[Callers] Pre-existing dance?

Tue Oct 18 12:25:25 PDT 2016

Regarding attribution, I like the way David Kaynor puts it on this website:
"Some of my dances are "compositions" only in the loosest sense of the
word; they fall into the category of "glossary" contras which basically
amount to minimally imaginative resequencing of ordinary contra dance
elements. Do such dances…especially if conceived spontaneously in a
teaching/calling situation… qualify as "compositions?" Maybe. Maybe not."

I'm in the maybe not camp.  They're not protected by any copyright here (at
least in my view, which has generally been shared by most people on this
list when the topic comes up on occasion).  I don't call regularly; most of
the time when I call dances, I'm doing so late at night after a singing
event or at somebody's house or at a more-or-less spontaneous outdoor
gathering, where I don't have dance cards with me.  I know several dances
by name and memory, but most of the dances at such events are things I've
made up on the spot.  I am almost certain that every single one of these
dances is a progression I have danced before at some point in the past, and
that somebody has written and put their name on Partner Balance and Swing,
Circle Left 3/4, Neighbor Swing, Long Lines, Ladies Chain, Left-Hand Star,
New Neighbor Do-Si-Do.  Good for whoever that person is, and if it's a
catchy title, that can be a useful way for us to refer to that particular
glossary dance.  But I wouldn't call it a composition, and I certainly
wouldn't feel like I need to research whoever wrote that dance and the
title and attribute it to that person.

Where I differ from Neal is that I don't really want a dozen people to be
putting their name on that above dance I just made up (after I've danced it
many times already, after somebody else made it up, etc).  It's just not
interesting enough of a sequence to be worth attributing at all.

It gets a bit tougher when we're talking about dances that, when written,
were really compositions, adding something new or fresh to the repertoire,
but could now be considered glossary dances because of how common those
figures have become in modern contra dances.  But that's not the case for
most of the dances.

-Dave
Washington, DC

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers <
callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> As someone with an academic background in the field of Folklore, the way
> we talk about attribution and authorship bothers me.
>
> (NOTE: what I'm talking about here is distinct from trying to track down
> the source of a dance you collected somewhere, or according respect to the
> first person to dream up a sequence.  Both of those goals are entirely
> legitimate.)
>
> The dance Luke described was created by him, not Mark Goodwin.  The
> sequence happens to be the same as one dreamed up by Mark Goodwin at a
> previous place and time, which is very important to know, but Luke's
> creation was independent and should be attributed to Luke.  If we attribute
> everything to the first person ever to dream up a sequence, we are grossly
> misrepresenting how dances are created and spread.
>
> When we attribute Luke's dance to Mark, we are saying that Luke (and
> everyone else) got the dance from Mark, or from a source tracked back to
> Mark.  That is factually incorrect in this case; Luke can point to when and
> why he came up with the dance.  Legally, it would also mean we are claiming
> that Mark holds the only legitimate copyright claim, which is again both
> incorrect and total nonsense (as copyright usually becomes when applied to
> folk genres).
>
> As both an academic and participant in our tradition, I want to know if
> many people independently came up with the same dance (making it a FOLK
> DANCE).  Otherwise, I am falsely giving credit and responsibility to a
> single creative genius.  The difference between those two is a significant
> matter in the question of how folklore is created and who owns it.
> Personally, I feel our cultural tendency to accord authorial rights has
> misled us.
>
> So please...if you came up with a dance put your name on it along with
> some of the details---and then tell me who else came up with it, too.
> Don't just stick their name on it.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
> Neal
>
>
> Neal Schlein
> Youth Services Librarian, Mahomet Public Library
>
>
> Currently reading: *The Different Girl* by Gordon Dahlquist
> Currently learning: How to set up an automated email system.
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks. I'll attribute it to Mark Goodwin.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Michael Barraclough via Callers <
>> callers at lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I have that exact dance as To Wedded Bliss by Mark Goodwin (2014). I use
>>> that in my Lesson and then, after teaching ladies chain and right & left
>>> through, follow that with my dance The Lesson (2009) which is
>>>
>>> A1 -----------
>>> (8) Neighbor Do-si-do
>>> (8) Neighbor swing
>>> A2 -----------
>>> (8) Ladies chain
>>> (8) Long lines, forward and back
>>>
>>> B1 -----------
>>> (8) Right & left through
>>> (8) Partner promenade across
>>> B2 -----------
>>> (8) Circle Left 3/4
>>> (4) Balance the Ring
>>> (4) Pass through
>>>
>>>
>>> and yes, I know it doesn't have a swing - it's in the lesson and I want
>>> to  minimize the use of partner swings so that new couples don't get bad
>>> habits.
>>>
>>> Michael Barraclough
>>> www.michaelbarraclough.com
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 22:45 -0400, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I was thinking about what I do at the "welcome to our contra dance"
>>> introduction, and what dance would easily move in to that. Noodling around
>>> with moves, I thought of a sequence with glossary moves, but I didn't have
>>> it in my box. Anyone recognize it?
>>>
>>> Improper
>>>
>>> A1 -----------
>>> (8) Neighbor Do-si-do
>>> (8) Neighbor swing
>>> A2 -----------
>>> (8) Men allemande Left 1-1/2
>>> (8) Partner swing
>>> B1 -----------
>>> (8) Promenade across the Set
>>> (8) Long lines, forward and back
>>> B2 -----------
>>> (8) Circle Left 3/4
>>> (4) Balance the Ring
>>> (4) Pass through
>>>
>>> During the introduction, I often teach the progression with a "ring
>>> balance, walk past this neighbor", and I wanted something that included
>>> that. There are lots of great accessible dances with that (The Big Easy,
>>> Easy Peasy, etc), but I'm not seeing one with a partner promenade
>>> (something I also use in the introduction; to go from a big circle to lines
>>> of couples for a contra set).
>>>
>>> If someone already wrote it, I'll happily give them credit. If not, I'll
>>> call it "If you can walk, then you can dance" (which I'll note is not an if
>>> and only if statement).
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://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
>
>

-- 
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20161018/099604eb/attachment.htm>