"If you dare" or "challenge" contra--opinions please
Dr. David Cottle
Our local callers have been kicking around an idea I'd like to try at one of
our dances. I'd like opinions please.
Most of our dances still have lots of beginners. We also have lots of
dancers who never seem to improve despite years of participation. For
example, a contra corners is still a big deal, and hard to do for many of
our dancers.
But also there is a growing number of people who travel and are really
excellent dancers, who are frustrated that we never get out of this rut.
We tried a "Zesty" contra, and if flopped. And I'd hate to give into the
system square dancers use, but what would you all think of, or have any of
you tried this:
Just one dance a night, maybe the one just before the break, announce a
"challenge" contra. The challenge contra would be more difficult and aimed
at the experienced dancers. I think if it were worded correctly it wouldn't
be offensive to beginners. You could say something like
"Hands four. Actives cross. Ok, before we do this dance, by show of hands,
how many of you would be able to do a contra corners without any
instructions? <count> Oh, good, it looks like we have enough to do a
'challenge' contra. So on the next dance we are going to pull out all the
stops, so join the line if you dare, or watch the mayhem if you don't. If
you're a little reluctant but would like to try be sure you partner up with
someone with either a good sense of direction or a GPS."
What do you think?
arge...@bcpl.net
<cot...@cerlsoundgroup.org> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Our local callers have been kicking around an idea I'd like to try at one of
>our dances. I'd like opinions please.
>
>Most of our dances still have lots of beginners. We also have lots of
>dancers who never seem to improve despite years of participation. For
>example, a contra corners is still a big deal, and hard to do for many of
>our dancers.
>
>But also there is a growing number of people who travel and are really
>excellent dancers, who are frustrated that we never get out of this rut.
>
>We tried a "Zesty" contra, and if flopped. And I'd hate to give into the
>system square dancers use, but what would you all think of, or have any of
>you tried this:
>
>Just one dance a night, maybe the one just before the break, announce a
>"challenge" contra. The challenge contra would be more difficult and aimed
>at the experienced dancers. I think if it were worded correctly it wouldn't
>be offensive to beginners. You could say something like....
I've been pondering ideas like this for several years. Periodically
I've been heard to complain that in general the contra dance community
does almost nothing to encourage dancing beyond the beginners' level.
Many dance groups are good about providing a level of instruction
adequate to enable a newcomer to enjoy his first evening's dance. But
none that I've come in contact with regularly do anything at all
beyond this level. I've seen one group attempt a series of workshops
aimed at dancers beyond the beginner's level, but it was done in a bad
time slot and at a bad venue, and was a poorly attended flop.
The idea of presenting an instructive and rewarding dance at a regular
time at _every_ session of a dance series seems like a very good one.
There are two principal ways that it could be done. The first is to
make the dance inclusive of everyone, with adequate instruction to
give relatively new dancers some hope of dancing it well. The second
way is to make the dance exclusive, aiming only at the best dancers,
and giving little or no instruction above a minimal walkthrough.
It seems to me that the first method is best. Although the second
method could be a real blast for the best dancers, it's a bit of a
slap for the rest of the folks in the hall. It wouldn't do a thing to
help them, and they're the ones that need the help and incentive.
Furthermore, it wouldn't help those benighted hotshots who mistakenly
think themselves the greatest thing on feet since Nijinsky or Pavlova.
In order to pull this sort of thing off, you'd need the support of the
majority of stake-holders in the dance community, including both the
governing board and the core of dedicated dancers. You'd also need
either a house caller to teach and call these special dances, or a
dance chairman to coordinate closely with visiting callers. You would
have to insure that the selection of these dances, from week to week,
made a logical, continuous progression of instruction and challenge.
You'd also have to insure that the callers were up to the job, giving
clear, concise instruction.
I think that any dance series that pulled this off would be rewarded
with continuous improvement in its level of dancing, and in the
enthusiasm and attendance of its dancers.
Alan
(To reply by email delete the "r" from my user name,
changing it to agedance)
Shawn Banta
I think you'll find, sadly, that pretty much *everyone* dares, and the more
experienced dancers will be even more frustrated than usual.
Here in Seattle, inclusiveness is a sacred cow, but we also have the luxury
of a fairly high-skilled community. Have you tried extra workshops?
We used to have an interesting dancer and caller here in Seattle named
George Walker. He died some years ago, but when he was still healthy enough
to call, he would almost always call a dance at our open mike contra dance.
He was a bad teacher, but his dances always worked. One of the early dances
had two moves -- contra corners (16 counts) and balance and swing (16
counts). Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. I wish I remembered the details,
but I know it worked, since George wrote it. In any case, it was a great
teaching dance for contra corners. Lots of repetition.
--Shawn (Seattle)
mc...@vms.cis.pitt.edu
In article <B6500227.7C4E%cot...@cerlsoundgroup.org>, "Dr. David Cottle" <cot...@cerlsoundgroup.org> writes:
> Our local callers have been kicking around an idea I'd like to try at one of
> our dances. I'd like opinions please.
>
> Most of our dances still have lots of beginners. We also have
> lots of
> dancers who never seem to improve despite years of participation.
We have a lot of those experienced dancers in our community and, to me, they
seem to be much more of a problem than beginners.
> Just one dance a night, maybe the one just before the break, announce a
> "challenge" contra. The challenge contra would be more difficult and aimed
> at the experienced dancers. I think if it were worded correctly it wouldn't
> be offensive to beginners.
I think, that if your community is like mine, this would not help anything.
There would be a few true neophytes who would drop
out, but you would also have
people who were sensitive people
who have been dancing for a few months
and can follow directions excellently who
would exclude themselves. These are
people you would want in your dance.
You would also have clueless, insensitive people who have
been dancing for years
and would simply NOT understand that they would
be a hinderence in a dance like that.
They would NOT drop out. So you would have quality at or below your regular
level and fewer people.
There would also be a few people who know all the moves, but have really bad
swings and think more twirls are ALWAYS better. They would LOVE this dance.
There are a few dancers in my community that complain bitterly
about beginners, but have exceptionally uncomfortable swings
and are impervious to
suggestions about it: "I've been dancing for years.".
'That may not be true in your neighborhood, but it has been demonstrated a few
times in mine.
I think the suggestion to have a didactic session where every one is
involved is a good one, but you would also see one or two people
who could really be helped by it sit them out. Again: "i've
been dancing for years..."
Michael Young
>
CareySchug
<cot...@cerlsoundgroup.org> writes:
>And I'd hate to give in to the
>system square dancers use,
And what's wrong with that? I'd love to go to a challenge contra. I am a
square dancer and international folk dancer. I can take a traditional contra
maybe once per year, its sooooooo boooorrrrring.
Nancy Martin
"CareySchug" <carey...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20001205014226...@nso-ck.aol.com...
>I'd love to go to a challenge contra. I am a
> square dancer and international folk dancer. I can take a traditional
contra
> maybe once per year, its sooooooo boooorrrrring.
There are plenty of traditional contras that are challenging. But is the
dance the problem or is the attitude the problem? A good dancer can get a
whole lot of satisfaction and pleasure from a well put together easier
dance. Dancing is an art. The challenge level of the dance is irrelevant.
Good dancing skills are gained by dancing mucho and staying open to being
taught. From the dancer's point of view it is a real pain in the rear when
the intermediate hotshots pay no attention or express their boredom while
the caller is attempting to deepen their understanding of the dance with a
demo or instruction. If they would swallow a little pride and not assume
they have already arrived as dancers, they might gain enough insight to get
beyond the terminally intermediate stage where "challenging" contradance
seems to have its greatest allure.
Bill Martin
arge...@bcpl.net
<mar...@teleport.com> wrote:
>There are plenty of traditional contras that are challenging. But is the
>dance the problem or is the attitude the problem? A good dancer can get a
>whole lot of satisfaction and pleasure from a well put together easier
>dance. Dancing is an art. The challenge level of the dance is irrelevant.
Yes, a good dancer can be satisfied by a well-danced, simple dance.
But an endless succession of simple dances is like a steady diet of
nothing but well-cooked baked potatoes. The first one might be
delicious, but after the fourth or fifth, one's appetite for potatoes
would be pretty well gone. If there were no inherent appetite for
challenge and complexity we'ed all be satisfied to meet to do the
Hokey-Pokey and Ring around a Rosey. Our classical music wouldn't
rise above Pop Goes the Weasel, and our literature would have ended
with Peter Rabbit.
>Good dancing skills are gained by dancing mucho and staying open to being
>taught. From the dancer's point of view it is a real pain in the rear when
>the intermediate hotshots pay no attention or express their boredom while
>the caller is attempting to deepen their understanding of the dance with a
>demo or instruction. If they would swallow a little pride and not assume
>they have already arrived as dancers, they might gain enough insight to get
>beyond the terminally intermediate stage where "challenging" contradance
>seems to have its greatest allure.
The problem with these terminally intermediate hotshots is that they
simply don't have the awareness of what bores (and sometimes dangerous
bores) they are. This situation is brought about largely by two
facts. There's little or no instruction on dancing well ever given in
the contra dance community outside of dance camps or festivals.
Equally damaging is the over-emphasized notion that no one should ever
refuse a dance with anyone. I'm all for being courteous and helpful
to newcomers, but tolerating folks who refuse to learn and are
unpleasant dancers forever is downright counterproductive. These
folks remain on the dance floor, continuing to influence newcomers who
are expected to learn from these "old timers". Perhaps if they
couldn't get partners they'ed realize that they had to change their
ways.
mc...@vms.cis.pitt.edu
>I'd love to go to a challenge contra. I am a
> square dancer and international folk dancer. I can take a traditional contra
> maybe once per year, its sooooooo boooorrrrring.
For me simple does not equal boring. Challenging CAN be fun, but it often is
not.
Michael Young
f
Dr. David Cottle
mc...@vms.cis.pitt.edu wrote on 12/5/00 7:41 AM:
> In article <20001205014226...@nso-ck.aol.com>, carey...@aol.com
> (CareySchug) writes:
>
>> I'd love to go to a challenge contra. I am a
>> square dancer and international folk dancer. I can take a traditional contra
>
>> maybe once per year, its sooooooo boooorrrrring.
>
>
>
> For me simple does not equal boring. Challenging CAN be fun, but it often is
> not.
Yes, I agree. And I use this argument to support my policy of aborting a
dance if it's not working for the hall. A good dancer will enjoy an easier
dance, and an inexperienced one will too. I'm just thinking one dance a
night.
Dr. David Cottle
arge...@bcpl.net wrote on 12/5/00 11:25 AM:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 02:03:41 -0800, "Nancy Martin"
> <mar...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
>> Good dancing skills are gained by dancing mucho and staying open to being
[...]
>> beyond the terminally intermediate stage where "challenging" contradance
>> seems to have its greatest allure.
>
> Equally damaging is the over-emphasized notion that no one should ever
> refuse a dance with anyone. I'm all for being courteous and helpful
During a thread a few years ago I suggested it was ok to accept a dance
conditionally. You could say "well, I guess I'll dance with you, but only if
you don't swing me so hard." Then if they continue the behavior you can say,
the next time they ask, "sorry, I told you I don't like to swing hard."
Phil and Carol Good-Elliott
> I'm all for being courteous and helpful
> to newcomers, but tolerating folks who refuse to learn and are
> unpleasant dancers forever is downright counterproductive. These
> folks remain on the dance floor, continuing to influence newcomers who
> are expected to learn from these "old timers". Perhaps if they
> couldn't get partners they'ed realize that they had to change their
> ways.
One issue that I don't believe has been mentioned here is, at least in my
current dance community, there are a number of "old-timers" who really are
old in age, are not in prime physical condition, or have orientation
challenges. Unfortunately, there is little that can be done to "change their
ways." If it weren't for many of these folks, we would not have much of a
dance at all. This may not be true in larger, urban areas, but in smaller,
more rural communities, I'd bet on this being the norm. I think that for
dancers who want more challenging dances in such communities, the answer is
to 1) travel to larger, urban communities where there is a higher level of
dancing ability or 2) throw a private dance party and only invite the folks
you want. Option 2 is not exactly politically correct, but I think most
folks would understand the desire of some folks to have more physically
challenging dances, especially if the private parties do not interfere or
detract from the regularly scheduled dance events. It's been important for
me to recognize there's little I can do to change our current dance
community, so I'll do something else to meet my desire for challenging
dances. Meanwhile, I'll enjoy helping to promote contra dancing to beginners
and long-standing members of the contra dance community.
