Each year for the past four years I have called a dance for adult attendees, and a few family members, at an adult chamber music camp. Some campers also play the tunes, all selected to be AABB and with B part contrasting with A part.
I have never had a roomful of people who needed less coaching on dancing with the structure of the tune. I bet that was pretty true when they were kids, too.
Richard Hopkins
hopkinsrs(a)comcast.net
850-544-7614 cell
Sent from my iPad
> On Aug 17, 2019, at 4:07 PM, callers-request(a)lists.sharedweight.net wrote:
>
> Send Callers mailing list submissions to
> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> callers-request(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> callers-owner(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (Linda S. Mrosko)
> 2. Re: Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (David Harding)
> 3. Re: Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (Bob Peterson)
> 4. Re: Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (Winston, Alan P.)
> 5. Re: Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (Colin Hume)
> 6. Re: Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (Woody Lane)
> 7. Re: Brain Dead - Need Suggestions (jim saxe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 23:40:27 -0500
> From: "Linda S. Mrosko" <elmerosko(a)gmail.com>
> To: Callers List <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: [Callers] Brain Dead - Need Suggestions
> Message-ID:
> <CAHC5Bqfhhvs7hVYSPXGcMvoZFfRt8kntmKE8A2rSFYb90oV8Vw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Although I've been calling forever and I know things, I'm not currently
> inspired to do this and am asking for help.
>
> Been hired to lead a dance for a music school -- ages 5 and up to teens and
> their parents and my contact asked if I could lead "dances that encourage
> really paying attention to beat counts?.throw in some music education in
> addition to fun."
>
> So I'll do my standard ONS dances for this group to recorded music that has
> very good beat counts and distinct phrasing. That's not the problem. The
> problem is *"throw in some music education." *I don't need a dissertation,
> just bits and pieces. The dance is only 1-1/2 hours long followed by ice
> cream.
>
> I've got a job that keeps me pretty busy and am training for a new job
> that's taking up a lot of my time and I just can't think anymore.
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> --
>
>
>
> *Looking forward,Linda S. Mrosko*
>
> *102 Mitchell Drive*
>
> *Temple, Texas 76501*
> *(903) 292-3713 (Cell)*
> *contradancetx.com <http://www.contradancetx.com>*
>
> *www.zazzle.com/fuzzycozy* <http://www.zazzle.com/fuzzycozy*> (Dance
> buttons, t-shirts, & more)*
>
I would think that the play party type “dances” would be good for getting them to equate certain melodies/and perhaps the beat to movement.
I second Sasha and others like that.
If I were doing this I’d incorporate some drumming but that may not be for you. However, if anyone is interested there’s a ton of resources on YouTube on how to introduce this age group to drumming/percussion.
Would it be a good idea to find out what the in tunes are for this age group are and use that music as a starting point?
Lastly I hope they are paying you well for your efforts!!!!! Sounds like a real chore.
Tom
Hi all,
I hesitate to make my first post to a new (to me) list be about culturally sensitive terminology because I fear that that sometimes stirs up controversy, but this is a remarkable coincidence:
I finally got around to joining this list yesterday because I wanted to ask the list whether anyone knows a less objectionable term for the Dixie Twirl move: I encountered the move in a dance I was interested in learning to call,
but I’d be unwilling to call using a dance term with the word “Dixie” in it. Then I realized I could just say “middles arch, rights lead under” and thus both avoid the term “Dixie” and avoid making my first post on this group be about culturally sensitive terminology. :-)
But then in receiving my very first Caller’s Digest, I see a recommendation for using the term Dixie in a dance name. So I’m getting up my courage to post, hoping that I’m not wading into a hornet’s nest...
I would recommend against using Dixie in a dance name or even using it as a dance term. Please allow me to explain:
I lived in Alabama for 14 years. In my personal experience, Dixie is a term that is nearly always used by white people with warped nostalgia for the antebellum South (choosing to ignore the fact that things weren’t so great for black residents back then). I find that glorifying “Dixie” is done by the same folks who glorify the rebel (confederate) flag: It’s done supposedly in the name of honoring heritage, but its closeted purpose is to express longing for the "Good Old Days" when whites were in charge and blacks were subordinate.
