Contra Callers March 2006

contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net

31 participants
43 discussions

by Gale T. Wood

Greetings, On the subject of Chorus Jig, I believe that it was John Macintyre who called Chorus Jig at Down East. I happened to be dancing with a talented and experienced dancer form Maine. She had never danced CJ or done the Contra Corner figure. Her eyes lit up once she had got the sequence down. She asked why this dance Is not called more often.... I explained that it is rare at a dance in NH when CJ is not called. I call it as standard at my dances (even if the band does not know the tune!)

19 years

Re: [Callers] Less Used Figures

by jerome23＠bellsouth.net

Jeffrey Petrovitch wrote: > > Also in the dance Money Musk there is a "lines of three forward and > back" and it really is not a "forward and back"; it is a "balance in and > balance out", which is danced differently. What does this have to do > with discussion of less used figures; I think it is important to know > dance moves like contra corners, balance in and balance out and once > again the "little things" that have brought contra dancing to where it > is today. It is the history!!! > In a similar vein, I recently learned from Peter Rogers that in the English figure called "forward a double and back," the double refers not to doing the move as a pair, but rather taking two measures of music to move forward and two to move back back. Forward a single and back would be equivalent (in timing) to a contra balance, forward a double and back would be equivalent in timing (if not shape) to long lines forward and back. Also, I have intuited that in the move "roll away with a half sashay," the half sashay refers to the non-rolling individual stepping sideways into the original place of the rolling individual. Can anyone confirm this? Jerome Grisanti

19 years

Re: [Callers] Called waltzes

by David.Millstone＠valley.net

> What called waltz dances do people know? These are the three I use most frequently: Spanish Waltz, an oldie Waterfall Waltz, by Pat Shaw The Wood Duck, by Fried Herman (both of these are from English country dancing, as is Margaret's Waltz, Duke of Kent's Waltz, and many, many more, but these two are the ones I seem to have settled on) There's also Roses in Bloom, a square set in waltz time, written by Rich Jackson and published in the CDSS News #106. But given the difficulty of getting some contra dancers to dance squares at all, and adding in the challenge of asking people to dance in waltz time, you can imagine that this doesn't get used much in contra circles! Also from the ECD world, another square in waltz time is Pat Shaw's Heidenroslein. David Millstone

19 years

Re: [Callers] calling New England squares : intro and break

by David.Millstone＠valley.net

Dave Merrill asked, "Are the intro, breaks, and close traditional and standard for particular dances, or are they generally improvised by the caller as his own signature?" Singing squares typically have the breaks built into the words that the caller sings. There may be slight variations in the wording that the caller uses, but the figures that are called for those breaks remain the same. Hence, when a group of dancers hears the caller sing, "Well, you do-si-do 'round your corner, with a right hand go twice around your own," they're primed to chime in with "Make it twice!" That's part of the fun of the singing squares, their very predictability.* In calling New England quadrilles or other styles of squares, it's more common for the breaks not to be a set part of the routine, and yes, that's part of the fun. If there's a particularly complex break that the caller plans to use, s/he may teach it before the dance, in the same manner as teaching the figure. If the break is going to be made up of more common movements, ones that the caller expects the dancers to be capable of carrying out on the fly, then there's no advance warning and the dancers just react to the calls as they are given. The "bow to partner, bow to corner" is indeed one time-honored way of starting a square--I've seen references citing this as a particularly New England styling, harking back to more genteel times--but even that isn't a given. I'd suggest that any caller interested in investigating breaks would do well to purchase a copy of Ted Sannella's "Calling Traditional New England Squares," which is full of general comments and theory, scores of breaks that Ted used, and a CD of Ted callign squares. The cuts on the CD were chosen in part to illustrate many different breaks. Two other items that may be helpful are Tom Hinds's recent publication with a similar title, "Calling New England Squares" and Tom's earlier "Give Me a Break!" All of these materials are available from the sales office at Country Dance and Song Society, http://www.cdss.org/sales/index.html David Millstone * Of course, the predictability sometimes breaks down, as it did for me when I was calling "Just Because" some years ago. I found myself moving dancers in unexpected patterns, shuffling them all around the square. A friend came up afterwards and congratulated me on a calling tour-de-force, keeping people moving and getting back home with partners where they needed to be, all the while keeping up the singing square. The truth, which I readily confessed, is that I had experienced a sort of brain freeze, and simply couldn't remember what was supposed to come next, and just kept calling. It worked out okay, but it's not an experience I'm eager to repeat!

