Hi, Tavi,
Thanks for sharing! I can't say if anyone else has authored these dances as
you have them, but I can think of two dances very similar to three first
one you shared.
The first is "Stop, Drop, and Roll," which I also wrote as a simple dance
to introduce the rollaway and half sashay to less experienced crowds:
http://www.duganmurphy.com/dances-i-wrote/
The other is "Roll Around A" by Cary Ravitz, which was the inspiration for
my dance: http://www.dance.ravitz.us/#ra
Dugan Murphy
Portland, Maine
dugan at duganmurphy.comwww.DuganMurphy.comwww.PortlandIntownContraDance.comwww.NufSed.consulting
(I drafted this message on a device that likes to autocorrect my words in
ways I don't always notice. Thank you for your understanding.)
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 12:14:49 -0700
From: Tavi Merrill via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
To: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net, Ronald Nieman <nieman(a)cox.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] has anybody else written / similar sequences?
danged Gmail sent when i tabbed! Checking in with y'all to share new chore,
confirm whether it is "original," and ask if others have sequences they use
for similar intents and purposes. Both are as yet un-danced, though i'm
certain enough they are sound to say feel free to use them. Additional
recently tested chore in the pipeline, though the rest has very low odds of
duplicating others' efforts.
Bread
improper
A1. Ring balance; Ladies Neighbor roll away (with a half sashay) along
Ring balance; Gents Partner rollaway across
A2. Neighbor balance and swing
B1. Circle L 3 places; Partner swing
B2. Ring balance; Gents Neighbor rollaway across
Ring balance and (either pass R or arch/duck) to meet new neighbors
(1/2017) Roll away with a half sashay is perhaps the purest distillation of
weight-sharing, yet compared to the more complex chain, conspicuously
absent from much of the choreography used with beginning dancers. In the
interest of teaching only one new move per dance, i sought here to use the
rollaway as a means of drilling weight sharing, building muscle memory, and
reinforcing key hall awareness concepts "along/across" in an early-evening
sequence. A2 can be articulated as either a ring balance or a two-hand
neighbor balance. For dancers already familiar with the petronella spin,
"Sourdough" variation: B2. Ring balance; Ladies Partner rollaway along;
Ring balance; all spin R 1.5 to meet new neighbors.
Water
improper: waves across, right hand to Neighbor, Ladies take left
A1. Waves balance, walk forward to new neighbors
Right hand (wrist) star 3 places; Neighbor pull by R across
A2. Partner L hand alleman 1.5
Partner promenade across
B1. Ladies R hand alleman 1
Partner swing
B2. Gents L hand alleman 1.5
Neighbor R hand alleman 1+ to waves
(1/2017) I've sought here to deconstruct both chain and R&L through,
focusing dancers on the A2 promenade and two exaggerated, hands-connected
"pass R" elements in A1. From A1 to A2, ladies may need a reminder to turn
left toward their partner for the alleman - better taught here than during
a square-through. ?Heavy Water? variation: If dancers are already familiar
with the courtesy turn, make A2 a Partner power turn and promenade across.
"Super-heavy Water:" That substitution, and gypsy (/whatever you prefer to
call it) in place of the B1 and B2 right-hand allemans, transform this into
a dance more suited to seasoned dancers and crowded spaces.
Courtesy twirls,
Tavi
Checking in with y'all to share new chore, confirm whether it is
"original," and ask if others have sequences they use for similar intents
and purposes.
Bread
improper
A1. Ring balance; Ladies Neighbor roll away (with a half sashay) along
Ring balance; Gents Partner rollaway across</td>
</tr><tr>
<td class="sched-table">A2.</td>
<td>Neighbor balance and swing
<br/></td>
</tr><tr>
<td class="sched-table">B1.</td>
<td>Circle L 3 places;
<br/>Partner swing</td>
</tr><tr>
<td class="sched-table">B2.</td>
<td>Ring balance; Gents Neighbor rollaway across
<br/>Ring balance and (either pass R or arch/duck) to meet new
neighbors</td>
</tr>
</table>
(1/2017) Roll away with a half sashay is perhaps the purest distillation of
weight-sharing, yet compared to the more complex chain, conspicuously
absent from much of the choreography used with beginning dancers.