-Phil
--
Phil, Carol, and Benjamin Good-Elliott
"Life is a child playing around your feet, a tool you hold firmly in your
grip, a bench you sit down upon in the evening, in your garden." - Jean
Anouilh
Ralph Barthine
> Equally damaging is the over-emphasized notion that no one should ever
> refuse a dance with anyone. I'm all for being courteous and helpful
> to newcomers, but tolerating folks who refuse to learn and are
> unpleasant dancers forever is downright counterproductive. These
> folks remain on the dance floor, continuing to influence newcomers who
> are expected to learn from these "old timers". Perhaps if they
> couldn't get partners they'ed realize that they had to change their
> ways.
I don't follow your logic. As you've probably observed, the bores already
have a strong tendency of flocking like vultures to the newcomers. If the
"reasonable" experienced dancers refuse to dance with the "hotshots", the
hotshots won't go away- they'll just become more agressive in corrupting
the newcomers.
rb
arge...@bcpl.net
wrote:
That makes us even- I don't follow your logic either. If followed, it
leads to the conclusion that the reasonable dancers should strive to
dance with the "hotshots" to keep them away from the beginners.
That's a degree of altruism way beyond my capacity.
Shawn Banta
1. Absolutely new
2. Slightly experienced with misplaced enthusiasm, inappropriate twirls,
etc.
3. Experienced but bad (e.g., no sense of rhythm for whatever reason)
4. New or experienced but with failing capacity to keep up (generally due to
age)
I don't dance with everyone who asks me. If I do agree to dance with someone
"difficult," it is with the (internal) promise that I'll smile, be
lighthearted, and end up with my partner feeling good about himself and his
abilities. This can include constructive criticism, of course. If I can't
see myself in this role, I do both of us a favor, and politely decline.
I've seen a dancer change from being a category #2 to being one of the best
dancers on the floor. I'm sure this didn't happen in a vacuum. I'll dance
with #1 and #4 dancers, but generally avoid the #3s.
--Shawn (Seattle)
> From: arge...@bcpl.net
> Reply-To: See signature- modify arge...@bcpl.net
> Newsgroups: rec.folk-dancing
> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2000 22:30:30 -0800
> Subject: Re: "If you dare" or "challenge" contra--opinions please
>
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 11:58:55 -0500, Ralph Barthine <rbar...@bcpl.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2000 arge...@bcpl.net wrote:
>>
>>> Equally damaging is the over-emphasized notion that no one should ever
>>> refuse a dance with anyone <snip>.
>>
>> <snip> If the
>> "reasonable" experienced dancers refuse to dance with the "hotshots", the
>> hotshots won't go away- they'll just become more agressive in corrupting
>> the newcomers.
>
> <snip> ...it
arge...@bcpl.net
<cst...@world.std.com> wrote:
>I just read about a dozen of the messages in this thread about the
>issues of having dances of different difficulty levels ("challenge
>contras" etc.) To begin with: some people love that kind of thing,
>and some hate it, and some are in between. There is a line (or a
>zone) -- on one side are the dances for walk-in beginners. Once you
>start crossing that line, you get all the issues and problems with
>dancer ability and perception and all the ensuing social stuff.
>
>All the opinions, ideas, and scenarios that have been expressed here
>are quite familiar to leaders in the modern square dance community.
>Modern square dancing has by definition always been absolutely and
>even extremely on the other side of the line, since it has no walk-in
>beginner dances (unless you consider the first night of someone's
>first class.)
>
>Yes, it's all quite exactly the same, amusingly, word for word,
>and I can assure you that there is no general solution.
>Once you cross the line, you're just plain asking for it.....
The points that you've made both here and in your second post are all
very well taken. However, there are several important differences
between the nature of MWSD and traditional contra dance that make it
improbable that the contra dance scene would approach the highly
structured separation of dance levels of MWSD.
First and most important, the emphasis in contra is in the joy of
moving gracefully in time to the music, not in having a large
repertoire of complex figures. Even an excellent contra dancer need
know is only roughly twenty five figures, instead of the hundred or
more that are studied in the higher levels of MWSD. And of these
twenty five or so contra figures, most are very simple. Any complex
figures in a challenging contra are always called as sequences of
elementary moves. This is true also when complex squares are called
at a "contra dance" event.
Furthermore, dances are almost always "walked through" so that there's
no need for the dancers to carry a large repertoire of figures in
their heads. All that's necessary is the ability to learn new
sequences rapidly, and to remember them for the length of one dance.
There's little attempt to challenge the dancers by constantly varying
the patterns. I can't remember ever dancing a "hash" contra, although
medleys are occasionally called.
So, there's no need for a several month course of classes in contra
figures before one can consider himself a contra dancer. Nonetheless,
there's a lot to learn in the way of dancing with style and grace, and
for many folks that ability doesn't seem to come easily without both
instruction and practice.
What's lacking in contra dance circles is continuing instruction in
technique, so that more of our community will progress to become
really good, smooth dancers. The challenge isn't in learning an ever
increasing and changing repertoire of figures. It's in the physical
joy of dancing really well.
If there's any need to separate the contra community into subgroups, a
logical separation would be into dance series which are primarily for
the purpose of friendly social contact, and dance series for those
folks who get pleasure from trying to dance as well as they possibly
can.
Perhaps there should also be a group just for "hotshots" in which
they'd be at home trying to outdo each other without endangering the
larger, gentler community.
Richard Maurer
If there's any need to separate the contra community into subgroups, a
logical separation would be into dance series which are primarily for
the purpose of friendly social contact, and dance series for those
folks who get pleasure from trying to dance as well as they possibly
can.
Perhaps there should also be a group just for "hotshots" in which
they'd be at home trying to outdo each other without endangering the
larger, gentler community. >>>>
The Center Set Phenomenon is a partial solution for
satisfying the needs of such subroups,
while allowing the dancers to share the band and caller.
And dancers can change back and forth between subgroups
during the evening.
I notice on this newsgroup that some callers want to destroy the
Center Set Phenomenon; yet it might be what is keeping the
dance alive from year to year. Anyone know?
------ -------------------------------------
Richard Maurer To reply, remove half
Sunnyvale, California of the homonym of the synonym for also.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Maurer
you can have the advanced contra on the left
and the normal contra on the right,
with music suitable for both.
Adjust sound so one caller's voice comes out
only on their own side.
Extra value if the callers plan ahead so that
their patter occasionally combines
into something interesting.
Dr. David Cottle
rcpb1_...@yahoo.com wrote on 12/8/00 2:46 PM:
> If you have one female caller and one male caller,
> you can have the advanced contra on the left
> and the normal contra on the right,
> with music suitable for both.
> Adjust sound so one caller's voice comes out
> only on their own side.
>
> Extra value if the callers plan ahead so that
> their patter occasionally combines
> into something interesting.
Interesting idea.
Dave Goldman
<cot...@cerlsoundgroup.org> wrote:
Yes, that worked quite well when Larry Edelman and (the then-named) Steve
Zakon did just that at Pinewoods American week several years ago. I do
recall thinking at the time that it would have been slightly better if one
of the callers' voices had been in a different register from the other's.
In that case, though, there was not any distinction between an "advanced"
vs. a "normal" contra. And it was _alternating_ contra lines following
each caller, rather than the two halves of the room. The notable moment
was the B-part, in which each dance featured a series of balances -- which
intercalated back and forth between the two dances.
Dave Goldman
Portland, OR
David Millstone
simultaneously]:
> In that case, though, there was not any distinction between an "advanced"
> vs. a "normal" contra. And it was _alternating_ contra lines following
> each caller, rather than the two halves of the room. The notable moment
> was the B-part, in which each dance featured a series of balances -- which
> intercalated back and forth between the two dances.
Lacking a second caller, I once called two dances for alternating contra
lines at a evening for experienced dancers. The dances I picked were
"Shadrack's Delight" and "Shades of Shadrack," precisely because they
provided a call-and-response for the balances. I taught the first dance to
dancers in sets A and C, and the second to sets B and D. We started the
music and I called the first dance twice through, just to get those
dancers off to a solid start, then on the third time through the music
started the dancers of the second dance. All went well, but it's not a
gimmick I'd want to repeat at our regular monthly dance. ;-)
David Millstone
Nancy Mamlin
"Dave Goldman" <da...@rsd-erase-this-bit.com> wrote in message
news:dave-09120...@i48-09-33.pdx.du.teleport.com...
I was at Chesapeake Dance Weekend in MD once when Larry did the same thing
with Kathy Anderson. I wasn't dancing that particular dance, but I remember
it being fun to watch. Probably the same set of a couple of contras.
Nancy Mamlin
Paul Kosowsky
>
> Types of difficult dancers:
>
> 1. Absolutely new
> 2. Slightly experienced with misplaced enthusiasm, inappropriate twirls,
> etc.
> 3. Experienced but bad (e.g., no sense of rhythm for whatever reason)
> 4. New or experienced but with failing capacity to keep up (generally due to
> age)
>
> I don't dance with everyone who asks me. If I do agree to dance with someone "difficult," it is with the (internal) promise that I'll smile, be> lighthearted, and end up with my partner feeling good about himself and his abilities. This can include constructive criticism, of course. If I can't see myself in this role, I do both of us a favor, and politely decline.
> I've seen a dancer change from being a category #2 to being one of the best dancers on the floor. I'm sure this didn't happen in a vacuum. I'll dance with #1 and #4 dancers, but generally avoid the #3s.
> --Shawn (Seattle)
Maya
Paul Kosowsky
potential to more diffuclut dances. I am very much looking for tactics
for hte sam that could be used in an Israeli Dance session, where I
think that many members of my session could do any number of dances, but
are slow learners at teh moment, due to a lack of need to be anyhting
else, and are tentative in learning more complex dances. NEverhteless,
I think there are many dances that they would enjoy if I or the session
leader could find a way to slowly begin introducing somewhat more
complex or rythmically unusual dances to them.
Maya
CareySchug
<mar...@teleport.com> writes:
>A good dancer can get a
>whole lot of satisfaction and pleasure from a well put together easier
>dance. Dancing is an art.
For art, as described in the rebuttal to my note, I contend contras pale
compared to Round Dancing or various formation based international folk dances.
Hopefully Ballroom dancing, which I am attempting to get into now, will be
even more artful than what I have done up to now..
I may be a dance snob, but I contend that that is no worse than the reverse
snobism of those who put down those of us who desire more of intellectual
challenge.
Should we say that all fiction books should be written at the 4th grade level,
because any story can be expressed that way, and anybody that wants anything
more complex is just some antisocial hotshot? Of course not. Each art form is
entitled to its own expression.
CareySchug
<cot...@cerlsoundgroup.org> writes:
>A good dancer will enjoy an easier
>dance, and an inexperienced one will too.
Speak for yourself. Those that don't, quit dancing, so it may be true of those
who are left. If there were more challenges, perhaps there would be more
dancers. From my experience, the turnover in american contras is higher than
in international folk or Western square dancing. If there were more higher
level contras, maybe more dancers would stick around (and eventually bring in
more newcomers?).
Many International folk dance groups start with an hour for beginners, anothe
intermediate hour, and end with a hotshot hour. Newcomers arrive early, and may
sometimes watch the later parts and socialize or leave. Some old timers come
for he whole dance, others arrive later.
In Western square dancing, there are different groups at different levels.
There too, some reverse snobs say the higher level dancs should be eliminated
because they think the high level dancers "should" enjoy the lower level
dances. I don't know what they've been puffing, but it ain't true. I know
that nearly all would quit dancing if somebody could enforce that all dances be
at the lowest common denominator. Also, I think if somehow those hotshots were
forced to go to lower level dances, many would alienate the lower level dancers
and REALLY kill western square dancing.
Andrew Tannenbaum
attended two or three, but now I avoid them. To let you know where I'm
coming from, I've been contra dancing weekly for more than 20 years, I
avoid the center set, I tend to be a very relaxed and attentive dancer,
sensitive to timing, rhythm, balance, weight, and space. I don't like
gimmicky dances or reckless dancers, because they tend to obstruct the
groove.
I question the premise that challenging dances are more fun than simple
dances, but I don't want to just dismiss the notion without reason.
I know there is a strong challenge square tradition over the past 50 or
75 years. Perhaps contra dancers who want a challenge should try them,
I think that's what contras might look like if we forked off in a
challenge direction. But I imagine that no one will follow this advice.
Because the same center set folks who want challenge contras probably
say "ick, squares" and leave it at that.
Speaking of the center set, I probably dance there less than one dance
per evening, about 5% of the time. But I've never found it to be a
panacea, The skills of the dancers tend to be similar to those in the
rest of the hall, but it's populated with the in-crowd. They're
always the last to form circles of four, they make the most noise
during walk-throughs, and they tend to be flashier, which means that
they take up more room than other dancers, kicking up their heels and
reeling their partners all around on courtesy turns. Not my idea of
adept dancing.
