[Callers] A Question Re: Contra friendly squares

[Tony Parkes via Callers]

Jim Saxe wrote:
<quote>
*** My question is, have any of you ever seen something like this happen?

     The caller (whether you or someone else, and using whatever
     words) instructs, say, the head dancers to swing their
     opposites, face the nearest side couple, and circle with
     that side couple.  In some square, one of the following
     misinterpretations occurs:

        1.  Instead of swinging in a spot directly in front
            of one of the side couples, a pair of head dancers
            swing either very near the gent's home place or
            very near the lady's home place.  (And you believe
            that they aren't intentionally dancing offset from
            their theoretical position to avoid crowding but
            that they actually don't understand where they are
            supposed to be.)

      OR

        2.  Head dancers swing opposites, then fall back to
            home places.  Then they go together with their
            *partners* to circle with whichever side couple
            they consider "nearest".

     OR

        3.  Somehow (whether or not you see exactly how it
            happens) dancers end up in a circle of five and
            a circle of three.
<end quote>

I have seen #3 happen several times when I was calling Ted's "Do-si-do and Face the Sides." I now teach it more carefully. Granted, it has a do-si-do rather than a swing, but I think I could now teach a similar dance with a swing and still keep the circles of four where they belong.

Jim again:
<< My point is that even bits of choreography that aren't really difficult can take more care to teach efficiently and effectively when they are unfamiliar to many of the dancers present than when they are familiar to almost all. >>

Yes. This is why squares are such a challenge to present effectively at a mostly-contra evening. The caller needs to think about what contra dancers know in terms of basic movements and transitions between them. Then s/he can focus on the potential trouble spots in a square and think about various ways of teaching them.

I just finished vetting the square "Head for Home" for a new caller who was thinking of using it. It has two stars, each of which leads the dancers to someone they haven't just been working with. I suggested freezing the action just before each star and having the dancers locate the person they'll be going to from the star.

I find that freezing the action is important in walking through a lot of the squares in my repertoire. Sometimes it helps to say "When you're done with the next move, you'll have switched places with [person or couple]" or "you'll be right back where you are now, facing the same way" or to have them take a shortcut to the next place they'll be, to get their bodies familiar with it, then back up and get them there the real way. (It could be argued that this last device is like showing how a magic trick is done, but in traditional calling we're not giving the dancers puzzles to solve, we're letting them take the scenic route even if there may be a more direct path to where they're going. Sandy Bradley used to say "When we're all done you'll be right back where you started, so the only thing that matters is that you had fun along the way.")

Tony Parkes
Billerica, Mass.
www.hands4.com