[Callers] Grand Square in a contra?

[Luke Donforth via Callers]

Thanks for the feedback on how it went. Someone else suggested trying to
get a regular grand square into the program earlier in the weekend, which
may have helped.

I do think there are other dances which differentiate in 4x4s, such as the
center 4 star, or having one person in a group of four lead the rest of the
line. I agree it's more of a cognitive load though.

Another version I considered, Fox Hollow Fallacy, had the same bent 4x4
set-up but then had you do the grand square with heads and sides couples.
So you're working with your corner instead of your partner. I hope to try
that at some point and see how it goes. You could go even further in homage
to square dancing and start it with right side couples one time, then head
couples the next, then left side couples, then side couples; an alternating
four-phase sequence (RHLS gives a more even distribution of the roles than
RLHS). But that's more of the square "pay attention to the caller"
tradition than contra's "learn the dance and the caller drops out"
tradition. I can imagine another F word dancers might use to name that Fox
Hollow variant...

For anyone out that way considering attending, I thought the dance weekend
as a whole was loads of fun.

On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:46 PM, David Harding via Callers <
callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Hi Luke, thanks for a great weekend.  I'm piping up as a dancer who had
> hoped that you would call a grand square in a contra formation after the
> discussion here.  Tonight I find myself in an analytical frame of mind,
> thinking about where we stumbled, in the hope that you (and others) will
> keep calling this dance and have great success with it.
>
> I'm from Illinois, but a regular at the two Wisconsin weekends
> (IndepenDance and Squirrel Moon).  The programs tend to be dominated by
> contras, but with enough squares so most dancers are familiar with the
> basic concepts.  I haven't been keeping count, but it feels as though most
> weekends include one dance with a grand square, and I felt that there were
> sufficient dancers on Sunday who knew the grand square figure that we
> should have been fine.
>
> Personally, I struggled to remember which direction to start as we
> flip-flopped from side to side.  I think a lot of us were disoriented that
> way.  Even in a square dance with rotating partners, one role usually stays
> home and can anchor the orientation.
>
> Part of my problem was not (yet) having internalized my identity as part
> of a right or left couple in a four-facing-four.  I don't need to think any
> more when I'm addressed as a gent (or lady), as a middle or inside or
> outside.  I know when I'm a head or a side.  I know where to find my corner
> wherever I am at the moment.  But I don't recall dancing a four-facing-four
> where the right couples did something different from the left couples.
>
> My two cents in the interest of continuous improvement.
>
> -Dave Harding
>
> On 7/5/2016 12:15 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
>
> Thanks John, that does seem like a fun bit to incorporate.
>
> I ran the Fox Hollow Foibles dance with the Grand Square happening on the
> diagonal at IndepenDance in Wisconsin. Folks seemed to have fun with it,
> but it was certainly challenging (my sense is that community doesn't do
> many squares; Grand or otherwise).
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 5:20 PM, John Sweeney via Callers <
> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Of course contra dancers like swinging, so you could try incorporating
>> this version into a contra dance:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfqC8uVfCUo
>>
>>
>>
>> In “Cowboy Dances” (1939) there was also a version with half a two-hand
>> turn (but they called it a swing!) every time you met someone.
>>
>>
>>
>> Happy dancing,
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> John Sweeney, Dancer, England john at modernjive.com 01233 625 362
>> http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth at gmail.com <Luke.Donev at gmail.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing listCallers at lists.sharedweight.nethttp://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>


-- 
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/20160708/a95b241b/attachment.htm>