Good dancers should be able to dance will with everyone, not just with
their experienced friends. If you can twirl five times on a courtesy
turn, you might be impressed with yourself. If you can do it and be
ready for the next figure on time, more power to you. But I'd be more
impressed if you could gracefully shepherd a partner who had some
obstacle - deaf, blind, spastic, doesn't understand English, just
confused, or otherwise, um, challenged. I find such dances more
challenging and interesting than those where I'd play my partner like
a yo-yo.
Challenge contras draw a sizable number of people who can't keep up.
Unfortunately, the idea of "hard contras" appeals more to the novice
because they aspire to be up to the challenge. It strikes me as an
immature sort of inclination, like people who would prefer to eat
only desserts rather than a good meal.
So the typical self-righteous center set dancer has one more reason
to say "screw them, this is an experienced dance." As if the center
set dancers needed more license to be exclusive. If they gave a
certification test in advance and checked your credentials carefully
at the door, I might feel a little better about experienced-only
dances.
There are secretive invitation-only dances and dance weekends that
address this matter - I've never attended one, but from hearing people
talk about them, I think I wouldn't enjoy them either. They just smack
of arrogance.
I assume that people are asking for challenge contras because they
want more excitement. I tend to find simpler contra dances more
exciting than difficult ones, because I enjoy dancing on the beat and
interacting with my fellow dancers. If the music is all cranked up
fast, and the figures are complicated and confusing, there is no time
to interact, and the rhythm on the floor tends to break up. I find
such messy dancing irritating, not exciting.
I do enjoy complicated dancing. I have danced international and
Israeli a fair bit, and many other folks types, and ballet too. If you
want to learn something fast and complicated and cool, go Balkan
dancing. Balkan doesn't usually have live music, but the footwork and
armwork can sure get tricky. Contra dancing will never compare, until
bands start playing those twisted crooked tunes. Maybe not such a good
idea, unless the band is very careful - Moving Violations, which plays
around Western Mass, is a nice step in this Balkan/contra fusion
direction. But it's still just contra dancing with very interesting
music.
Tricking up contra dancing just strikes me as odd. Gee, we could put
steeplechase obstacles in the middle of each set. How about laser
lights, mirror balls, and smoke. Monday Nitro! Big steroid pumped
callers bellowing "circle up four, you pencil-necked geeks!" Or
spinning knives. Make it more like a video game. Gotta bring in the
youngsters. Hmmm, where was I?
I have been to many very exciting contra dances lately. What makes
them so fine is great music, and that tends to draw good crowds of
dancers. Good callers can help too, by calling interesting (not the
same as difficult or gimmicky) dances, and then getting the hell out
of the way. Callers are a (very) necessary evil, but if we could
dance without callers, we would, sorry callers. (This point is
debatable, I know. No more so than the rest of my opinions.) But I
don't go to a dance to hear the caller (as a rule). Callers who try
to impress their special personality on the dance are barking up the
wrong tree. Yes, your personality will show, fine. Just don't force
it.
When I look at the calendar and see my favorite dances coming up, I'm
thinking of the bands and the dance groove. I'm not saying, gee, I
hope they do spaghetti medley double-time no-walk-thru hash call
teacup chain power power power turn. I suppose there are many who
disagree with me. But I get queasy just thinking about it.
If you're bored at your contra dance, I'd suggest visiting a dance
where people really are excited, and try to find out what makes that
dance tick. If you're in the New England area, come out to the Snow
Ball or the Dance Flurry this winter, these annual events will have
great music. When they're done, I'd defy you to tell me that they'd
have been better if the dances were more challenging.
Andy
Phil and Carol Good-Elliott
>
> I assume that people are asking for challenge contras because they
> want more excitement. I tend to find simpler contra dances more
> exciting than difficult ones, because I enjoy dancing on the beat and
> interacting with my fellow dancers. If the music is all cranked up
> fast, and the figures are complicated and confusing, there is no time
> to interact, and the rhythm on the floor tends to break up. I find
> such messy dancing irritating, not exciting.
Andrew, you apparently have some very strong opinions about contradancing
and some of the socializing that goes along with it. I have differing views
on many points. I, too, have been contradancing (I include squaredance when
I refer to contradance) for more than 20 years. I also have danced several
other styles of dance - formal and informal. I enjoy the challenge of
contras and squares that do more than go through the traditional figures. I
also enjoy good, simple, community dancing where everyone gets to dance and
have fun. I enjoy contradance when 1) folks are there enjoying themselves,
not behaving snobbishly and respecting the dancing abilities/limitations of
others, 2) when everyone is "in the groove" - no matter how complex the
dance, 3) when challenged with complex moves or calls and dancers are
working together to find the groove - if not the move (cheesecake squares,
anyone?) - and the caller is doing a good job of maintaining the pulse of
the dancers.
> There are secretive invitation-only dances and dance weekends that
> address this matter - I've never attended one, but from hearing people
> talk about them, I think I wouldn't enjoy them either. They just smack
> of arrogance.
?????? I beg of you to do an arrogance check in your message before you
describe others desire for what they find fun as smacking of "arrogance." To
do a bad job of paraphrasing scripture, please check for the 2x4 in your
foot before you go telling other dancers of the splinters in theirs.
-Phil
Shawn Banta
experienced through regional events, dance camps, traveling to other venues
and so forth, what contra "can be." Those peak experiences where everything
is flowing and everyone is one time, you don't have to be on the alert for
getting stepped on, or to shepherd someone "on to the next." Not all Wild
Asparagus dances are difficult. Some of them are fun because they are sultry
and simple and trancelike. I think all of us would agree that we don't want
a night of geometry, but it's fun from time to time to be challenged.
So the question is how to go about raising the bar. To try to do this during
a dance by gradually introducing slightly more complicated moves over the
course of the night obviously takes a commitment by the caller. I know
callers get flak for being preachy, but I do think they have a
responsibility to the community to try to teach points of style. If not
them, who?
And I'd like to just put my two cents in about the music. An amazing band
like Seattle's KGB makes moving to the music fun. If the music plods along,
how are the dancers going to learn to fly? The bands need to challenge
themselves, too. (KGB did Jingle Bells as a jig.)
--Shawn (Seattle)
Paul Kosowsky
indeed work. At my session we let the whole hour for beginners get
sloppy: if we have ltos of beginners it goes longer, and if we have
none, it nearly disappears. This gets boring when there are ltos of
beginners (because some peopel do like complecated dances. I happen to
be one of them. Not that I dislike easier dances, but they do get
boring after a while.), but helps bring them back.
Maya
Gaging
Very well said.
Although I enjoy the social aspects of our local dances and feel the need to
promote them to keep contra dancing alive, I seek dance camps and weekends for
my "dance fix." I am no longer satisfied with only local dances.
My best experiences are a combination of a good/great level of caller, band and
dancers. The caller does not have to call difficult dances for me to get into a
trance, just nice flowing ones. However, a mixture of difficulties is a bonus.
Lynn Towns
Nancy Martin
> I may be a dance snob, but I contend that that is no worse than the
reverse
> snobism of those who put down those of us who desire more of intellectual
> challenge.
No put-down intended, but contra dancing is a simple dance form. That is its
charm and nature. Its a fine melding of the social, the physical, the
musical and the spiritual. If you want something different than contra dance
try chess.
Bill Martin
me...@ssrl.slac.stanford.edu
<mar...@teleport.com> writes:
Bill, thanks...what you've written is one of the best ways to describe English
country dancing that I've ever read. (Well, except for the chess part.) It's
always hard to summarize what ECD is about, but you did an excellent job.
Seriously, I appreciate it; I'll use something very similar on an ECD-related
website I'm revamping.
Vanessa
CareySchug
writes:
> No put-down intended, but contra dancing is a simple dance form. That is its
> charm and nature. Its a fine melding of the social, the physical, the
> musical and the spiritual. If you want something different than contra dance
> try chess.
>
> Bill Martin
Who is to say that you can't meld all of those with dancing at a slightly
higher level? When I use do do Western Square dancing at the almost "challenge
3" level, we still socialized, brought home made snacks, talked, etc. Can you
please explain to me what it is about the more complicated figures that
eliminates the spiritual and charm?
We talk about how "charming" it is to hear 7 year olds talk. Should we
eliminate all conversation above the 7 year old level because it is not
"charming" and people should play chess instead? Nobody "needs" the vocabulary
above the 4th grade level, except for special terms for scholarly work, so
should we require that all non-techincal conversation be at the 4th grade
level? Actually, we may be on the way there, an analysis of the presidential
debate speaches during the last campaign pegged Bush's a grade lower than
Gore's and Gore's a grade or two lower than previous campaigns. I'm thinking
the numbers were 3rd, 4th, and 5th-6th, but I'm not sure of that.
I'm really getting tired of people calling me arrogant for wanting a slightly
more complex dancing (whether it is folk, contra, square, or whatever), who are
unable to realize they are being far more arrogant than me. I say more
arrogant, because they are putting down dissenting views. They (not
necessarily you) are saying higher level dances should be discouraged or not
allowed. They are telling me what level I should dance at and be happy or
there must be something wrong with me. I am not putting down low level dances,
or saying lower level dances should be eliminated, I am encouraging diversity
and variety.
Anyway, this discussion started about American contra, I believe the ECD and
SCD (Scottish Country Dance) groups (none of the local ones are close enough or
on the right days for me to get to) are usually are much more complex than
American "barn" contra, inasmuch a moderately coordinated beginner cannot show
up one evening and do every dance.
For your ECD, do you have somebody "calling" them like in a square dance, call
the first iteration or two, do you walk through them once, or must they be
memorized? In interanational folk dancing some ECD and SCD dances are done,
and they have always been among my favorites. Angus MacLeod, Picking Up
Sticks, are some of the names I remember. Do ECD groups do Morris dances?
What about English longways contras (i.e. for as many as will) as compared to
"set" dances for 3 or 4 couples only (I always thought that ECD only referred
to the set dances, but could be misinformed). I remember more SCD names, such
as 1314, Trip to Bavaria, Trip to Paris.
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
>
>I'm really getting tired of people calling me arrogant for wanting a slightly
>more complex dancing (whether it is folk, contra, square, or whatever), who are
>unable to realize they are being far more arrogant than me. I say more
>arrogant, because they are putting down dissenting views. They (not
>necessarily you) are saying higher level dances should be discouraged or not
>allowed. They are telling me what level I should dance at and be happy or
>there must be something wrong with me. I am not putting down low level dances,
>or saying lower level dances should be eliminated, I am encouraging diversity
>and variety.
Personally, I've been sorry to see the decline of the triple-minor contra,
and the general difficulty in calling a figure like contra corners and
having it work.
I think the real problem with an 'advanced contra' dance or series is that
there is no general agreement on what that means. Is it: a series where
we aren't going to waste any time at all on teaching but just do flowy
equal improper duple minor contras in a night-long medley? a series where
we do unexpected figures that don't flow and so are hard? a series where
we dance to music in rhythms other than jig and reel and have to express
the music in our dancing? a series where we do triple-minors dances where
each couple's role is very different and you actually have to pay attention to
do it right?
Contra - and I overgeneralize from what I've seen in the SF Bay Area,
perhaps - has a lot of people who don't want to have to think about the
dances very much, and a lto of modern choreography driven by the idea that
the flow of the dance will inevitably present you with your partner, ready
to swing. There isn't necessarily anything wrong with that, but it means
that the population who get that out of contra are really uninterested in
the idea of making it more difficult.
>
>Anyway, this discussion started about American contra, I believe the ECD and
>SCD (Scottish Country Dance) groups (none of the local ones are close enough or
>on the right days for me to get to) are usually are much more complex than
>American "barn" contra, inasmuch a moderately coordinated beginner cannot show
>up one evening and do every dance.
Not true at SF Bay Area English dances, where someone who shows up for the
first time at the beginning of the evening will probably get through every
dance, especially if he or she didn't come in with an equally-inexperienced
partner and stick exclusively with that partner the whole night.
>For your ECD, do you have somebody "calling" them like in a square dance, call
>the first iteration or two, do you walk through them once, or must they be
>memorized?
When I call ECD, my goal is to shut up as soon as possible, but no sooner.
That may mean one walkthrough or two, prompting the first time through or
all the way through the dance - whatever it takes for that night and that
group.
>In interanational folk dancing some ECD and SCD dances are done,
>and they have always been among my favorites. Angus MacLeod, Picking Up
>Sticks, are some of the names I remember. Do ECD groups do Morris dances?
