[Callers] More on Programming

[Kalia Kliban via Callers]

On 6/25/2015 8:25 PM, Cary Ravitz via Callers wrote (regarding some of 
the reasons why he finds squares less fulfilling than contras) :

> *For me*, this all comes down to dancer, music, motion connection. It
> can be wonderful in a contra. I've never found it in a square.

It's not just dancers and musicians in the hall, though.  There's 
another person up there on stage, and what squares provide that contras 
really don't is a very live and fluid connection between the caller and 
the dancers.  With the average contra, the caller prompts until they can 
get out of the way.  The goal seems to be a sort of invisibility.  But 
with squares, there's a very direct connection between the dancers and 
the caller, and it can be exhilarating.  I experienced this recently 
dancing a fast square to Lisa Greenleaf's impeccably-timed calling, and 
there were points in there when she was calling sequences of moves so 
fast that we didn't have time to think.  It was immediate response, like 
the calls went straight to the feet and hands and left the brains free 
to enjoy the ride.  It was unlike any contra.  Not better.  Different. 
Excellent.  And yes, it wasn't as much about the music.  But it was very 
much about putting complete trust in the caller to get us to the right 
place at the right time.

Not all callers can do that, of course, and a bad square is (IMO) less 
fun than a bad contra, but they can be REALLY good.

Kalia