program. I do snarl at a mostly challenging dance program. I like
contra corners a lot, but, naturally, you need a sizable group of
regular attendees, experienced dancers who can carry the
knowledge of that figure from one dance to the next. Its the kind
of figure that is pointless to include unless the aim is to make it
a regular feature of the dance series. Of course, the caller could use
it as a weapon if he doesn't like the crowd.
Bill
Dave Goldman
<nkmR...@bubbaguitar.com> wrote:
> Of course, the caller could use it as a weapon if he doesn't like the crowd.
Ah! An element of caller strategy I have been overlooking all these years!
(Being focused, myself, chiefly on the battle between callers and bands.)
Bruce Henderson
(snip) it can be great fun to make a point
Recapturing the fun undermines the dance community!
MeCorva
> input from other participants is not welcomed. This is doubly
> destructive because we often learn best what we teach.
This depends a lot on the caller -- some callers start calling because
they need that level of control. However, most callers out where I'm
from are willing to let the foursome work itself out as long as A:
there aren't 3 people telling the 1 beginner what to do B: Everyone
isn't confused at once, leading to babble C: The advisor isn't
overloading the beginner. You have a generally well thought out post,
so I'm going to assume that you teach as you post -- and therefore
I'll blame the callers.
I liked your descriptions of leading -- and your comments to beginners
that they should watch the other dancers is a very good one. In
fact, when I teach people next week, I'll add that to my litany.
I don't really agree with your comments about "mothers" and "hand
waggling", since what helps a beginner can be insulting to a veteran
dancer -- but that's expected. And sometimes, a hand waggle can be
necessary, since beginners aren't trained to notice the other dancers.
But, to each their own, I guess. ( it's worth noting as you do that
many "helpful" suggestions can be annoying if done excessively,
repeatedly, or pointedly)
mc...@vms.cis.pitt.edu
> I'm a decent contra dancer after two years of dancing. I remember
> much of the trouble I had learning to dance, and have made suggestions
> over this forum as to how beginners could better be brought into the
> dance community.
It is a good question. It isn't particulary simple. "Better"
can be quicksand.
>
> But the problem is not just in the beginners, but in the
> general dance community. If everybody "helped," beginners
> could be brought up to speed more quickly.
This is a good ideal. Largely, it is what community dance is
about, IMO.
> Unfortunatly, the callers usually discourage this
> by discouraging the experienced dancers from helping
> the inexperienced dancers.
Sometimes there aer good reasons for this. I've seen
well-meaning "help" change an adequite 90 second
walkthrough into a 5 minute quagmire.
Sometimes you know they'll get it the second time through, but they will be
confused the first time through. Nothing will
make it faster, but you can hinder that.
> I see this repeatedly in the walk-throughs and in the
> beginners lessons. Callers seem to want to control the "lesson" and
> input from other participants is not welcomed. This is doubly
> destructive because we often learn best what we teach.
>
Participation can be very good. Sometimes it isn't, though.
In my workshop, I try to have beginners do a move half a
dozen times (with feedback), so they can get the feel and
the timing. Get an experienced dancer who wants to SHOW
that there are 4 variations on that move? Will that help?
> In addition, I find that dancers in general just don't seem to
> understand certain things about contra dancing that to me seem
> obvious.
Oh, that is so true for all of us. But sometimes what strikes
me as "obvious" strikes someone else as "wrong."
Like the guy who shows moves (above): he thinks it's wrong
to try to get them to do things one way that is smooth and
feels good. It's deceptive telling them it's how to do it,
when there are a few "right" ways. That is obviously something
I don't understant and he helps me with it.
<snip>
> ... it's completely unnecessary to remember the
> figures.
>
> Part of the reason for this is that the dancers up and down the entire
> line communicate with each other throughout the dance. Each dancer
> has a gist of an idea of the next figure, and between the gists, a
> complete memory is formed. Beginners screw up more often not because
> they don't remember the next figure, or don't know how to do it, but
> because they don't know how to participate in this group
> communications.
Wow. I think this is one of the best descriptions of community dance I've
heard.
Quote of the year here, Bruce.
>
> The receiving end of the communication is principally visual: Looking
> at what your opposite is doing. Looking at what everybody else is
> doing. Looking for leads. It is also partly touch: feeling the lead
> given to you. (The "sending" end consists of the leads I mentioned
> above plus just being in the right place and doing the right thing at
> the right time.)
