[Callers] 4 person do-si-do

Richard Hopkins via Callers callers at lists.sharedweight.net
Tue Dec 1 13:37:12 PST 2015


In southern-style square dancing, there are several variations on a figure which is often called “dosido” for two couples, and they are nothing like what Luke is imagining.  They go by names like Georgia Rangtang, Georgy-Alabam, Do-si, Dosido and (I think) in MWSD a version of it is called Do Paso.   That’s not to say that the figure you are describing isn’t a good one for your dance; it’s just another reason to avoid calling it a dosido.  

Richard

``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Richard Hopkins
Tallahassee FL
850-544-7614
hopkinsrs at comcast.net


> On Dec 1, 2015, at 4:01 PM, via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> 
> Send Callers mailing list submissions to
> 	callers at 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 at lists.sharedweight.net
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	callers-owner at 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. Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance (Aahz via Callers)
>   2. Re: Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance (Aahz via Callers)
>   3. 4 person do-si-do? (Luke Donforth via Callers)
>   4. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Tom Hinds via Callers)
>   5. Re: Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
>      (Aahz Maruch via Callers)
>   6. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Aahz Maruch via Callers)
>   7. Re: Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
>      (Bill Olson via Callers)
>   8. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Hilton Baxter via Callers)
>   9. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Rich Sbardella via Callers)
>  10. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Don Veino via Callers)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:27:22 -0800
> From: Aahz via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> Message-ID: <20151130222722.GA23748 at panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> I've been asked to run a barn dance Saturday Jan 16, 9pm-11pm, but I'm
> busy.  The dance will be part of the Western Regional Outdoor Leadership
> Conference:
> 
> http://outdoored.stanford.edu/center/wrolc-2016/
> 
> If you don't know where Stanford is, you're probably coming from too far
> away to make sense.  ;-)
> 
> There will be 100+ college students.  The theme for this year's
> conference is "diversity", and they would prefer a caller who can fit the
> theme in addition to having experience with one-night-stand environments.
> 
> I've offered to be a filter so that they don't need to deal with the
> responses, so please respond privately to me if you're interested and
> available.  I've already explained that booking will be somewhat
> difficult both because of the relatively short notice and because it's
> Ralph Page weekend.
> 
> I probably will also be sending out an e-mail blast to people I have
> addresses for, apologies if you get this twice.  They have already
> contacted other callers so you may actually get three copies...
> -- 
> Square/Contra Caller                                    http://caller.aahz.ws/
>                      <*>           <*>           <*>
> "Those who hear not the music think the dancers mad."
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 16:10:45 -0800
> From: Aahz via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> Message-ID: <20151201001045.GA4132 at panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015, Aahz via Callers wrote:
>> 
>> I've been asked to run a barn dance Saturday Jan 16, 9pm-11pm, but I'm
>> busy.  The dance will be part of the Western Regional Outdoor Leadership
>> Conference:
>> 
>> http://outdoored.stanford.edu/center/wrolc-2016/
>> 
>> If you don't know where Stanford is, you're probably coming from too far
>> away to make sense.  ;-)
> 
> Someone pointed out that I should at least have mentioned that this is
> California.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 05:45:27 -0500
> From: Luke Donforth via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: "Callers at Lists.Sharedweight.net" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAFrKOZbyzOSGTT2YwMjcghwcmXnQi+ek0J-=ekz0QKJgGLi7Ng at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
> Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
> things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
> 
> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
> 
> Doubled-si-do
> Four Facing Four
> 
> A1 -----------
> (4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
> (12) Neighbor swing
> A2 -----------
> (8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
> (8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
> B1 -----------
> (8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
> (8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
> B2 -----------
> (16) Partner balance and swing
> End facing line of direction
> 
> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
> chain.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Thank you
> 
> -- 
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth at gmail.com <Luke.Donev at gmail.com>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151201/18d8ab09/attachment.html>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 08:55:12 -0500
> From: Tom Hinds via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: Luke Donforth <luke.donev at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Callers at Lists.Sharedweight.net" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID: <3EA4A682-26DF-4FB9-8BA8-CC22215C526D at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
> 
> Luke,
> 
> There have been times when I've tried new ideas and the dancers  