In the interest of teaching only one new move per dance, i sought here to
use the rollaway as a means of drilling weight sharing, building muscle
memory, and reinforcing key hall awareness concepts "along/across" in an
early-evening sequence.
There's a hidden agenda here: Doing a "wowee" figure in the second half
with minimal additional teaching.
<br/><br/>A2 can be articulated as either a ring balance or a two-hand
neighbor balance. For dancers already familiar with the petronella spin,
"Sourdough" variation: B2. Ring balance; Ladies Partner rollaway along;
Ring balance; all spin R 1.5 to meet new neighbors.
Hi
Just wondering aloud since this is not something I've ever seen discussed here. Do you (or a musician you're traveling with) take a "booker fee" for planning a tour, or even a single community dance when there is a lot of planning with the event host and time spent booking musicians? How much of a fee do you usually ask for from the event host or cut for yourself from the total fee to the group?
Donna Hunt
It's a friendly low-key local community dance, and they know I'm mainly a
contra caller, so the potential for hurled tomatoes is low -- but I still
want to not stink too much.
Any suggestions for dance choices or thought-habit adjustments?
Back to scribbling on my 3x5 cards and re-reading Lloyd Shaw...
Amy
Gene Murrow is giving a caller’s workshop, details below, on Monday evening. This is open to ECD and contra caller’s if you are interested and can attend. I’ve put the details below:
"The caller's workshop with Gene Murrow will be at Casa de Las Campanas at 18655 W Bernardo Drive in Rancho Bernardo. A donation of $20/person is requested. This is the campus where Priscilla [one of our dancers] lives. Workshop starts at 6:30 and ends at 9:30. Here's what Priscilla says:
'Casa has 3 major construction projects going on right now. Car-pooling will help the parking situation Attendees will bear right up the hill as they enter the campus from W. Bernardo Dr. and go to the Sur Building reception area. That is the main entrance to Casa. I will be waiting to point down the hall to the Craft Room. Rest rooms close by. I'm pretty sure wifi is available in the Craft Room.'"
In response to Ron's challenge, here's my take on a non-glossary way out of
the Dublin Bay figure - via a unique(?) twist on a Mad Robin. Good response
when called at the Concord, MA Scout House Thursday dance this week
(2/2/17).
Included below is a follow-up spin with a more traditional Down the Hall to
simplify further. Names were contributed by our 5 year old daughter, which
then inspired the choreography.
Happy Dancing!
Don
*I ♥ Faeries - DI - Don Veino 20170125*
*A1*
Neighbor Balance & Swing, end facing down (Twos in center)
*A2*
Line/4 DTH and Back, Dublin Bay Style
(4 steps fwd down the hall, turn single to face up, continue 4 steps down
in reverse, 4 steps fwd up the hall, turn single to face down, continue 4
steps up in reverse)
Bend the line (so Twos are above the Ones)
*B1*
Mirror Mad Robin - Ones Through the Center First (starting up towards head
of the hall)
[G1 and L2 dyad moving CW, L1 and G2 moving CCW]
1s Swing in Center, end facing UP
*B2*
1s Half Figure 8 up through the 2s (around opposite role N, to end BELOW -
improper and facing progression)
2s Swing, end facing UP
Tune suggestion: Becky Tracy's Black Rock https://youtu.be/GHoJ3B-LgPY
*I ♥ Unicorns - DI - Don Veino 20170203*
NOTE: All swings in this dance end facing down.