Some ECD performing groups do Morris dances, but you wouldn't expect to go
to a publically-available English dance and find yourself doing a Morris
dance.
>What about English longways contras (i.e. for as many as will) as compared to
>"set" dances for 3 or 4 couples only (I always thought that ECD only referred
>to the set dances, but could be misinformed).
You are misinformed. ECD is the whole genre, longways, squares, circles,
Sicilian Circles, and all.
>I remember more SCD names, such
>as 1314, Trip to Bavaria, Trip to Paris.
Trip to Paris is an English dance published in the 1600s, I believe.
-- Alan
Perhaps this is time to promote the English Country Dance discussion list;
subscribe by sending mail to ECD-R...@playford.slac.stanford.edu with
a blank subject line and the message body
SUBSCRIBE
QUIT
--
===============================================================================
Alan Winston --- WIN...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 650/926-3056
Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA 94309-0210
===============================================================================
Andrew Pollock
people can eventually get it. That's why a dance like Floricica Olteneasca
(where the harder steps are interspersed by easier parts) has been more
successful than Batuta Munteneasca (where the difficulties are fairly
constant)
Jerry & Sally Cunningham
the hardest section, it helps. Everything after that is easier by
default. Try to teach the hardest part first; then the part that comes
just before it, so that you can move from the easy part into a review of
the hard part--in other words, teach from the back to the front, so to
speak. Some dances may be constructed with the hardest part being the
first part, but none come to mind at the moment.
Good luck,
Sally
Andrew Pollock wrote:
>
> If you pick a dance where the difficult part of the dance is short, most
> people can eventually get it.
>
> Paul Kosowsky wrote:
>
> > What I think was being looked for was a way to introduce dancers with
> > potential to more diffucult dances.
>> Maya
Nancy Martin
> We talk about how "charming" it is to hear 7 year olds talk. Should we
> eliminate all conversation above the 7 year old level because it is not
> "charming" and people should play chess instead?
Simple doesn't mean stupid. If a
stranger can't walk in off the street and get hooked for life, if you can't
zone out and get lost in the music and movement, if your brain is too
occupied with puzzle solving to allow you to chat and cut up a little while
you dance, well, it just ain't contra dancing then.
We need to maintain a balance between the simpler and the more complex
elements of the contra dance program. Too often dancers and callers don't
recognize the contribution that the simpler dances make. I learned a
valuable
lesson, wonderful insight, from a guy who taught Irish sets and folk
dances. He persuaded us, through experience, that the best dancers are the
ones who not only excel in the simplest of folk dances, but get lost in the
pleasure of that moment. Behold the noodle dancers who wriggle around near
the stage at the rock concert. They can shake that bootie in time with the
beat for hours on end, the same movement over and over again, and just be
ecstatic. We need a portion of that at our contra dances. Its an important
part
of dancing, and, the more challenging the figures, the less likely the
ecstacy. Its a balance.
Bill Martin
CareySchug
win...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr") writes:
>Personally, I've been sorry to see the decline of the triple-minor contra,
>and the general difficulty in calling a figure like contra corners and
>having it work.
The triple minor contras I knew were among my favorites too.
>I think the real problem with an 'advanced contra' dance or series is that
>there is no general agreement on what that means.
I know that all dancers except western square dancers absolutely freak out at
the thought of rules and regimentation, but the lists and defined level numbers
mean I can go anywhere in the WORLD and if a western square dance is listed at
a certain level, I will know if I can do it or not. Pretty much the same for
the phase levels in Round dancing.
Sometimes even I feel the strictness in western square dancing is overbearing,
but you can't argue with success. In recreational dance, there are many more
western square dance groups than folk, contra, clogging, country dancing, or
anything else except disco and possibly traditional ballroon.
CareySchug
<mar...@teleport.com> writes:
>If a
>stranger can't walk in off the street and get hooked for life, if you can't
>zone out and get lost in the music and movement,...
So, you walked into first grade and got hooked on reading 1 syllable words, and
anybody who wanted to move on to 2nd grade is just too occupied with problem
solving, and must be a sicko??
When I was a kid, I went go to a small wooded area and got hooked on nature. As
I got older, I moved on to bigger forests, added camping, canoing, etc. Should
I have stayed with the one acre forest I got started on? After all, I walked
into that and got hooked on natue, should that have been all I would ever need
for the rest of my life?
> ... if your brain is too
>occupied with puzzle solving...
Puzzle solving? No more than 1+1=2, is that a puzzle to you? Can you conceive
that others who enjoy harder dances, do not consider it puzzles? Is it
possible different people are different? Of course, I would not force anybody
to do a challenge contra, square, or whatever if it was work for them.
> ... to allow you to chat and cut up a little while
>you dance, well, it just ain't contra dancing then.
Speak for yourself.
(1) If my brain ain't involved, it ain't fun, and it ain't dancing.
(2) I talk (though that can be distracting to others), but I cut up A LOT at
complex dances when I know the other dancers won't be confused by it.
--I put in extra turns, for myself at will, and for the woman if I know she can
handle it.
--I go down through the middle of the square instead of around.
--For a longer sequence, I may temporarily trade place with my partner.
--If everybody in both squares can handle it, I trade places with another
couple in another square.
--I may do a whole tip reversed with my parnter, taking each others roles.
--I do reversed roles with my partner in round dancing too.
--Extra claps, hand slaps, etc.
--I have whistles that I blow for certain calls..
--There are responses that many dancers throw in for some calls.
--I do "fake outs" of going the wrong way, etc.
Others at my level of dancing do too. I still say you are the biggest snob on
this list, partly because you don't even realize how you are trying to play god
and set the rules for how anybody ELSE is allowed to have fun. Don't you dare
try to tell me what contra dancing is for me.
KMsSavage
because you don't even realize how you are trying to play god and set the rules
for how anybody ELSE is allowed to have fun. Don't you dare try to tell me
what contra dancing is for me.
Carey--
The generally accepted unwritten rules here in r.f-d. include no
name-calling or, ah, negative directives. Many of your listed items won't work
too well in contra dances.
And if you ever bring a whistle to a dance I'm calling, you'll regret it.
--Karen M.
Because I'll make you sit on the stage with the band and play percussion.
ElissaAnn
> I cut up A LOT at
>complex dances when I know the other dancers won't be confused by it.
I'm in favor of cutting up when the other dancers won't be confused, but
I have a few questions for you.
>--I put in extra turns, for myself at will, and for the woman if I know she
>can
>handle it.
Do you finish them in time to start the next move on the proper beat?
>--I go down through the middle of the square instead of around.
What does this mean?
>--For a longer sequence, I may temporarily trade place with my partner.
>--If everybody in both squares can handle it, I trade places with another
>couple in another square.
>--I may do a whole tip reversed with my parnter, taking each others roles.
>--I do reversed roles with my partner in round dancing too.
I like switching places, too.
>--Extra claps, hand slaps, etc.
If you did that at a point when everyone was supposed to be holding
hands, that would annoy me (see Petronella flame war).
>--I have whistles that I blow for certain calls..
>--There are responses that many dancers throw in for some calls.
>--I do "fake outs" of going the wrong way, etc.
Why?
Elissa
Nancy Martin
> When I was a kid, I went go to a small wooded area and got hooked on
nature. As
> I got older, I moved on to bigger forests, added camping, canoing, etc.
Should
> I have stayed with the one acre forest I got started on? After all, I
walked
> into that and got hooked on natue, should that have been all I would ever
need
> for the rest of my life?
I thought you wanted
to change the nature of the tradition when, in fact, you were just telling
us how bored you are by it. My apologies for the misunderstanding. But I
have some questions on a couple of points you made:
> Can you conceive
> that others who enjoy harder dances, do not consider it puzzles?
Educate me, then. Don't tell me how much you dislike the contra
tradition. Help me understand what it is that you like about difficult
dances.
> (1) If my brain ain't involved, it ain't fun, and it ain't dancing.
There must be times when you are dancing that you get into that fine
floating trance-like state that is pure physical, and even spiritual, but
definitely not mental, pleasure. Surely you have had that experience of your
brain slipping into neutral and something else taking over. That is an
essential part of contra dancing, though not the whole story.
> I still say you are the biggest snob on
> this list, partly because you don't even realize how you are trying to
play god
> and set the rules for how anybody ELSE is allowed to have fun.
That's "God" with a capital "G", please. We're not talking minor league
here. Don't be grandiose. I can't make rules for anybody but myself. You
originally volunteered a provocative public statement (bait?) that
traditional contra dances are b-o-r-i-n-g. It doesn't make sense to then get
all bent out of shape if I bite the hook and respond.
Bill Martin
bogus address
> [ western square dance ] the lists and defined level numbers mean I can
> go anywhere in the WORLD and if a western square dance is listed at a
> certain level, I will know if I can do it or not.
You can't do it here 'cos nobody does that stuff. And if you think
anybody's going to spend six months in dance college learning it when
they could just be going to ceilidhs instead, dream on.
> Sometimes even I feel the strictness in western square dancing is
> overbearing, but you can't argue with success. In recreational dance,
> there are many more western square dance groups than folk, contra,
> clogging, country dancing, or anything else except disco and possibly
> traditional ballroon.
Not here they aren't. I've lived here 25 years and never seen even one
of those complicated square dances advertised, whereas *all* the others
you mention have caught on to some degree. I suspect your concept of
the extent of the WORLD is much the same as George W. Bush's.
========> Email to "jc" at this site; email to "bogus" will bounce. <========
Jack Campin: 11 Third Street, Newtongrange, Midlothian EH22 4PU; 0131 6604760
http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/purrhome.html food intolerance data and recipes,
freeware logic fonts for the Macintosh, and Scots traditional music resources
Jon Leech
CareySchug <carey...@aol.com> wrote:
>Sometimes even I feel the strictness in western square dancing is overbearing,
>but you can't argue with success. In recreational dance, there are many more
>western square dance groups than folk, contra, clogging, country dancing, or
>anything else except disco and possibly traditional ballroon.
Unless MWSD has changed dramatically in the last few years, it is
literally a dying activity - last time I heard, the average age of
participants in the US was around 55 and rising steadily. Of course most
social dance forms are somewhat cyclical, and perhaps this trend has
changed.
Also, in the two parts of the country I can speak with some personal
experience of - the Research Triangle and SF Bay Area - there are more
of (each of) swing, salsa, and ballroom dancers than of MWSD dancers.
There may indeed be more MWSD clubs than partner dance venues - that's a
different metric.
YMMV.
Jon
__@/
CareySchug
<mar...@teleport.com> writes:
>> Can you conceive
>> that others who enjoy harder dances, do not consider it puzzles?
>Educate me, then. Don't tell me how much you dislike the contra
>tradition. Help me understand what it is that you like about difficult
>dances.
You'll never understand as long as you call them difficult. They are not
difficult to me. Can you tell me why you enjoy reading a novel written
for adults more than one one written for 3rd graders? More nuances,
more variety, different flows from one call to another. Sometimes longer
calls mean the caller is silent for a while and one can enjoy the music
uninterrupted by the caller's speaking.
>> (1) If my brain ain't involved, it ain't fun, and it ain't dancing.
>There must be times when you are dancing that you get into that fine
>floating trance-like state that is pure physical, and even spiritual, but
>definitely not mental, pleasure. Surely you have had that experience of your
>brain slipping into neutral and something else taking over. That is an
>essential part of contra dancing, though not the whole story.
If its too easy, my mind wanders onto non-dancing thoughts, and I cannot
get into that trance, maybe. I'm glad you are saying it is not the whole
story. You or others previously claimed it was.
Would you be happier if we called "challenge" contras something else,
since you think it is not the same artistic form?
> I can't make rules for anybody but myself.
Aha, but you and others have attempted to. I never said the low level contras
and squares should be eliminated, but you and others said there should NOT
be any that are too hard for some stranger to walk in off the street and do
the first night.
>You originally volunteered a provocative public statement (bait?) that
>traditional contra dances are b-o-r-i-n-g. It doesn't make sense to then get
>all bent out of shape if I bite the hook and respond.
I was responding to previous absolute declaration (bait?) that everybody
should be happy with the present state of contra dances, and not want
anything harder.
It would be nice if there were 25 or 40 levels (instead of the present 7
levels in western square dancing), so somebody would walk in do level 1 the
first time, and after that got boring, go to a level 2 group and do that the
first time, and so on, instead of having to take lessons for 6-18 months to get
to the next level. But you would need MANY MANY goups to have that many
options. Of course, remember, that while taking lessons, one is not just
sitting a desk doing dry onerous work, one is dancing what one is learning,
so maybe people enjoy that almost as much as going to a non-class dance.