For those interested in the topic here’s an article that touches on the current controversy around the word: https://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Heart-of-Dixie-vanishing-fr… <https://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Heart-of-Dixie-vanishing-fr…>
I’ll just be avoiding it. I’m planning to go with “middles arch, rights lead under” unless someone can suggest a better term or phrase?
Thanks all, and lovely to meet you!
Becky
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: callers-request(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: Callers Digest, Vol 64, Issue 5
> Date: August 7, 2019 at 4:07:07 PM EDT
> To: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Reply-To: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 23:36:49 -0400
> From: Luke Donforth <luke.donev(a)gmail.com <mailto:luke.donev@gmail.com>>
> To: Gregory Frock <gregfrock(a)gmail.com <mailto:gregfrock@gmail.com>>
> Cc: "Callers(a)Lists.Sharedweight.net <mailto:Callers@Lists.Sharedweight.net>" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Riffing on "The Nice Combination"
> Message-ID:
> <CAFrKOZZzWN9mEB9_TJem06o_ebqttPXRs6HUU7Gf58KxK9mFGQ(a)mail.gmail.com <mailto:CAFrKOZZzWN9mEB9_TJem06o_ebqttPXRs6HUU7Gf58KxK9mFGQ@mail.gmail.com>>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Good suggestion. And thank you all for the other variants and ideas :-D
>
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 9:05 AM Gregory Frock <gregfrock(a)gmail.com <mailto:gregfrock@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> For title, might I suggest "The Dixie Combination"? The couple trading
>> figure is often called a Dixie Twirl, and there already exist "A New
>> Combination" and "The Nice Combination".
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 2:28 PM Luke Donforth via Callers <
>> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I was programming for tonight, and looked at Gene Hubert's classic "The
>>> Nice Combination" (N B&S, Dwn 4, turn as cpls, C L 3/4, P S, Ld/robin
>>> chain, LHS); and wondered what the simplest variant that would flow well
>>> with a gents/larks chain instead of a ladies/robins chain.
>>>
>>> What I've come up with is below. Anyone got a prior on it? Anyone got a
>>> variant with a gents/larks chain they like more?
>>>
>>> The New Combination
>>>
>>> A1 -----------
>>> (4,12) Neighbors balance and swing
>>> A2 -----------
>>> (6) Down the hall four line
>>> (4) Pair on the right make an arch, gent/lark on the left lead through,
>>> lady/robin on the right walks to far side, inverting the line
>>> (8) Come back up the hall and bend the ends
>>> B1 -----------
>>> (6) Circle left 3/4
>>> (10) Partners swing
>>> B2 -----------
>>> (8) Gents/Larks chain (pull by left, courtesy turn with neighbor)
>>> (8) Right-hand star 1x
>>>
>>> I'm planning on using Gene's original tonight in Belfast (and probably
>>> the vast majority of the time, it's a great dance); but I thought an
>>> accessible gents/larks chain would be nice.
>>>
>>> I appreciate hearing your thoughts.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Luke Donforth
>>> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <mailto:Luke.Donforth@gmail.com> <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com <mailto:Luke.Donev@gmail.com>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> List Name: Callers mailing list
>>> List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
>>> Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/ <https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <mailto:Luke.Donforth@gmail.com> <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com <mailto:Luke.Donev@gmail.com>>
Hello all,
I was programming for tonight, and looked at Gene Hubert's classic "The
Nice Combination" (N B&S, Dwn 4, turn as cpls, C L 3/4, P S, Ld/robin
chain, LHS); and wondered what the simplest variant that would flow well
with a gents/larks chain instead of a ladies/robins chain.