> figured out an easier way.  Or said differently they saw through the  
> complexity and thought it was not worth the effort.  I'm not saying  
> this is true for your dance but it's something to be prepared for.
> 
> In terms of timing I'd guess that the 4 person do-si-do is going to  
> take more than 8 beats.
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 07:10:56 -0800
> From: Aahz Maruch via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> Message-ID: <20151201151056.GA19052 at panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015, Aahz via Callers wrote:
>> 
>> I've offered to be a filter so that they don't need to deal with the
>> responses, so please respond privately to me if you're interested and
>> available.  I've already explained that booking will be somewhat
>> difficult both because of the relatively short notice and because it's
>> Ralph Page weekend.
> 
> Thanks to the several people who told me about Contra Carnivale, that's
> proof I'm currently out of the loop on the contra side.  ;-)
> -- 
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6                        http://rule6.info/
>                      <*>           <*>           <*>
> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 07:22:40 -0800
> From: Aahz Maruch via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID: <20151201152240.GA7848 at panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
>> 
>> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
>> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
>> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
> 
> In the normal duple improper formation, a four-person do-si-do is called
> zigzag, there are lots of dances with that.  But that's not what you're
> doing here.
> 
>> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
>> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
>> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
>> chain.
> 
>> From my POV, that's a four-person gypsy.  Or maybe the square dance
> equivalent would be promenade inside the ring.  The key element of
> do-si-do is facing the same direction during the movement (modulo the
> contra variant of a spinning do-si-do or square dancing's highland fling)
> and ending up facing the same direction at the end.
> 
> I recently saw a square dance caller struggle with explaining Walk Around
> the Corner (which is square dancing's equivalent of gypsy) and See Saw,
> failing to mention either of the "easy" ways of getting across the
> concept:
> 
> * keep your shoulder toward the person you're walking around
> 
> * exactly the same thing as an armless allemande
> 
> Anyway, there are probably several ways to call what you want, but I
> think that do-si-do ain't one of them.  ;-)
> -- 
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6                        http://rule6.info/
>                      <*>           <*>           <*>
> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 16:04:53 +0000
> From: Bill Olson via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: Aahz <caller at aahz.ws>, "callers at lists.sharedweight.net"
> 	<callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> Message-ID: <BAY177-W24CB4327B5398ED4B4147AC60F0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> 
> I think most people figured that one out! Go Cardinals!! Win PAC 12 title!
> 
>> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 16:10:45 -0800
>> To: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
>> From: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> 
>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015, Aahz via Callers wrote:
>>> 
>>> I've been asked to run a barn dance Saturday Jan 16, 9pm-11pm, but I'm
>>> busy.  The dance will be part of the Western Regional Outdoor Leadership
>>> Conference:
>>> 
>>> http://outdoored.stanford.edu/center/wrolc-2016/
>>> 
>>> If you don't know where Stanford is, you're probably coming from too far
>>> away to make sense.  ;-)
>> 
>> Someone pointed out that I should at least have mentioned that this is
>> California.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> 		 	   		  
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151201/caa3e4db/attachment-0001.htm>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 12:10:16 -0500
> From: Hilton Baxter via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID: <565DD478.8060908 at binghamton.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
> 
> I wrote a dance with a 4 person do-si-do and have called it a few times. 
> Whoever has to travel from the far corners will need an extra couple of 
> beats, so it's good to have a "soft" figure after the do-si-do for 4, so 
> the folks arrive late (men, in your dance, Luke) can catch up somewhat 
> gracefully.
> 
> As for treating it as a gypsy for 4, in my dance people liked going 
> forward and then twirling away to the right and back to place. This was 
> probably because it gave some ccw movement to contrast cw turns 
> elsewhere in the dance. To teach the figure, I've had dancers do a RH 
> star "but just pretend to touch"  then walk through with twirls over L 
> shoulder.
> 
> Hilton Baxter
> 
> 
> 
> On 12/1/15 10:22 AM, Aahz Maruch via Callers wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
>>> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
>>> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
>>> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
>> In the normal duple improper formation, a four-person do-si-do is called
>> zigzag, there are lots of dances with that.  But that's not what you're
>> doing here.
>> 
>>> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
>>> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
>>> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