*A1*
Neighbor Balance & Swing, end facing down (Twos in center)
*A2*
Line/4 DTH - Turn as a Couple - Return, Bend the Line (so 2s above 1s)
*B1*
Mirror Mad Robin - Twos Through the Center First (starting down towards
foot of the hall)
[G1 and L2 dyad moving CCW, L1 and G2 moving CW]
Twos Swing in Center, end facing DOWN
*B2*
Twos Half Figure 8 DOWN through the Ones (around opposite role N, to end
above - improper and facing progression)
Ones Swing, end facing DOWN
Donna,
I can imagine a scenario in which organizers would be shy to share this
information for fear of retaliation or pressure from those who want them to
change their practices. Having received such pressure, personally, I am
sure it will happen to others. I'm not saying all pressure to change is
bad, but that some people don't like being pushed. It is a (smallish) issue
around the term "gypsy" in my neck of the woods.
-Amy
On Jan 31, 2017 6:39 AM, "Donna Hunt via Callers" <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
If we were creating a doc for attendance and opening it up to the "world of
contra dances organizers" to comment why not add some other categories that
we've been discussing?
Linda Leslie suggested the Organizers group might have stats. I'm
wondering if CDSS keeps any?
When Jeff replied to my query about LGBTQ dances and groups using
non-gender terminology I wasn't at all surprised to see the list (since I
know most of those groups), but I *was* surprised to realize that there
were no groups in other major cities throughout the country.
Topics that might be on the Doc:
Dance Organizations that use non-gender terminology
Dance Organizations that have considered but decided not to use non-gender
terminology
Dance Organizations that have decided to use a non "gypsy" terminology
Dance Organizations that have considered but decided not to use non "gypsy"
terminology
There could be a write in section where Dance Organizations could state
which terms they use.
I would request that the attendance be under 25, 26-50, 51-75, 76-100,
etc. Or even increments of 20. There are several small groups in this
country that survive with under 20 attendance and other groups where a drop
in 25 dancers means serious financial hardship.
Dave is concerned that groups might be wary about posting such
information. Are there groups represented on this list that might NOT
participate in this information gathering? Seems useless to even create
the Doc unless folks are willing to post the data.
Donna Hunt
-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Casserly via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
To: Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu>
Cc: callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
Sent: Mon, Jan 30, 2017 4:12 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Another vote for "jets" and "rubies"
What if we made a Google doc with more vague categories where dances could
self-report their attendance? Something like, a column for the state where
the dance is located, a column for 2015 average attendance, all done in
ranges of 1-50, 51-100, etc, and another column for 2017 attendance, with
the same ranges? I think that would be useful for purposes of knowing how
many dances are suffering declining attendance, and where those dances are,
but wouldn't give out enough specific information to make organizers queasy
about publicly releasing data.
On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Jeff Kaufman via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> For attendance, what I would love to see is dances making their
> attendance numbers fully public. Something like a googledocs
> spreadsheet that anyone can view where you put in attendance numbers.
>
> (I've advocated for this, internally to BIDA, for years
> (unsuccessfully). We do have a sheet like this, but it's not public.)
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Linda Leslie via Callers
> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> > It may be that the Organizers’ List for Shared Weight may have this kind
> of
> > data.
> > Linda
> >
> > On Jan 30, 2017, at 12:51 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers
> > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> >
> > No, I haven't seen statistical analysis of this. Maybe it's worthwhile
> for
> > this to be polled out to various dances.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ron
> >
> > On Jan 30, 2017 10:54 AM, "Donna Hunt" <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > Just getting back to this thread, lots to catch up on.
> >
> > Jeff and Ron: You both seem like the statisticians here. Is there any
> data
> > that reflects where in the country the LGBTQ gender-free dances are and
> > where the communities that use gender-free terminology are?
> >
> > Just curious.