19 years

Calling New England Squares

by jerome23＠bellsouth.net

David Millstone wrote: > I'd suggest > that any caller interested in investigating breaks would do well to purchase a > copy of Ted Sannella's "Calling Traditional New England Squares," which is full > of general comments and theory, scores of breaks that Ted used, and a CD of Ted > callign squares. The cuts on the CD were chosen in part to illustrate many > different breaks. Two other items that may be helpful are Tom Hinds's recent > publication with a similar title, "Calling New England Squares" and Tom's > earlier "Give Me a Break!" All of these materials are available from the sales > office at Country Dance and Song Society, http://www.cdss.org/sales/index.html > I would like to throw in my own endorsement for Tom Hinds' "Calling New England Squares" and "Give Me a Break!" I have found both to be very fine resources as I seek to call fun and satisfying squares. I've been reading and rereading these as I've been traveling lately. One of the wisest nuggets is the lesson that squares I find fun to dance may not be suitable for me to call because callers are generally more experienced dancers. So Tom offers several ways to analyze squares for suitability to a particular crowd. I know that some contra dancers think squares aren't fun. It's my judgement that when callers are very well prepared and the figures are well-matched to the crowd's ability, I don't hear from those "squares aren't fun" dancers. In fact, I even hear "that was a fun square!" It's especially satisfying to get a smile from a grump. Contrawise, if I am not well prepared on a square, I will hear it. Jerome Grisanti

19 years

Less-used figures

by Cynthia Phinney

Hello callers, I am just back from a wonderful two days at the DownEast Country Dance Festival in Maine. There was something I noticed there that I thought was worthy of note on this list. I was sitting out watching Linda Leslie do a walk-through for a dance. The dance had a contra-corners figure in it and the dancers got lost enough trying to walk it through that Linda had six couples do a demo. It struck me that fifteen years ago I don't think that would have had to be taught at an event like the Festival, because it was a figure we used (and was taught to us) so frequently in the regular Saturday night dances that the number of people attending an event like the festival who didn't know it would be low. It seemed to me to be a reflection of doing the older dances so much less often than we used to. I remarked on this to the person I was sitting with, but then realized that he is in his twenties and does not know the kinds of dances that used to fill an evening of dancing around here back in the 70s and 80s (when the majority of dances we used in an evening might well have been older traditional dances and were as likely to be proper as improper). His assumption is contra corners is a figure that always has to be taught no matter who the crowd. When relating this story to my partner, who was not at the festival, he asked whether people sat down when Linda did the demo. Most of them did - but there were a good number who did not. He recalled how it used to be that when the caller asked for a demo, the whole rest of the hall automatically squatted or sat so everyone could see. Very often now people remain standing during demos (at least around here). Just two interesting observations on the evolution of what we're doing and how we do it. I've made a note to teach the contra corners at my local dance sometime soon. (other callers have used it there - but very infrequently). Best to all of you, -cynthia

19 years

Re: [Callers] Less used figures

by Jeffrey Petrovitch

If there is one dance that you are going to dance at the Nelson Town Hall, it is going to be Chorus Jig. Without exception, Chorus Jig is danced every Monday, every Monday of the year, and there is no doubt that it is the highlight of the evening. I think there are few places where the dancers will actually cheer when the caller says that are going to call Chorus Jig or Money Musk (both dances you should not miss). It is interesting people are talking about less used figures, because in doing so, we can really look at the evolution of contra dancing. Formation for example, from a time where the majority of dances were proper, from a time where the majority of dances were improper, to a time where the majority of dances are improper and becket. Last month, I was talking with my friend Amy Cann, a fiddler in the Greater Putney Area, and we were talking about the evolution and history of contra dancing. An interesting point came up when we danced a dance with a wave across to a pass-through. I have only been contra dancing for three years, and I learned that a "balance the wave" was balance to the right and balance to the left. According to Amy, she told me that the "original balance the wave" was balance forward and balance back, similar to a "balance and swing". It is an interesting point and when you think about the physics of it, it makes a lot of sense. Another example is "line of four, down the hall, turn alone and return"; as experienced callers and dancers we known that is polite to turn alone towards your neighbor, because it has become so second nature to us. These are two examples of the "little things" the history points that really had to a contra dancing experience. Also in the dance Money Musk there is a "lines of three forward and back" and it really is not a "forward and back"; it is a "balance in and balance out", which is danced differently. What does this have to do with discussion of less used figures; I think it is important to know dance moves like contra corners, balance in and balance out and once again the "little things" that have brought contra dancing to where it is today. It is the history!!! Chris made a great point about "we as callers need to model the good behavior from the floor as dancers." My addition to that would be that we as callers perhaps are one of the largest factors in the evolution of contra dancing. Through our dance selection and dance programming and of course our teaching, we have the opportunity every evening to present contra dancing to a new individual, someone who has no idea what contra dancing is all about and for them that is where contra dancing starts. If contra dancing was a plate of cookies siting on the table, it would be perhaps one of the best cookies there is, but don't you think it was taste better if you knew what were the ingredients and where they came from??? Jeff