>>> chain.
>> From my POV, that's a four-person gypsy.  Or maybe the square dance
>> equivalent would be promenade inside the ring.  The key element of
>> do-si-do is facing the same direction during the movement (modulo the
>> contra variant of a spinning do-si-do or square dancing's highland fling)
>> and ending up facing the same direction at the end.
>> 
>> I recently saw a square dance caller struggle with explaining Walk Around
>> the Corner (which is square dancing's equivalent of gypsy) and See Saw,
>> failing to mention either of the "easy" ways of getting across the
>> concept:
>> 
>> * keep your shoulder toward the person you're walking around
>> 
>> * exactly the same thing as an armless allemande
>> 
>> Anyway, there are probably several ways to call what you want, but I
>> think that do-si-do ain't one of them.  ;-)
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:08:28 -0500
> From: Rich Sbardella via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: Luke Donforth <luke.donev at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Callers at Lists.Sharedweight.net" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAE4BujLVWfDArVtrTdUY-mffVCX83EFLui3zZzqG24YQF=41Zw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> Luke,
> 
> In modern square dance a left hand star without hands is simply called
> promenade inside.  By definition a right hand star w/o hands would be a
> reverse promenade inside.  Both would take 8 beats/steps to accomplish in a
> square, and probably close to eight beats in a mescolanza.
> 
> I do not quite understand your comment about the women, as they will all
> have to adjust there walk around to accomodate for the last women into the
> "handless star" or promenade.
> 
> Unless I am misunderstanding your concept, this does not resemble a dosido
> in any fashion, and I believe using that term might muddy the use of Dosido
> and As Couples Dosido.
> 
> Rich Sbardella
> Stafford, CT
> 
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> 
>> It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
>> Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
>> things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
>> 
>> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
>> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
>> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
>> 
>> Doubled-si-do
>> Four Facing Four
>> 
>> A1 -----------
>> (4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
>> (12) Neighbor swing
>> A2 -----------
>> (8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
>> (8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
>> B1 -----------
>> (8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
>> (8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
>> B2 -----------
>> (16) Partner balance and swing
>> End facing line of direction
>> 
>> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
>> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
>> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
>> chain.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> Thank you
>> 
>> --
>> Luke Donforth
>> Luke.Donforth at gmail.com <Luke.Donev at gmail.com>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>> 
>> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151201/19ea7ed8/attachment-0001.htm>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:21:00 -0500
> From: Don Veino via Callers <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: Luke Donforth <luke.donev at gmail.com>
> Cc: "Callers at Lists.Sharedweight.net" <callers at lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAAJTtiJeho-rMBkH-c9g6rdhS0ppc5+XZQE=RYRCVKzXSJzEjQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> 
> With respect to Tom's prior comment about dancers substituting the simplest
> interpretation sometimes, I think this dance could have that apply.
> 
> Up through the A2 Ladies Chain you are in lines of four facing
> configuration (as opposed to square). If the Dosidos happen in two groups
> of 2 (parallel traditional Dosidos) up and down then that formation is
> maintained, timing is proven and the Circle entry still has the same
> inertia.
> 
> -Don
> 
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> 
>> It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
>> Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
>> things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
>> 
>> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
>> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
>> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
>> 
>> Doubled-si-do
>> Four Facing Four
>> 
>> A1 -----------
>> (4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
>> (12) Neighbor swing
>> A2 -----------
>> (8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
>> (8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
>> B1 -----------
>> (8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
>> (8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
>> B2 -----------
>> (16) Partner balance and swing
>> End facing line of direction
>> 
>> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
>> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
>> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
>> chain.
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> Thank you
>> 
>> --
>> Luke Donforth
>> Luke.Donforth at gmail.com <Luke.Donev at gmail.com>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>> 
>> 
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151201/71279bcc/attachment-0001.htm>
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of Callers Digest, Vol 20, Issue 1
> **************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20151201/2d5c851a/attachment.htm>


More information about the Callers mailing list