CareySchug
(ElissaAnn) writes:
>>--I put in extra turns, for myself at will, and for the woman if I know she
can
>>handle it.
>Do you finish them in time to start the next move on the proper beat?
Of course, it would not be "handling it" if I did not.
>>--I go down through the middle of the square instead of around.
>What does this mean?
One call in squares (I think in barn dance squares too) is "head couples
separate
go around to the outside". You can just cut down the middle instead. Sometimes
it becomes a race as the side couples try to prevent it. I can also follow my
partner
and go around the same side as her instead of he opposite side as her.
>>--Extra claps, hand slaps, etc.
>If you did that at a point when everyone was supposed to be holding
>hands, that would annoy me (see Petronella flame war).
It isn't. Except with partner, its mostly during weave the ring ( 'grand
right and left no hands') where nearly everybody now slaps hands as
they pass. The cut up is to intentionally just miss slapping hands, or
pull back at the last moment.
CareySchug
(KMsSavage) writes:
>Many of your listed items won't work too well in contra dances.
Betcha I could make them work....if the other dancers were up to it.
>And if you ever bring a whistle to a dance I'm calling, you'll regret it.
Since you don't call the calls for which whistles are used, I wouldn't blow a
whistle at your dance. The western square dance calls are "load the boat",
"track 2", "acey duecey" and "ferris wheel".
I am not alone. For the first two calls above, many people use the same
whistle, I have slightly different ones. The other two whistles I use instead
word responses that others use: a duck call instead of saying "quack", and a
whistle that sounds like "wheeeee" instaed of that word. And I try to always
check to see if anybody in my square is wearing a hearing aid, and if so, I
don't blow the whistles.
Maybe contra dancers don't cut up and have as much fun as western square
dancers.
I've also seen concerns about contra dancers being too sloppy in how they
dress, but that too is not a problem with western square dancers.
But I have seen no end of contra dancers putting down western square dancers on
this list. No, not everybody, but a number of people. Intolerance is ugly, no
matter how exhibited.
CareySchug
writes:
>You can't do it here 'cos nobody does that stuff. And if you think
>anybody's going to spend six months in dance college learning it when
>they could just be going to ceilidhs instead, dream on.
>
>> Sometimes even I feel the strictness in western square dancing is
>> overbearing, but you can't argue with success. In recreational dance,
>> there are many more western square dance groups than folk, contra,
>> clogging, country dancing, or anything else except disco and possibly
>> traditional ballroon.
>
>Not here they aren't. I've lived here 25 years and never seen even one
>of those complicated square dances advertised, whereas *all* the others
>you mention have caught on to some degree. I suspect your concept of
>the extent of the WORLD is much the same as George W. Bush's.
Ignorance is such bliss. I certainly will dream on, Mr Bush.
I have the lists (and web pages) western squares, international folk, and
contra/traditional dancing in the chicago area. There are maybe 6-8 regular
(american) contra dance groups (some weekly, some monthly), I think two english
and/or scottish country dance groups, maybe 15 international folk, 5 single
nationality folk, and about 42 LISTED western square, not counting maybe 8-10
higher level square dance groups that are not listed. There are about 5
monthly Round dances (no teaching) and probably 20-30 weekly classes in round
dancing. Oh, the international folk dance list (4 pages including specials)
also includes several amateur performing dance and music groups.
On the commercial (i.e. held in a bar or restaurant, where the propieter's goal
is to sell food and/or booze) side, I have just started getting listings of
ballroom and "singles" dances, so my guess would be very approximate on them,
but maybe 10-15 true ballroom dance series and 20-50 singles dances where its
mostly cha-cha, jitterbug, two-step and freestyle. Maybe there are still 10-20
bars with western line and two-stepping (or maybe more).
Sadly, all of the above are 1/3 to 1/2 what they were 15 years ago, and (I am
told) in its heyday, western square dancing was even double that, but that was
before my time.
Many park districts have classes in swing, western, and ballroom dance.
I tried going to two park district type (noncommercial) ballroom dances this
month. At one two couples but no leader showed up, at the other there were 5
couples.
How many contra groups are there in your area? I have an international square
dance directory that lists 272 (by my count) square and round (almost all
square) dance groups in the UK. Most meet weekly, the others are pretty much
biweekly. Of course they won't be advertised, because they don't want people
who have never seen it to drop in and expect to do it cold. Actually, there
are probably many more, as the higher level clubs generally don't list
themselves in the directory. Just because you aren't willing to spend 6 months
in "dance college" does not mean others are unwilling.
Some other statistics: Sweden, about 150, Germany about 450, France only has 2
listed (not surprising, as everywhere in the world dances are called in
English, and what other country spurns foreign words?). Australia, over 400.
I counted 52 in tiny Denmark. The directory is 152 pages of VERY small type,
but with numerous display ads for stores.
Western square dancers have power. Square dancing is the "official state folk
dance" of 28 states. There are 16 major national square and round dance
councils. There are about 260 local councils of square dance clubs in this
country, and 60 in other countries. These are all groups of individual square
and round dance clubs that have gotten together to organize and coordinate
their activities. There are about 200 publications (newsletters and calendars)
on square and round dancing. There are full time square dance halls that have
multiple square dances every day of the week, mostly in retirement communities.
Maybe if there were CHALLENGE contra dance levels defined, maybe there would be
another 272 challenge contra groups in the UK.... I look forward to that. I
would truly like to see challenge level contras. Well, not the 272 in the uk,
but 1000s we could have in the USA.
Maybe you live in Scotland. There were only 2 square dance clubs listed in
scotland and 5 in Wales. I'll bet there are plenty of good SCD dance groups in
Scotland, and that would draw me away from squares too.
Also, there are almost as many clubs listed in Japan, but they are almost all
listed as "mainstream", the lowest level, and I know that Japan is a hotbed of
high level square dance, so I'll bet, just as in this country, the higher level
dances don't list themselves, just as entry level square dance clubs don't
advertise to the general public, higher level ones tend to not advertise to the
entry level. When you get to the higher levels, the calendars of those clubs
are passed around from one club to another.
What about other countries? There is only one listed in Mexico (listed as
every wednesday and friday), but there is also an "area info" number listed,
which kind of implies there are other dances, they just aren't detailed in the
directory.
me...@ssrl.slac.stanford.edu
<mar...@teleport.com> writes:
> CareyShug wrote:
>> (1) If my brain ain't involved, it ain't fun, and it ain't dancing.
>
> There must be times when you are dancing that you get into that fine
> floating trance-like state that is pure physical, and even spiritual, but
> definitely not mental, pleasure. Surely you have had that experience of your
> brain slipping into neutral and something else taking over. That is an
> essential part of contra dancing, though not the whole story.
I won't go so far as to second what CareyShug said above (without a further
discussion clarifying everyone's definitions of "brain" and "mental" --
semantic differences can confound you when you least expect it). And I wonder
if such differences are at the heart of this thread.
But it does seem to me that my brain does get involved in contra dancing, as
well as in English country dancing. Dance trance is dance trance; you get
caught up in the flow, and the pleasure of motion takes over. But my brain
doesn't go away...it joins in the fun. It's not "pure physical." Come to think
of it, this is true for any form of dancing I do where the dance clicks and I
don't have to worry about getting it right, for whatever reason. My head always
gets to come to the party.
Vanessa
Nancy Martin
> I never said the low level contras
> and squares should be eliminated, but you and others said there should NOT
> be any that are too hard for some stranger to walk in off the street and
do
> the first night.
> I was responding to previous absolute declaration (bait?) that everybody
> should be happy with the present state of contra dances, and not want
> anything harder.
CareySchug, you're shooting your shotgun so fast you can't tell that you
missed the pigeon. I haven't written anything at all in this thread that
corresponds to the above. What does get my goat is
that you couple your wish for a more challenging dance program with
disparagement of traditional contras. You repeatedly imply that traditional
dances are too bonehead easy for such an advanced fellow as yourself. Which
leads me to believe that you ar unfamiliar with the traditional repertoire
or you would know that many of those dances are quite challenging.
Most contra dances have a balanced dance program, drawing on a limited
number of figures, that allows a newcomer without a partner to have a great
time without first attending classes and still provides some challenging
dance experiences for the regulars. Its a system that works dandy, but it
requires the inclusion of some easier dances and some harder dances. At it's
best, beginners and experienced people all get something, and all get to
share in a great group experience.
It gets worse. Unlike the western square clubs, a contra dance is like oral
history. There is a strong connection, through the inclusion of some
traditional dances and figures and traditional fiddle tunes, to two
centuries of American social life. We would not have contra dance today if a
few old goats in the Northeast had not bucked the fashion of the 1920's and
clung to their silly old traditional contras and squares.
So, I dissent when others dump on traditional dances or promote unbalanced
challenging dance programs for open public dances. We have too much to lose.
Bill Martin
Christopher C Stacy
people seem to be completely missing: there are different ways to "have fun"!
No surprise that there are different kinds of dance forms that appeal
to different people, or to people who are just in a different mood.
I can't understand why some people get upset about this fact.
Please just support, promote, and attent the dances that you like.
There are some things that simlar between contras and modern
("western") squares, but there are mostly big differences in
the kind of enjoyment that one gets from them. Mainly, the
way that your brain is engaged is entirely different in two dances.
I don't enjoy traditional squares and contras very much;
I prefer the super high level challenge square dances,
where an example of an individual call might be:
"scoot and plenty interrupt after the first star circulate
with an inroll motivate turn the star one quarter less",
or maybe: "Revert the loop and tag chain through scatter cross
reactivate to a diamond and plenty, turn the star 3/4, the wave".
So what? Some people love that kind of thing, and love taking
endless lessons and studying diagrams and having to think really
hard while dancing. Some people would rather groove their brain
on the music and a more familiar or predictable set of patterns.
That's why there is chocolate and vanilla.
>>>>> On 19 Dec 2000 04:56:02 GMT, CareySchug ("CareySchug") writes:
CareySchug> I've also seen concerns about contra dancers being too sloppy in how they
CareySchug> dress, but that too is not a problem with western square dancers.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
cheers,
Chris
CareySchug
Leech) writes:
>Unless MWSD has changed dramatically in the last few years, it is
>literally a dying activity - last time I heard, the average age of
>participants in the US was around 55 and rising steadily. Of course most
>social dance forms are somewhat cyclical, and perhaps this trend has
>changed.
Agreed, its dying. At the same rate as international folk & american contra are
dying. It's still far ahead of them, at least in the Chicago area. But that's
why I am trying to switch over to ballroom now.
> Also, in the two parts of the country I can speak with some personal
>experience of - the Research Triangle and SF Bay Area - there are more
>of (each of) swing, salsa, and ballroom dancers than of MWSD dancers.
I was comparing MWSD to international folk, clogging, ECD, SCD and american
contra, which MWSD is far ahead of each (and probably ahead of all of them
combined), since those are the groups that continually put down MWSD. I have
never heard a ballroom, contra, swing, etc dancer do anything except ignore
MWSD (which is fine). If you count ballroom at the entry level, I am sure it
is ahead of MWSD. If you compare it to a comparable expertise level, Ballroom
may be the similar age range and population as MWSD. Or maybe not any more,
but it was a few years ago, the last time I considered getting into ballroom.
Jon Leech
CareySchug <carey...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <91mft6$ccob6$1...@fido.engr.sgi.com>, nos...@oddhack.engr.sgi.com (Jon
>Leech) writes:
>> Also, in the two parts of the country I can speak with some personal
>>experience of - the Research Triangle and SF Bay Area - there are more
>>of (each of) swing, salsa, and ballroom dancers than of MWSD dancers.
>I was comparing MWSD to international folk, clogging, ECD, SCD and american
>contra,
Well, no. You were comparing to "folk, contra, clogging, country
dancing, or anything else except disco and possibly traditional
ballroon."
There are a lot of "anything elses", including those I mentioned.
Jon
__@/
CareySchug
in the last few years, which was unchanged from more extensive experience about
12-15 years ago.
I will grant that contras are "harder" or I would rather say "more varied" and
"more elaborate" than traditional square dancing (aka "barn dancing"). Every
traditional square I have seen could probably be done by a moderately quick
thinking person the first night they attend, but that is not true of contras.
In traditional squares, for each time squares are formed, the sequence is
repeated 4 times, once for each of the four couples.
In traditional contras, for each time the set is formed, the sequence is
repeated many times, hopefully enough for everybody to work their way up to the
head of the set and get to be the "active couple" at least a few times. There
are two or possibly three (in a duple minor contra) actions each couple will
do.