> >
> > Ron: When you say that local dances attendance is down is there data
> about
> > that compared to dances where attendance is not down? Again, looking for
> > information country wide or even geographic area.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Donna Hunt
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Callers mailing list
> > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Callers mailing list
> > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761 <(781)%20258-2761>
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
Since it was an article about my dance series that started this
conversation about role terms, I'll offer that the primary reason we chose
"jets" and "rubies" as gender-free terms is so that regular contra dancers
from other places can come in and dance without needing anything to be
explained to them since the terms are pretty similar to "gents" and
"ladies."
We also took a look at this graphic of Ron Blechner's analysis of
gender-free role terms people have been talking about:
http://amherstcontra.org/ContraDanceRoleTerms.pdf
We may not use "jets" and "rubies" forever, but we figured we'd give it a
try. There didn't seem to be any reasons not to try and there are
certainly plenty of reasons to try.
Most men at our dance dance as jets and most women dance as rubies, but for
the few who dance opposite, switch around, or whose gender expression
doesn't fit the man/woman binary, I'd like to think that formally
separating dance roles from gender is validating in a meaningful way.
Dugan Murphy
Portland, Maine
dugan at duganmurphy.comwww.DuganMurphy.comwww.PortlandIntownContraDance.comwww.NufSed.consulting
No, I haven't seen statistical analysis of this. Maybe it's worthwhile for
this to be polled out to various dances.
Best regards,
Ron
On Jan 30, 2017 10:54 AM, "Donna Hunt" <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> wrote:
Just getting back to this thread, lots to catch up on.
Jeff and Ron: You both seem like the statisticians here. Is there any
data that reflects where in the country the LGBTQ gender-free dances are
and where the communities that use gender-free terminology are?
Just curious.
Ron: When you say that local dances attendance is down is there data about
that compared to dances where attendance is not down? Again, looking for
information country wide or even geographic area.
Thanks
Donna Hunt
Hearing the multiple-prompts-for-same-move topic framed in a new way has
been helpful to me. I've enjoyed that local communities have different
feels to them. I like that this discussion led to Tony and others
indicating that term variations are part of the charm of local variations.
With regards to Tony's question about the number of terms increasing in
contra, a question:
I understand that squares used to be more commonly interspersed with
contras at dances, correct? Squares provide so many different moves that
they need special teaching for individual dances. So are modern contras
that much different?
If I need to teach a box the gnat or a square-thru to a room with a number
of new dancers, does it matter whether that move is taught for a contra or
a square? I agree that the contras themselves have gotten more complex in
the past few decades, but the overall choreography over time? I might like
to hear more voices of long-time callers / dancers for perspective.
Best regards,
Ron Blechner
On Jan 30, 2017 10:17 AM, "Tony Parkes via Callers" <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Rich Hart wrote:
<< I'd also add to your two requirements (enjoyable and in a safe space), a
third one. that is that our dances should also be welcoming to all,
regardless of their position in life, and dance skills. As callers, we all
try to chose dances and calls that are appropriate, and acceptable for the
local dancers. That should not change.>>
I deliberately kept my list of requirements short, because I’m not
convinced there’s consensus on any others. You might think “welcoming to
all, regardless of… dance skills” would be a no-brainer, but in reality,
some series are (perceived as) far less welcoming than others. One could
even argue (though I’m not arguing here) that this is not necessarily a bad
thing, as long as there’s at least one series in every metropolitan area
that nurtures beginners. I do want to say that I find it somewhat troubling
when a series that doesn’t bill itself as “challenging” or “experienced”
develops a reputation for freezing out newcomers.
I agree that callers try to present programs that are “acceptable for the
local dancers”; but that’s not the same as being “welcoming to all.” The
local dancers may be quite sophisticated in their tastes and capacities,
and it may be hard (though not impossible) to please them and still foster
an inclusive atmosphere.
The disparity between series attitudes may be a good thing, a bad thing, or
some of each, but it’s the reality in many areas.
Tony Parkes
Billerica, Mass.
www.hands4.com
New book: Square Dance Calling (ready Summer 2017)
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net