Ah! That explains something to me. On first read I though -he's just mistaken,
the primary medium is tactile. (Sound plays a huge part, too.)
But then I realized: That is why you think contras are some much easier for
everyone- visual is much easier for you and contras are more visual than
say, circle mixers, squares, waltzes or what have you. Not everyone
is that visual.
There is something very visually powerful about seeing the moves duplicated
up and down the line. Almost like having parallel mirrors eight feet apart.
>
> Beginners screw up the group communication principally by not looking
> at other people. You can often pick out the beginners by how little
> they seem to be aware of the other dancers, until they blunder into
> them. I tell beginners constantly to look at the other dancers, that
> that helps them do the dance more than most anything else they could
> do.
Not just visual: they don't look, they do not feel, and they don't listen
to the music the way experienced dancers do. "Aware" is really what I can
take from this paragraph.
<snip>
>
> Having observed this much, I do not say that I could provide training
> in proper leads. However, I figure that, if I alert others to this
> notion, maybe someone will come up with a way of teaching dancers to
> lead and to accept leads -- i.e., to communicate the dance without
> memorizing it.
There's a lot of us that work pretty hard at it. I think that
is why we can get so hostile to someone who has not tried their
ideas out on real groups of beginners telling us "HERE is how
you do it."
If you worked at it, as a caller or a workshop teacher, whatever,
you would find that some notions work well. Others just sound
like they should work and you can't can't see any reason for it,
but they don't.
But you would also find that if you had some thing that worked a
bit, and someone came along and wrecked the rhythm of what you
were doing while they were trying to help...
Callers and beginners workshop teachers are sometimes like that.
>
> The point of all this is that if the entire dance community
> is brought "up to speed" on how to bring beginners up to
> speed, then it would beccome more of a real community.
A whole community? Up to speed? What, you gonna kick someone
out just 'cause they're a bit of a lame ass?
We're talking about people here.
Real communities always have bit of disfunction to them. One
way or another. Would you like to try my tinfoil helmet?
> I do not feel that most callers do
> much to facilitate this, which is not to blame them for
> the problem, but merely to point out that they may be in
> a position to help fix it.
Sometimes I can see the problems a caller has and know
exactly how they can fix them. When that happens, I have
a choice.
I can either be an obnoxious fool or I can leave quietly by the back door.
I've done both. Depends on my mood.
Michael Young
The Martins
"Dave Goldman" <da...@remove-this-bit-ResearchSoftwareDesign.com> wrote
in message
> Ah! An element of caller strategy I have been overlooking all these
> years! (Being focused, myself, chiefly on the battle between callers
> and bands.)
Oh, yes, sometimes the dancers must be punished.
Bill
David Millstone
Rose <sta...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
> Sadly, the flavor of our small, rural contra dance is changing...
> We are having smaller and smaller turnouts, and are not sure why
> people aren't coming back. We now have a core of dancers who are pushy
> (sometimes physically) with newcomers / less experienced dancers...
> What do you do about "experienced" dancers who are intolerant
> of those less experienced?
As others have mentioned, what you're going through isn't unique to
your series. It's happened at most contra dance series with which I'm
familiar, and for that matter, a similar thing happened in the modern
western square dance movement, both in the early 1960s and again more
recently. There seems to be a tendency for a small group of active
dancers-- what Ralph Sweet once labeled the "overactive 10%"-- to try
to make things fit their own view of how dancing should be, which leads
to the gradual-- or not-so-gradual-- exclusion of just plain folks who
like to dance but perhaps not as often as the others.
I'd agree with comments that others have voiced, that the callers can
play a key role in fixing the problem. It helps if the committee is
clear with the caller about their expectations. Any of these statements
might be part of the committee's vision, but they can't all fit into
one evening:
-- We're looking for an evening that includes simple dances at the
start so that newcomers can meet with success on the first few dances.
-- Our goal is a program of high energy contemporary contras with a lot
of swings for everyone.
-- We hope that the first half-hour of dancing is specifically aimed at
families with young children, including a variety of dances that more
experienced dancers will also enjoy for their novelty.
-- We encourage you to provide one or two explicit style pointers
during the course of the evening, perhaps a few tips about timing, or
how to share weight in a swing, or what the role of the man is in a
lady's chain, or how to move from a swing to swing transition.