In MWSD, for each time squares are formed (at the lower levels) there is one
patter call, usually about 5 minute, then a singing call, about 3 minutes. The
singing call is repeated 4 times, as the women move one position to the right
each time, dancing in turn with each of the men. There is also a "chorus"
repeated at the start, middle and end, which may be the same. Some callers do
not repeat the same sequence 4 times, and vary the "chorus" although records
come choreographed with one verse and one "chorus", I remember some callers
having the women move left, or even more complex patterns, but I have not seen
that for many years (once the caller had the men move, but that is hard, as
most verses end with "promenade home" and that means the men's homes). The
patter section of the dance NEVER REPEATS, at least in general. There will
generally be 10-40 calls till everybody goes back home and another sequence
begins. Sometimes a caller will choreograph sequences ahead of time, and
several sequences will start with the same first 4-8 calls. At levels of MWSD
with a larger number of calls (I won't say higher levels), the singing calls
get dropped. The number of configurations the people can be in, and which must
be recognized, rapidly grows beyond, the absolute lowest levels (which are only
defined for the sake of teaching).
One thing I have hoped for in a "challenge" contra is "patter" calling. In
practice, the caller would probably call one sequence each of a number of
traditional contras, possibly with minor alterations (like dosados instead of
arming across, or adding/skipping calls in which there is no net position
change). Or how about sequences that alternate between proper and improper
(would have to have the active or inactive couple net change sides during one
sequence)? Sequences that cross over between two adjacent contra sets? In a
"normal" contra, could you rotate each foursome 90 degrees (like is done in
some duple minor contras) then do a duple minor series of calls with a phantom
couple? If you had contra dances like this, I bet you could (over time) build a
whole new set of dancers, that would not detract from the present set, and be
made up of MWSD and people who come to contra dances a few times then lose
interest and stop coming.
I also would like "patter" round dancing, which one teacher did a few times
during lessons, but there do not seem to be any other Round Dancers here, so
this is not the venue for that discussion.
Paul Kosowsky
> I also would like "patter" round dancing, which one teacher did a few times
> during lessons, but there do not seem to be any other Round Dancers here, so
> this is not the venue for that discussion.
all, nothign stops me from interjecting Israeli Folk Dance stuff into
the multiple discussions of COntra and square dance... I say feel free
to talk about any sort of folk dance, and maybe it wil lattract more
people who do that sort of dance, and we can all expand and learn
somethign new.
Maya
Shawn Banta
called by Ted Sanella (which of course required equal-length sets, so
everyone got back to his/her partner at the same time), I've done contras in
which the progression, in parallel sets, was for two couples to switch sets
and the other two couples to progress down (I think...). And some contra
medleys have a bit of the "on the fly" energy that square dancing can have.
I think there is a lot of room for creative dance crafters to widen our
repertoire of moves and expectations, though I don't think "patter contras"
will ever be very popular with most of us, since one of the pleasures of
contra dance is getting to the point of autopilot so you can relax a bit and
smile, make eye contact, and so forth. But I do think contra dancing has
been "dumbed down," like it or not, to appeal to larger numbers of dancers
by going for the lowest common denominator. Look at all the confusion a
triple minor set can cause. Sometimes it seems like the only dancers who
have any flexibility have an English Country Dance background.
There was a rather heated exchange here in Seattle when someone suggested
square dances could be written to be more like contras. Some people reacted
as if the suggestion had been to barbeque our pets before the dance. Talk
about sacred cows! Personally, I'd like to go to a dance that had a chestnut
or two, a goofy (forgive me, that's just my opinion) visiting square, a
triple minor contra, Levi Jackson Rag, several flowing but hot contras... I
think if I were a caller I'd do one experimental dance a night -- either a
contra with square moves (cheat or swing), a square with contra moves
(contra corners around the square), anything to twist people's brains around
a bit and get them out of their comfort zone. Personally, I don't think this
betrays our dancestors.
--Shawn (Seattle)
> From: carey...@aol.com (CareySchug)
> Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com
> Newsgroups: rec.folk-dancing
> Date: 22 Dec 2000 01:44:45 GMT
> Subject: Re: "If you dare" or "challenge" contra--opinions please
>
> <snip> One thing I have hoped for in a "challenge" contra is "patter" calling.
Nancy Martin
> One thing I have hoped for in a "challenge" contra is "patter" calling.
Why?
> Or how about sequences that alternate between proper and improper
> (would have to have the active or inactive couple net change sides during
one
> sequence)? Sequences that cross over between two adjacent contra sets? In
a
> "normal" contra, could you rotate each foursome 90 degrees (like is done
in
> some duple minor contras) then do a duple minor series of calls with a
phantom
> couple? If you had contra dances like this, I bet you could (over time)
build a
> whole new set of dancers, that would not detract from the present set, and
be
> made up of MWSD and people who come to contra dances a few times then lose
> interest and stop coming.
And I could take my Chevrolet, cut the top off, take off the wheels, stick a
sail on it and I'd have a boat of sorts instead of a nice car. What is the
point of turning contra dancing into MWSD? But, if that is what you want to
do, it ought to have a different moniker to distinguish it from contra
dancing. That would better fit your idea (not a bad idea) of attracting a
different crowd than the current crop who go contra dancing - and like it,
too.
Bill Martin
CareySchug
<sba...@u.washington.edu> writes:
>I think there is a lot of room for creative dance crafters to widen our
>repertoire of moves and expectations, though I don't think "patter contras"
>will ever be very popular with most of us, since one of the pleasures of
>contra dance is getting to the point of autopilot so you can relax a bit and
>smile, make eye contact, and so forth.
When I am in a square of MWSD where all the dancers are good dancers,
I can slip into autopilot and not be conciously aware of the calls. If some
of the other dancers are weak, then I pay concious attention to the calls
and keep track of where everybody should be, so I can point to where anybody
should be if they need/want help, or at least not be confused myself when
somebody is out of position.
>But I do think contra dancing has
>been "dumbed down," like it or not, to appeal to larger numbers of dancers
>by going for the lowest common denominator.
My point has been that perhaps the dancers capable of more comples figures
drop out, and having alternative higher level dances would keep them from
leaving.
>Look at all the confusion a
>triple minor set can cause. Sometimes it seems like the only dancers who
>have any flexibility have an English Country Dance background.
Triple minor sets also are no problem to the international folk dancers I have
seen.
>I think if I were a caller I'd do one experimental dance a night --
>... anything to twist people's brains around
>a bit and get them out of their comfort zone. Personally, I don't think this
>betrays our dancestors.
I can't agree with you more.
CareySchug
>I say feel free
>to talk about any sort of folk dance, and maybe it wil lattract more
>people who do that sort of dance, and we can all expand and learn
>somethign new.
Thank you Maya.
Well, Round dancing is usually an adjunct to MWSD, although a few people get
into Round Dancing first or only. It is choreographed (larger definition)
ballroom dancing, in which a "cuer" calls the fixed sequence of ballroom steps
for each dance tune played.
Sometimes "ballroom" is used for only the traditional, slow steps, such as
foxtrot and waltz; "latin" is considered separate including things like tango;
and swing is also separate including things like jitterbug and cha-cha. And
sometimes "ballroom" includes all the above. The round dancing associated with
MWSD is the larger definition.
But I seem to be the only enthusiast of MWSD here. The thing I like the most
about MWSD as compared to every other structured dance (true ballroom is
unstructured in that every couple is doing their dancing independent of all
others on the floor) is that (during the patter section) the sequence of
figures is determined by the caller and independent of the music and not
repeated, and unknown before the caller says it
One thing I like doing in Round Dancing is doing a dance I have never seen
before, which approaches the equivalent of patter, because most round dances
have a pattern of three or four parts, repeating in some irregular sequence,
and no part being done more than two or three times (eg iABABbCDCDe where A-D
are the 4 parts, and "i", "b" and "e" are a short intro, break and ending). One
round dance cuer has called some "patter" rounds during classes, which I
suspect were trials of a new dance he was choreographing.
Since there are International folk, various national folk, as well as american
contra people here, it is reasonable to discuss them. It would not seem to be
possible to have MWSD or Round Dancing discussions here, as I am the only
proponant, and there is a prominent contributer here who is very vocal and
baiting on anybody who does not let him be the absolute unquestioned master in
defining what any dance form should be or what any dance term should be defined
as.
Phil Davidson
> But, if that is what you want to
> do, it ought to have a different moniker to distinguish it from contra
> dancing.
How about Postmodern Western Square Dancing?
-- Phil
Victor Eijkhout
> Sometimes "ballroom" is used for only the traditional, slow steps, such as
> foxtrot and waltz; "latin" is considered separate including things like tango;
Nice try, but tango is not a latin dance. Those are cha-cha, rumba,
bolero, samba, paso doble, mambo, jive & swing. European usage calls
ballroom: foxtrot, slow (English) waltz, Vienese (fast) waltz, tango &
quickstep.
> sometimes "ballroom" includes all the above.
That's more the American usage of the term.
--
Victor Eijkhout
"the time comes for everyone to do deliberately what
he used to do by mistake" [Quentin Crisp]
David Millstone
in different forms in recent years. The argument, as I understand it, is
that more complex contra dances are a missing part of our contra dance
scene, that many dancers leave the contra dance world because they are
bored with simple dances (insert "traditional" for simple in some
readings), and that dancers want the challenge of more difficult figures.
At the same time, Dudley Laufman has posted several
thought-provoking essays on the Perils of Prosperity, reminding us that
there are entertainment options today that did not exist 100 or even fifty
years ago. Dudley concludes, "It really doesn't matter how big or small
the dance is or what "level" it's at or whether or not it is universally
accepted, as long as everyone has a good time."
I remember citing at length as part of an earlier discussion on
complex dances a passage from a book written by Ralph Sweet in which he
describes the rapid rise (and subsequent bust) in modern western square
dancing (in western Massachusetts) brought about by similar demands and
the development of ever-more-complex figures in the late 50s and 1960s.
Here's another description of that phenomenon.
This comes from an article called "Keeping Those Traditional
Roots," written by Chip Hendrickson (whose calling career began in 1951)
and published in the Country Dance & Song Society NEWS, issue #82,
May/June 1988. (By the way, there are many good reasons to join CDSS but
receiving the Newsletter would alone justify the cost of membership-- it's
an invaluable and well-edited window on the Anglo-American dance world.
See http://www.cdss.org for more information.)
For those who want the Executive Summary, here it is:
MORE COMPLICATED DANCES DO NOT LEAD, OVER TIME, TO GREATER NUMBER OF
PARTICIPANTS.
---lengthy summary of Hendrickson's article follows---
Hendrickson begins with an overview of the square dance situation.
"After World War II, there were many dances held in small communities,
usually on Saturday nights. These dances featured live music, a limited
repertoire and were held in unused barns, lodge halls, commercial
establishments, and sometimes schools. Alcohol was a part of many of the
events, and all reports indicate these dances tended to be rather rough
and rowdy affairs.
"Gentler folk who enjoyed the dancing but not the presence of
alcohol at square dances formed social clubs, usually called 'The
Such-and-Such Country Dancers.'Š The dance clubs grew in size and number
through the 50s, and the dancers became very proficient in learning and
following the calls. The number of basic figures was still limited, and
callers were ingenious in finding new ways to maneuver eight people
through a square dance.
"Contra dances were interspersed throughout the evening as were
polkas, waltzes, schottisches, hambos, and international folk dances.
These dances were simple and could be learned by following others on the
floor although there were lessons being held for such purposes.
"Square dance lessons, when held, consisted of ten-week courses
which usually included learning ten or so of the most popular singing
calls. These dances were sure to be done at almost any event one attended.
A person could frequent most of the open dances and pick up the calls just
by dancing. Experienced dancers for the most part were eager to assist the
newcomers and show them the figures, steps, and fine points of styling."
Hendrickson describes "a different style of dancing" that emerged,
beginning with the 1958 introduction of the Square Thru dance figure which
"offered the caller so much in the way of new figure combinations that its
use became universal very quickly as the big-name travelling callers
spread the figure from coast to coast." Callers competed with each other
to create new figures. "Attendance at this new form of square dancing was
phenomenal. New clubs, classes, and callers seem to appear overnight all
over the country.... The length of lessons increases as did the need for
regular attendance at club dances in order to keep up with the latest
dance figures. Tempos increased...complexity became the norm. This was
exciting for many leaders and dancers. Others, however, were not pleased.
The relaxed atmosphere, they felt, was gone and it wasn't fun anymore."
Traditional dancing declined and club dancing became the "in" thing.
"The modern activity was unknowingly limiting its share of the
public market as it became more and more complicated. At this writing
[1988] as many as forty plus lessons are recommended to become an
acceptable (not accomplished) dancer. There are thousands of basic
figures, and a complicated dancer ability-level system is in place.