19 years

Re: [Callers] Less-used figures

by David.Millstone＠valley.net

Cynthia spoke about the necessity of demonstrating contra corners, a figure that she had thought most would know well. As Lisa pointed out, there are dance series where the older dances are called regularly and dancers there will be familiar with figures such as contra corners. (I'd say you're more likely to find these older dances included in the repertoire of smaller dances in rural New England than you are at most of the zesty urban dances.) The figure isn't called as much these days because it favors the ones-- the "active" couples, in the now out-of-favor parlance. The contemporary passion for everyone-moving, equal-activity choreography means that figures such as contra corners simply aren't used as much, unless it's a dance such as Alternating Corners where the ones and twos take turns doing contra corners. There's an example I like to use to demonstrate these changes. In the early to mid-1980s, when the "hey for four" started to appear with increasing frequency in contra choreography, an import from English country dancing, it frequently required lengthy, step-by-step instruction, often supplemented with a demonstration by a carefully-selected group of dancers. At that same time, when an evening's program included traditional contras--many of which are duple proper and end with the generic down the center and return, cast off, right and left over and back--people had no trouble with those closing figures. Today, the situation is nearly reversed--callers can move swiftly through a hey for four, knowing that most dancers on the floor will be familiar with the figure; it's a figure that you couild expect to encounter in a contra medley at NEFFA, for example, where there's no instruction. The newcomers will be assisted by those old hands (old feet?), who can indicate with an exaggerated shoulder the correct passing side and who can keep everyone moving. Call a duple proper dance, though, and the caller's troubles multiply. First of all, there are all those dancers who have already taken hands four and crossed over... they need to be brough back onto the correct side. And then doing the same sex right and left through can cause all manner of problems, so a careful, step-by-step instruction follows, often with a demonstration. The same applies, even more so, with triple minors, which of course were the norm at one time in our dancing past. People like what they know, and if they haven't been exposed to different figures and different formations, they'll initially resist the unfamiliar. But take a group of dancers who only dance contras regularly and get them through a grand square successfully, let alone something like a teacup chain, and you can feel the excitement in the room. But I digress... Cynthia also also raised the question of whether dancers squat or sit down when there's a demonstration, and Chris made several good suggestions about this. Dancers simply have grown accustomed to not having a demonstration, or are less tolerant of a demo than they might have been. I recall the story of Ted Sannella calling in Washington, DC, some years ago. He went out onto the floor to demonstrate the timing he wanted to see for a right and left through, and one of the dancers was heard grumbling something to the effect of "Who is this old man, who thinks he has the right to show us something?" The dance's organizer swiftly replied, "That's Ted Sannella, and if he thinks people here need to work on that figure, then they do!" Ted was fond of jumping onto the floor once or twice in an evening-- never more than that, in my recollection-- to illustrate style points. I don't think that this practice is as common these days, at least in the groups where I dance. One delightful exception for me came last fall when I was calling in Prague. There, in part because of the language barrier, I found it far more efficient to demonstrate unusual figures than to try to explain with words what I wanted. Yes, they'd be able to follow me, with the assistance of a translator, but the one picture/thousand words maxim applied. As soon as I took two steps toward the dance floor from the mic, the entire room sat down or squatted, without my needing even to make a request. I'd show the figure with the assistance of a few couples, and then everyone would dance it. I consciously modeled my calling on Ted's model, so I'm comfortable going out onto the floor. I do think that this action is a good way of making style points or demonstrating a particularly complex move. Perhaps if more of us did this at opportune moments, dancers would in time learn to get out of the sightlines of their neighbors. One final point. Chris ended his post with the comment that "we as callers need to model the good behavior from the floor as dancers." Well said! If we're on the dance floor when another caller comes out to demo something, I think that we have an obligation immediately to squat down ourselves, and trust that others will follow our lead. David Millstone

19 years

calling New England squares : intro and break

by David Merrill

Hi: After this year's DEFFA survivors dance and armed with this year's Ralph Page Weekend syllabus, (and my first impromptu chance to call squares) I'm left with a question. Are the intro, breaks, and close traditional and standard for particular dances, or are they generally improvised by the caller as his own signature? (Bow to partner, and then to corner seems to be how most begin but they seem fairly divergent from there on out!) Thanks from a very inexperienced sort-of-caller, Dave Merrill _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

19 years

Teaching the swing

by Camilla Streeter

I've been sitting on the sidelines for a while enjoying the conversation. I'm been an avid dancer for almost twenty years and I truly enjoy bringing new people in to contra dancing through one-on-one teaching. I think that Rick Mohr has a wonderful way of explaining the mechanics of the swing. He recently taught the buzz step to the gathered crowd at Rehoboth and it was great to watch. I used the same language the other night with a beginner and he got it easily. Rick also has a nice way of explaining the weight distribution concept so that the gents don't get sore right arms. I agree with Jeff that if you find the right language you can teach this successfully. The buzz step swing is such a great thing, it seems a shame to let someone miss it. Camilla Streeter --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

19 years

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Contra Callers March 2006