-- Our dancers expect to be introduced to new dances that are on the
cutting-edge of dance choreography.
-- Please feel free to teach a couple dance as part of your program. We
understand that this may take time that might otherwise go to a contra,
but we're interested in learning these dances as well.
-- Our dancers expect most dances to keep everyone moving all the time,
rather than dances with clear actives and inactives.
-- We want at least one of the dances each evening to be a traditional
contra dance, one of the so-called chestnuts.
-- We welcome a variety of dances in various formations, including
contras, squares, triplets, circle mixers.
Good callers can present many different kinds of programs, but it's the
job of the organizing committee to get clear about what you want. The
Thursday night Cambridge (MA) dance sponsored by NEFFA, for example,
has a very explicit set of guidelines for callers. They may not be the
guidelines that you would want for your own dance series, but a caller
coming to Cambridge-- even one who's never danced there beforehand-- is
given a very good idea of what's expected. The clearer you are about
what you want from you callers, the easier it is for them to provide
that.
Somewhere between 15 and 20 years ago at our several local dance
series, we sensed some of those problems developing. A group of us
(local callers, a few musicians-- who were also active dancers-- and a
few dancers only)-- met specifically to discuss what's now commonly
called "center-set syndrome." CSS at its worst is characterized by any
of the following symptoms: hot-shot dancers lining up to dance with
other hot-shot dancers in the center set, clamoring for
ever-more-complex dances, disdaining to do squares or mixers, vocal
complaining when those dances were presented, refusal to dance with
newcomers or generally making them feel inferior, high proportion of
extra twirls, spins, and other flourishes, frequently making the
perpetrator late for the ensuing figure, constant motion even to the
extent of adding in all kinds of extra movements when not called for in
the dance, etc....
Anyhow, we all (maybe 8 or 10 of us) met over pizza one night to
discuss the situation and what we might do to counteract those
tendencies. After decrying the situation-- there's nothing so pure as
dancers offended by the antics of other dancers <grin>-- we adopted a
few strategies. First was that as individual dancers, well-known
figures in the local dance community, we vowed to set a good model.
This meant making an active effort ourselves to invite newcomers as
partners and to dance part of each evening with folks (new or not) who
were not particularly skilled dancers.
We resolved not to rush to the head of each set, but rather to walk
with our partner and to join in often at the bottom of the sets. If you
can't elbow your way to the very first spot in line, it's often easier
for a new dancer to be the last couple in line, learning the 2's part.
You then get to be a 2 all the way up the line, rather than learning
one part from, say, the 4th position in line, and then have to switch
to the 1's part. By joining in at the bottom of the set, or at least by
spreading ourselves out, we felt we could exercise some leadership by
example on the floor, helping by our presence to prevent the "clot of
confusion" that sometimes occurs in the back of the hall when all the
newcomers end up there. We also felt that by dancing in side sets and
by not rushing toward the top of the center set we'd send a message
that there was good dancing to be had throughout the hall.
We agreed that when we were on the dance floor we'd try to model the
sort of behavior we wanted to see from other dancers. This meant making
an effort not to talk when the caller was explaining a dance. We also
walked through the figures as the called explained them, rather than
racing through a contra corners, for example, to show others that we
already knew how to do this.
We agreed to refrain from "helping" the caller by adding our own
explanations on the floor, figuring that in the long run we'd do better
if folks learned to listen carefully to the callers' instructions. If
those instructions weren't clear, then that was something the callers
needed to learn and since the callers were part of the local community,
we saw that improving their skills was a way to improve our local
dances.
Around this same time, but not as part of that meeting, several local
callers made an informal agreement to help each other develop their
skills as callers. We'd get together from time to time to discuss
programming: "I loved the progression from Dance A to B to C,
introducing a different set of basic figures gradually. By the time we
got to G in your program, everyone was comfortable with the basic moves
in the dance and was ready for the particular challenge of G."
Similarly, "Were you aware that you had three dances in a row that all
contained down the hall four in line, turn as a couple?" At each
other's dances, we'd provide feedback about the evening: "During the
walkthrough to _____, when you said "X," we were all confused. As soon
as you said "Y" folks around me instantly understood what you meant."
Did this immediately stop the sort of individualistic behaviors you're
describing, Stacy? No, I can't say that it did.