"At meetings and conferences, modern callers continually lament the
decline in attendance at dances. Classes are small in many areas, and the
activity is no longer growing with the population. In southwestern
Connecticut, for example, there has been a nearly twenty-five percent
population increase over the past twelve years, yet there are fewer modern
square dance clubs in existence. Attendance figures do not match the
percentage of the population increase. By any logic this is not growth,
not even a maintaining of dancer activity over the past two decades. The
club dance movement had changed from an all-encompassing relaxed social
activity to that of a dedicated hobbyist endeavor."
---end of Hendrickson summary--
Do I like dancing complex dances? Yes, on occasion.
Do I enjoy calling complex dances? Yes, on occasion. In recent
years, I even promoted an annual "hot dance" aimed at experienced dancers
in our area (northern NH/VT), a one-night-stand for those who craved
challenge.
Do I think that a steady diet of more complex dances will help
contra dancing attract and retain new dancers? No. Would I promote such a
series on a regular basis? No.
I've read plenty of opinions about the supposed virtue of complex
dances, but I've seen no evidence that such a program will lead to a
sustainable growth in the dance community. I have seen considerable
evidence-- such as that cited above-- that the opposite is true. And then
I have the example of our own local community dance.
Our regular dance includes a mix of traditional and new material.
In the course of a year, we regularly include simple dances, New England
chestnuts, triple minors, Sicilian circles, mixers, squares and triplets
and other odd formations, and couple dances as well as the duple minor
improper and Becket formation contras that are most popular on the scene
these days. Over the years, our attendance figures are steadily climbing.
Best of all, we attract a wide range of ages to our dance, from elementary
school children and high school kids through senior citizens. At our
recent 20th anniversary, some 350 people turned out to dance and to
celebrate the vital role that dancing has in our community. So far, at
least for us, it's a formula for success.
David Millstone
Lebanon, NH
CareySchug
TAD and IFD (International folk dance). At roughly the same rates. There are
some within the MWSD community who are proponants of eliminating all the higher
levels in MWSD, making the same bigoted claim that "all those people could have
just as much fun at lower levels". I know very well that most of the higher
level dancers would quit if somehow their levels were eliminated. I still
dance all levels, as do a few others, but I would not do more of the lower
level MWSD dances than I do now if the higher level ones were eliminated.
Within MWSD, the "plus" level (most common, after one year of classes) is
suffering a similar decline to TAD and IFD. The next level, "advanced" has
declined more. The third level, "challenge 1" has declined about the same, and
the higher levels, "Challenge 2" through "challenge 4" have declined
significantly less. Do these differences mean anything? Probably only that
when people get to higher levels, they are more likely to stick with it.
Here in Chicago there are still MANY more MWSD dances than IFD or TAD.
Ballroom (I think the american definition of the term) is on the upswing, but
there are reasons to believe it is a temporary bubble. I think somebody said it
started when some popular character on a soap opera was doing it on the show.
Over the long term, it too is declining, there are fewer ballroom dance studios
than there were 10 or 20 years ago.
The listing of ballroom dances is longer than MWSD, but the two I went to had
repectively 4 people (and no leader) and 9 people who came.
CareySchug
<Ph...@PhilDavidson.com> writes:
>How about Postmodern Western Square Dancing?
>
>-- Phil
Maya and all:
Here is just another example of how this bigoted group is anti MWSD. They
consider "Western Square Dancing" to be an insult to be applied to any dance
form that doesn't match their rigid and frozen little minds. If one wanted to
draw parallel to MWSD, one could come up with a moniker of "Modern Western
Contra Dancing", but that would not be appropriate to the subject of the
original thread. This thread was based upon something A LITTLE BIT harder than
the typical contra, not something that would take 5-9 months to learn like
MWSD.
In the international folk dance groups here, they used to do squares
occasionally, at a level somewhat higher than the typical "traditional square
dance" level. But still nowhere like the level of MWSD.
By the way, if they were to be fair to all, the proponants of traditional
american squares and contras would not try to usurp the unexpanded terms of
"contra" and "square", but call their dance forms "Traditional American
Square", "Traditional American Contra" and "Traditional American Dance" (for
both) or something like that, as square and contra dances exist in many
countries besides and probably before the USA. But they believe they own the
world, so I will only get flak for this suggestion. Perhaps the subject of
this original thread could be called "Extended Traditional American
Square/Contra/Dance".
One reason the tradtional american dance people here put down MWSD so much, is
they talk about going to class for a year, as if that was some terrible ordeal.
Those that take classes have just as much fun in the classes as they later
have at dances, the only negative about the classes is that you have to go
pretty regularly and can't just take a break for a month or two as you would
get too far behind. But no use trying to explain that to the prejudiced TAD
people.
Anthony Argyriou
at the Starry Plough. The dancers are largely younger than me (I'm 34), and
the place is packed almost every Monday night. We do some very complicated
(and tiring) dances - and our big problem is to not attract too many dancers
for the space.
Every week, there are lessons at the beginner level and at an "intermediate"
level for two hours, then dancing for about two more hours. Lots of people
come and take the beginning class once, or for a few weeks, and don't come
back. SOme of them just don't have the time, others get discouraged, others
find they're not that interested. But there are always new dancers, and
enough (sometimes too many) continue with Irish dancing to keep the
commmunity alive. There are almost enough who have had to move away to spawn
new groups - there would be an active Silicon Valley group if people didn't
stay at work until all hours of the evening, and there may be a group
forming in Marin County.
There are about 8 dances in the repertiore of most dancers who have been
there over a year - all fairly complicated. People who have been there
longer may have up to 15. We'll dance the High Caul Cap all the way through
(it's 17-1/4 x 32 bars long), then move on to a 9x32 bar long jig.
We do have a steady turnover - people eventually lose interest, or they move
away. The people who lose interest are either perennial beginners, who have
significant problems with basic dance techniques (we're not good at teaching
that), or the most advanced dancers, who complain that there are no new
challenges. We've written a couple of complicated new dances lately, and
tried to revive a couple of tricky ones which had fallen into disfavor. But
it's not quite enough. Some people turn to Irish step dance, which is
generally more challeging, but on a different level (it's all about the
footwork), some turn to other types of dance (Morris dance and swing seem to
be popular among the experienced dancers), others turn to other pursuits.
We have a relatively special set of circumstances - we're in the midst of a
wealthy, culturally rich, metropolitan area, and we're right next to a large
university. We're drawing from a large population that's more open to
different things that most of the US population. The University gives us a
constant supply of new blood. We tie into a large community (almost a
subculture) of historical re-enactors - many of the dancers at the Plough
work at or have worked at the big Renaissance Faire, or at some of the
smaller ones in Northern California. There was a big spike in interest with
Riverdance, which hasn't really slowed down since.
But - our dancers thrive on complicated dances. If we dropped them, we'd
lose many of our best dancers, possibly including most of the people
interested in teaching beginners.
Anthony Argyriou
mill...@valley.net (David Millstone) wrote:
> For those who want the Executive Summary, here it is:
>
>MORE COMPLICATED DANCES DO NOT LEAD, OVER TIME, TO GREATER NUMBER OF
>PARTICIPANTS.
>
>---lengthy summary of Hendrickson's article follows---
[snip]
bogus address
>> Sometimes "ballroom" is used for only the traditional, slow steps,
>> such as foxtrot and waltz; "latin" is considered separate including
>> things like tango;
> Nice try, but tango is not a latin dance. Those are cha-cha, rumba,
> bolero, samba, paso doble, mambo, jive & swing. European usage calls
> ballroom: foxtrot, slow (English) waltz, Vienese (fast) waltz, tango
> & quickstep.
>> sometimes "ballroom" includes all the above.
> That's more the American usage of the term.
Looking at the way Dancebase (the Edinburgh dance umbrella group)
classifies things, there is some tango in their ballroom classes
but most of it is in separate tango classes (both Argentinian and
flamenco tango).
Dancebase has some good stuff in their current season: Egyptian
bellydance, South African gumboot, Bharata Natyam, capoeira, break-
dance, several kinds of modern dance, Scottish ceilidh...
Victor Eijkhout
> > Nice try, but tango is not a latin dance.
>
> Looking at the way Dancebase (the Edinburgh dance umbrella group)
> classifies things, there is some tango in their ballroom classes
> but most of it is in separate tango classes (both Argentinian and
> flamenco tango).
Right. And that's almost a different dance, compared to ballroom tango.
Greg McKenzie
David Millstone wrote:
> Dudley (Laufman) concludes, "It really doesn't matter how big or small
> the dance is or what "level" it's at or whether or not it is universally
> accepted, as long as everyone has a good time."
I think this speaks to the heart of the matter. For some folks complexity is
fun. Others may just be looking for a fun evening of social dance. As for
me I wonder about the label "challenging" when applied to contra dances. The
most "challenging" dances are those with lots of beginners and inexperienced
callers.
Contras are extremely social and extremely good at incorporating newcomers
without separate instruction. No other dance form compares in this regard.
I hope that contra dances will always retain this quality.
Greg McKenzie
Somewhere near Gilroy, CA
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
>
>
>David Millstone wrote:
>
>> Dudley (Laufman) concludes, "It really doesn't matter how big or small
>> the dance is or what "level" it's at or whether or not it is universally
>> accepted, as long as everyone has a good time."
>
>I think this speaks to the heart of the matter. For some folks complexity is
>fun. Others may just be looking for a fun evening of social dance. As for
>me I wonder about the label "challenging" when applied to contra dances. The
>most "challenging" dances are those with lots of beginners and inexperienced
>callers.
>
>Contras are extremely social and extremely good at incorporating newcomers
>without separate instruction. No other dance form compares in this regard.
Except for English Ceilidh, English Country, and probably Scottish Ceilidh.
(And I hear that Sacred Circle dancing is easy for newcomers too.)
-- Alan
===============================================================================
Alan Winston --- WIN...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL Phone: 650/926-3056
Physical mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 69, PO BOX 4349, STANFORD, CA 94309-0210
===============================================================================
Anthony Argyriou
wrote:
>>Contras are extremely social and extremely good at incorporating newcomers
>>without separate instruction. No other dance form compares in this regard.
>
>Except for English Ceilidh, English Country, and probably Scottish Ceilidh.
Really? Assuming that Playford's dances count as English Country, there are
some English Country dances which are incredibly easy and can be taught to
anyone who can walk, in the minute or so the musicians will take to tune up
or have a beer, but there are some pretty challenging dances which require
instruction and practice to be able to do passably well. (St. Martin's,
Stingo, Argeers, Dargason, etc.)
A wide variety of dances, from simple to complex, can also make a dance form
attractive; that may be another factor in the Starry Plough's success with
Irish Ceili dance.
Anthony Argyriou
also of Merrie Pryanksters
Paul Kosowsky
> Maya and all:
Excuse me! I do not beleive I insulted anyone else's preferred style
of dancing in any way. Perhaps you misread what I wrote, or are
confusing someone else's post with mine. I've never attempted MWSD,
however I am a fan of other rahter intricate forms of dnacing, so I
certianly would not insult yours. I beleive that there is a place for
all sorts of things, and that the more levels that exist for peopel to
dance at, the better. So if I offended you, I'm sorry, and would truely
appreciate if you didn't lump me in with people you feel are insultign
you.
Maya
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr
>win...@SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU ("Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr")
>wrote:
>
>>>Contras are extremely social and extremely good at incorporating newcomers
>>>without separate instruction. No other dance form compares in this regard.
>>
>>Except for English Ceilidh, English Country, and probably Scottish Ceilidh.
>
>Really? Assuming that Playford's dances count as English Country, there are
>some English Country dances which are incredibly easy and can be taught to
>anyone who can walk, in the minute or so the musicians will take to tune up
>or have a beer, but there are some pretty challenging dances which require
>instruction and practice to be able to do passably well. (St. Martin's,
>Stingo, Argeers, Dargason, etc.)
Yes indeed, but this doesn't contradict my point at all. There are contra
dances with timing or geography challenges, etc, and these often don't get
done at normal contra evenings with first-timers present, or are built up
to with easier dances. At social (as distinct from performance-based)
English Country, a good leader manages the instruction/dance ratio
appropriately for the group that's present. If you have 19 people and 5
are brand new - to pick a totally hypothetical example from when I called
the Berkeley dance last Wednesday - you choose relatively simple duple
minors, choose dances sharing the same figures, and make sure that if you
introduce complexity that you've already introduced the basic concepts,
while also choosing dances of enough intrinsic merit that they're fun for
the experienced dancers. Dargason is easier if people already know how a
hey works. As a result, a first-timer can come to an evening of English
Country dancing with no advance knowledge and often be able to dance every
dance, which is something like the standard that Greg McK was claiming for
contra dance. (Of course, there is the problem that you plan your program
to introduce all the pieces that go into your difficult dance, and
somebody brand-new walks in the door an hour after the dance starts and
jumps ito your difficult dance and is totally lost. But this happens at
contras, too.)