What I've come up with is below. Anyone got a prior on it? Anyone got a
variant with a gents/larks chain they like more?
The New Combination
A1 -----------
(4,12) Neighbors balance and swing
A2 -----------
(6) Down the hall four line
(4) Pair on the right make an arch, gent/lark on the left lead through,
lady/robin on the right walks to far side, inverting the line
(8) Come back up the hall and bend the ends
B1 -----------
(6) Circle left 3/4
(10) Partners swing
B2 -----------
(8) Gents/Larks chain (pull by left, courtesy turn with neighbor)
(8) Right-hand star 1x
I'm planning on using Gene's original tonight in Belfast (and probably the
vast majority of the time, it's a great dance); but I thought an accessible
gents/larks chain would be nice.
I appreciate hearing your thoughts.
--
Luke Donforth
Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>
To clarify, the group of dancers I’ve been working with at Pinewoods has been a mix of older dancers who are new to this terminology as well as younger dancers who have been promoting the change.
Lisa
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 1, 2019, at 5:33 PM, Rich Goss <rich(a)richgoss.com> wrote:
>
> Lisa, thanks for sharing your observations.
>
> Seattle and Portland, OR dances seem to be moving to Larks and Robins as well. My next Portland dance on Aug 24th will be Larks and Robins. Not all dances are gender neutral terms at this point, but we do announce which terms will be used.
>
> Rich
>
>> On Aug 1, 2019, at 1:35 PM, Lisa Greenleaf via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>> Update: today at contra class at Pinewoods I tried Lakes and Rivers. Rivers is not a satisfying or clear word to say for me personally, and the dancers said it got lost over the sound system. They overwhelmingly prefer Larks and Robins.
>>
>> Lisa
>>
At the urging of dancers who were recently at Harmony Week at Pinewoods, I tried Larks and Robins today for role identifiers in contra, and it was great. I physically like saying the word Robins more than the word Ravens, and the dancers were fine with it, too, even with a dance that had a Mad Robin. Callers—experiment!
Lisa
Sent from my iPhone
I had these responses from trad-dance-callers(a)yahoogroups.com
<mailto:trad-dance-callers@yahoogroups.com>
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Otto Warteman:
I had an exhibition group from 1975-1998 and we did it with 32 dancers, but
with 8 steps and turn and alternating couples turning.
You can have like spokes of a wheel four couples deep where all the heads
are facing the center or as alternating couples face their partner.
You can also do four different contras at the same time where to number one
couple is the furthest out from the center.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Jim Saxe:
There's a dance by Ted Sannella called "Ted's Double Quadrille No. 1" (or
"... #1") that includes a different (and, I think, simpler) version of grand
square for sixteen dancers than the one in the video John cited. The
starting formation is a square with two couples side-by-side on each side of
(as in Rod's Quads) and the action is simply for each couple to act the part
of an individual in a normal eight-person grand square. If I recall
correctly, when I danced to Ted's calling at Augusta Dance Week in 1985, he
had partners put our near arms around each other's backs as in a star
promenade, but it might also be done with partners simply holding near
hands.
Side couples begin by facing up or down the hall toward the other side
couple in their foursome and backing away, while heads begin by dancing
forward towards the opposite head couple. On the fourth beat each couple,
turns as a unit 90 degrees to face across the square. On the next four
beats, the original heads back out toward the side spots, while the original
sides advance toward the head spots, all couples turning on the last beat to
face uo and down. Etc.
A spreadsheet index of Ted's dances linked from
http://davidsmukler.syracusecountrydancers.org/ted-sannella-index/
lists the date of composition as 1965.
--Jim
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802
940 574
http://contrafusion.co.uk/KentCeilidhs.html for Live Music Ceilidhs
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
http://www.modernjive.com for Modern Jive DVDs
Hi John,
Nice researching!
I checked Burleson’s SD Encyclopaedia but it’s not mentioned.
It would be fun to use both this move and the Dutch crossing figure in new dance.
Cheers, Bill