Did it lead to maintaining the sense of openness that our group cared
so much about? You betcha! We continue to have two dance series a
month, each thriving after many years. One dancer came to me, years
ago, to explain that he was no longer going to come to my dance. His
complaint was that we were "too friendly to beginners." He wanted to
have more challenging material right from the start so that folks could
get an idea of what "real dancing" was all about. My response was to
paraphrase, politely, the line from a Woody Guthrie song: "So long,
it's been good to know you."
David
Bob Stein
"The Martins" <nkmR...@bubbaguitar.com> wrote:
> > Ah! An element of caller strategy I have been overlooking all these
> > years! (Being focused, myself, chiefly on the battle between callers
> > and bands.)
>
> Oh, yes, sometimes the dancers must be punished.
Aye, and we musicians do enjoy a good punishin'!
My favorite is to forget whether I'm on the A or B of a tune. Much
consternation and hostility is generated then. Hey, and you can claim
you were "in the zone, man!"
Another favorite is regular beatings of annoying dancers.
And callers...hoowee, that's a whole other story!
-Bob S
--
Bob Stein, NOsq...@SPAMvoicenet.com
(To reply. remove the appropriate words from my address)
"When a man's best friend is his dog, that dog has a problem."-- Edward Abbey
Gene E. Bloch
news:bphgeg$32l$1...@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu:
<lots of clippage>
> In article <f586f039.03111...@posting.google.com>,
> freemab@hotmail.c
>> The receiving end of the communication is principally visual:
>> Looking at what your opposite is doing. Looking at what
>> everybody else is doing. Looking for leads. It is also partly
>> touch: feeling the lead given to you. (The "sending" end
>> consists of the leads I mentioned above plus just being in the
>> right place and doing the right thing at the right time.)
>
>
> Ah! That explains something to me. On first read I though -he's
> just mistaken,
>
> the primary medium is tactile. (Sound plays a huge part, too.)
>
> But then I realized: That is why you think contras are some much
> easier for everyone- visual is much easier for you and contras are
> more visual than say, circle mixers, squares, waltzes or what have
> you. Not everyone is that visual.
>
> There is something very visually powerful about seeing the moves
> duplicated up and down the line. Almost like having parallel
> mirrors eight feet apart.
>
I'm an international dancer, and I often dance in rooms with a
mirrored wall. Frequently, I'll be watching myself in the mirror and
will realize that I'm actually looking at someone else.
It's very weird when that other person's moves are reflected in your
own propriosensors - like I have a clone or a doppelgänger. It
feels like I'm that other person, even if their gender is wrong...
It reminds me of what you said.
Gino
--
Gene E. Bloch (Gino) phone 650.966.8481
Call me letters find me at domain blochg whose dot is com
Dave Goldman
Stein <NOsq...@SPAMvoicenet.com> wrote:
> Aye, and we musicians do enjoy a good punishin'!
>
> My favorite is to forget whether I'm on the A or B of a tune. Much
> consternation and hostility is generated then. Hey, and you can claim
> you were "in the zone, man!"
Even better: skip or repeat HALF of a part of tune (i.e., one-eighth of
the entire tune). This way not only do you get considerable attention from
the dancers, but even callers will usually notice that something is wrong!
(Though, to be honest, in my experience it is much easier to accomplish
this result by having the caller drop an eighth of the dance...)
-- Dave Goldman
Portland, OR
DMurphy139
>mirrored wall. Frequently, I'll be watching myself in the mirror and
>will realize that I'm actually looking at someone else.
Whoa. I thought Sling Skate and I were the only international folk dancers in
this forum. Here's looking at you, Gino. -- Denis
Mean Green Dancing Machine
DMurphy139 <dmurp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>Whoa. I thought Sling Skate and I were the only international folk
>dancers in this forum. Here's looking at you, Gino. -- Denis
Very far from it. But just because Sling Skate does folk dancing
doesn't mean that I consider him a fellow dancer.
--
--- Aahz <*> (Copyright 2003 by aa...@pobox.com)
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista
"Watership Down: You've read the book. You've seen the movie. Now eat
the stew!" --Dani Zweig
Bruce Freeman
and B' is that B' is MISSING a couple bars. Real interesting music to
play (no doubt) or listen to, but kinda rough on the dancers. This
actually happened at a dance I was attending. I don't know the full
story, but I was told later that the band "had been given" this piece
to play, so they played it. I finally figured out what was going on
by literally counting bars as we ATTEMPTED to dance to it!
Bruce Freeman