(A leader who isn't responsive to the needs of the group he or she
actuallyy has, or who has a different agenda - is running an experienced or
advanced dance, publicized a workshop in the brain-bending dances of Colin
Hume, or whatever - won't produce an accessible experience for the
first-timer, but this is equally true for contradances.
There's no magic, unique thing about contras that automatically makes every
dance in the repertoire easy and fun, or that automatically makes an
evening of contra accessible to first-timers in the face of an incompetent
or unresponsive caller. (Nor is there about English Country, or English
Ceilidh, or barn dances.) However, the goal in most social evenings in
these styles is an evening of fun with just enough instruction to make it
work, and it can be accomplished by good callers with good musicians.
(That last paragraph is actually expanding my argument with Greg, not
directly responding to what you said.)
>
>A wide variety of dances, from simple to complex, can also make a dance form
>attractive; that may be another factor in the Starry Plough's success with
>Irish Ceili dance.
This makes it attractive to the people who find that kind of thing
attractive. The Gaskell ball is (as you know) phenomenally popular with
a menu of a few couple dances and a few extremely easy country dances
(Galopede, Sir Roger). Not everyone who likes contras will do squares.
That ECD has a wide range of figures, of complexity, of meter, of mood --
a range not apparent in the first-edition-Playford-interpreted-as-rowdy-
peasant-dances mode of the RenFaire performance teams - is interesting
and attractive to me, but this isn't reflected in attendance figures in
comparison with contras.
(And that's why there are different kinds of dancing, of course - people
don't all have the same tastes. But it's also why you can't take other
people's word about whether other kinds of dancing are fun or not - those
people might not enjoy them, but you might, and vice versa.)
-- Alan (about to be away from news and email for five days, so won't see
responses until then.>
Greg McKenzie
Alan Winston - SSRL Admin Cmptg Mgr wrote:
> As a result, a first-timer can come to an evening of English
> Country dancing with no advance knowledge and often be able to dance every
> dance, which is something like the standard that Greg McK was claiming for
> contra dance.
Alan also wrote:
> There's no magic, unique thing about contras that automatically makes every
> dance in the repertoire easy and fun, or that automatically makes an
> evening of contra accessible to first-timers in the face of an incompetent
> or unresponsive caller. (Nor is there about English Country, or English
> Ceilidh, or barn dances.) However, the goal in most social evenings in
> these styles is an evening of fun with just enough instruction to make it
> work, and it can be accomplished by good callers with good musicians.
> (That last paragraph is actually expanding my argument with Greg, not
> directly responding to what you said.)
Alan, I am sorry if I was unclear in my post. What I intended to point out is that contras are unique in
their ability to offer *both* a high level of social interaction *and* a high level of accessability to
novices. It is, in part, because contras offer a generous amount of physical contact, that newcomers can
be "swept up" into the flow of the dance by more experienced dancers who physically guide them into the
proper location. In English Country dance the cues are often more subtle, with less physical contact, thus
requiring a bit more attentiveness by new dancers. As you point out, however, an astute caller can easily
overcome such minor differences.
Greg McKenzie
CareySchug
>Excuse me! I do not beleive I insulted anyone else's preferred style
>of dancing in any way.
You most certainly did not. I apologize for giving you the impression that I
would think anything negative about your contributions to this list.
And you were about the only one who neither silently stood by nor actively
attacked MWSD and (in general) forms of dance that you did not personally
promote. You were the only one who kept an open mind and were proud to say so
publicly. I addressed it to you, since I was complaining about other negative
members of this list that are so dedicated to baiting me that I no longer see a
point in responding to them; their minds are so tightly closed that no new idea
could ever find its way in.
CareySchug
<ab...@justicedepartment.gov> writes:
>What I intended to point out is that contras are unique in
>their ability to offer *both* a high level of social interaction *and* a high
>level of accessability to
>novices.
And others here are pointing out that contras are NOT unique, however much you
wish to make them so. Almost anything except MWSD and performance dances (e.g.
ballet) offer a high level of social interaction and CAN (MAY) be made
accessable to newcomers in a mixed group. This includes, but is not limited
to, (american) clogging, English and Scottish country dancing, international
folk dancing, Traditional American Square dancing. The leader can make any of
these forms, including American Contras, accessable to novices or not, if they
choose and have the ability.
Aside: Do some or most members of this list include traditional American square
dancing in with "contras"? The groups that do American contras here also do
squares, cajun two stepping, and perhaps anything else done to the same style
of music.
Unlike (in practice) Traditional American Contras, I would further like to
claim that international folk dance quite frequently will (1) provide a high
level of social interacion, (2) be accessable to newcomers *AND* (3) at the
same time can include more complex forms to retain those who might get bored
with the novice level dances.
ElissaAnn
<to Maya>
>And you were about the only one who neither silently stood by nor actively
>attacked MWSD and (in general) forms of dance that you did not personally
>promote.
The only one? I doubt it.
I don't remember attacking MWSD in my reply to you. If I did, it was
unintentional. What exactly did I say that you interpreted that way?
Elissa
--
http://members.aol.com/elissaann
Greg McKenzie
CareySchug wrote:
> In article <3A4CF560...@justicedepartment.gov>, Greg McKenzie
> <ab...@justicedepartment.gov> writes:
>
> >What I intended to point out is that contras are unique in
> >their ability to offer *both* a high level of social interaction *and* a high
> >level of accessability to
> >novices.
>
> And others here are pointing out that contras are NOT unique, however much you
> wish to make them so.
I apologize for my poor choice of words. "Unique" is not the correct word for
what I was trying to say.
Also:
> Almost anything except MWSD and performance dances (e.g.
> ballet) offer a high level of social interaction and CAN (MAY) be made
> accessable to newcomers in a mixed group. This includes, but is not limited
> to, (american) clogging, English and Scottish country dancing, international
> folk dancing, Traditional American Square dancing. The leader can make any of
> these forms, including American Contras, accessable to novices or not, if they
> choose and have the ability.
You'll get no argument from me on this point. Social dancing is very social and,
by implication, accessible to wide groups of people. The leader makes a big
difference.
Greg
Phil Davidson
> Aside: Do some or most members of this list include traditional American square
> dancing in with "contras"? The groups that do American contras here also do
> squares, cajun two stepping, and perhaps anything else done to the same style
> of music.
"Do ... members of this list include ..." -- I suppose you mean the
regular dance events frequented by participants in r.f-d. I'm guessing
that you're not talking about nomenclature.
Here's one data point. The (SF) Bay Area Country Dance Society events
vary. The regular dance in El Cerrito is called "squares and contras";
it's about half-and-half. Some of the other regular contra dances have
an occasional square dance in an evening of contras. There's usually a
Norwegian polka at the beginning (during the sound check), a hambo after
the break, and a waltz at the end of both sets; with slight variation.
In other words, square dances are a definite minority at regular BACDS
events. They seem to be somewhat less popular than contras. I think
I've heard a few regular contra dancers express their relative dislike
for squares, but they dance them anyway. I've only met one dancer who
refused to dance square dances, but she lives in another state.
The BACDS camps and dance weekends have more variety. The fall and
spring dance weekends include contras, squares, English country dances,
plus workshops for couple dance (often without teaching). Sierra
Spring, the American dance week, includes contras, squares, swing,
clogging and (starting in 2000) salsa, plus other couple dances,
sometimes with instruction (such as Cajun).
I'm not aware of the content of BACDS's English country dances or Morris
events, or of English Week or Family Week.
(The Alta Sierra event, over Labor Day Weekend, closely resembles Sierra
Swing. At least it did in 1998. Alta Sierra is not a BACDS event.)
When BACDS dancers cut loose on their own, I find a large number of
people are experienced couple dancers. People do swing, polka, Cajun,
salsa, and some other ballroom steps.
This summary could probably benefit from refinement by other BACDS
regulars.
-- Phil Davidson, Berkeley, CA
Nancy Martin
> Maya and all:
>
> Here is just another example of how this bigoted group is anti MWSD. They
> consider "Western Square Dancing" to be an insult to be applied to any
dance
> form that doesn't match their rigid and frozen little minds.
For God's sake, that is such a preposterous exaggeration it defies reason.
Come on, Carey, admit it. You're a troll, aren't you. You're pulling our
leg, eh? Come on, fella, you can let us in on the joke.
Bill Martin
CareySchug
>>and you were about the only one who neither silently stood by nor actively
>>attacked MWSD and (in general) forms of dance that you did not personally
>>promote.
>The only one? I doubt it.
>I don't remember attacking MWSD in my reply to you. If I did, it was
>unintentional. What exactly did I say that you interpreted that way?
>Elissa
I don't remember anybody else (besides Maya) objecting to attacks upon MWSD.
Certainly not regularly and not consistently. And I did say "about the only
one".
I reviewed your response to me, and I believe that was a positive interaction,
in which you raised reasonable questions and I (hopefully) provided additional
information that satisfied your concerns. My note was a response to an attack
on MWSD as being something done by people who did not know how to have fun.
Probably because you are familiar with it and agree with it, you did not ask
for explanation of the "cut-ups" done by people at contra dances. Although you
did not attack MWSD, by questioning cut-ups at MWSD and not at TAC, you
implicitly acquiesce in the attacks on MWSD.
Aside to group: I will now ask what kind of "cut ups" are done regularly at
Traditional American Contra dances?
Several people (a small but vocal minority of this list) have consistently
attacked MWSD and anybody who dares to disagree with their "vision" for what is
the "correct" (i.e. Traditional American Contra) dance form with demands that
others call the slightest deviation from their definition some new name, and
suggesting pejorative or derogatory names. Whether such posts were intended as
attacks or just based upon lack of awareness of what they said is only of
limited importance. If I call a person of a minority by what is a racist term,
even if I was ignorant of that fact, it is still my fault for being ignorant.
Nobody but Maya has consistently and universally rebutted such attacks upon
dancing diversity, suggesting that all should keep an open mind. And phrasing
her ideas as opinions, not as absolutes. By my recollection, others that have
reacted to attacks on dancing diversity have only responded to support their
own private views, not speaking up for all.
Remember the famous quote (approximately):
First they came for the communists, and I was not a communist, so I did not
speak up.
Then they came for the labor organizers, and I was not a labor organizer, so I
did not speak up.
Then they came for the Jews, and I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up.
...
Then they came for me, and there was nobody left to speak up for me.
Paul Kosowsky
The leader makes a big
> difference.
Oh my does the leader make a big difference! Perfect agreement from me
there. WHile certain aspects of interaction at dance events seem to be
stable (at least inside of Israeli Dance, which is all I've done enough
to really knwo about it), a great deal of the feel of any group seems to
come from teh leader and the prominent members of that group. IT can be
amazing how different the style of one group is from any other, while
still feeling comfortable for the vast majority of people coming from
the same larger community/dance style/wahtever. Certainly in what
little trasveling I've done, I've noticed major differences in dress,
attitude, and behavior between different sessions.
Maya
KMsSavage
<mucho whiny "you're being mean to me, you bunch of jerks!" snippage>
<Remember the famous quote (approximately):
First they came for the communists, and I was not a communist, so I did not
speak up.
Then they came for the labor organizers, and I was not a labor organizer, so I
did not speak up.
Then they came for the Jews, and I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up...>
And then they came for the MWSD'ers, and since I am not a MWDS'er Carey is
now in my killfile.
::PLONK::
--Karen M.
tired of reading post after post after post of "all you creeps hate MWSD and
you're insulting me!" stuff
Shawn Banta
I certainly don't advocate putting square dancers into "camps," and tend to
think dance preferences are a personal choice which should be respected as
such, the pettiness and name calling (on more than one front) is
unfortunate. THAT'S why I've kept quiet.
And as an answer to the "cut-up" question: contra dancers don't use that
term, which is perhaps why we haven't related to the concept. Frank Clayton
is the master of the whatever-you-call-it in contra dancing. I think in
general, though, the hard-line traditionalists would say the dances should
be danced as written. (For example, some might say clapping during
Petronella turns is a "cut-up," others would say it's an abomination.)
--Shawn (Seattle)
> From: carey...@aol.com (CareySchug)
>
> ...First they came for the communists, and I was not a communist, so I did not