Hello all,
I've started to become aware of a few trends in the community around the
Shared Weight Callers list:
1. The list volume has increased
2. The subject matter is increasingly focused on tiny details of the
calling experience, usually only of interest to someone who has been
calling for many, many years. And these details are debated at length
(increasing the volume of the list).
3. People are leaving. Not in mass droves, but a noticeable amount. And
some are telling me that the list does not serve their needs.
This list was started 9 years ago (next week!) with the express purpose
of supporting and encouraging the newer caller. An open forum where the
most basic of question was not only tolerated, but celebrated. We
succeeded in creating that community for many years, but lately, that
vision seems to have been lost along the way. It would be a shame to
lose that part of what made this group special.
Seth and I started this list, but all we did was start the ball rolling.
This is your community, your forum for discussion. I will support
whatever this list wants to become. I just want us to be conscious and
deliberate about deciding what it will be.
So, let's start a discussion about the Purpose of the List and the
future of Shared Weight. Here are some thoughts to consider:
A. Since there seems to be a split in the discussion, should we split
the list? On one side is experienced callers discussing master-level
details of calling, programming, teaching and history. On the other side
is the mentoring of newer callers who need help at the apprentice and
journeyman levels. We could start a master-callers(a)sharedweight.net list
quite easily. People could change their subscription based on their
interest.
B. If we keep this list as-is, how do we make it easy for someone to
determine what will be relevant to their level of interest? How do we
know when to ask someone to take their debate of a trivial issue off list?
C. How do we keep the experience of the list useful and relevant to the
most number of people at the widest range of experience levels?
Thanks to all of you for your participation, whether you post, or just
lurk. I love being a part of the traditional dance community and
especially part of our subset of dance callers.
Happy Dancing,
Chris Weiler
SharedWeight Founder/admin/moderator
Craftsbury, VT
Personally, I like to dance and call squares as much as contra dances, but in many locales there is a strong preference for contras. If you were going to program a square or two in an evening otherwise devoted to contra dances, which ones would you pick? Or what would be the characteristics of squares that you think would make the contra devotees say "That wasn't so bad after all"? (This is assuming you have asked and the organizers haven't told you they expect all contras).
I am programming this Friday's Tallahassee dance right now, so this is not just an academic question.
Richard Hopkins
hopkinsrs(a)comcast.net
850-894-9212
850-544-7614 cell
Sent from my iPad
Hi Everyone - Many of our easier dances include down-the-halls, but there
are so many ways to come back up! There's turn alone, and turn as a couple
of course, but there's also sliding doors, right-hand-high-left-hand-low,
loop-de-loop, cloverleaf. What are your favorite dances that include an
unusual down-the-hall? I've thought of putting together a program that
highlights all the different ways to go down the hall. I think there is a
wide enough variety in these dances that it could be doable without boring
the dancers.
JoLaine
--
JoLaine Jones-Pokorney
"We are as gods and might as well get good at it!"
- Stewart Brand
> 2. Re: Purpose of the List (Perry Shafran)
>
> Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:42:34 -0400
> From: Sam Whited <sam(a)samwhited.com>
>
> On 09/11/2013 03:34 PM, Lindsay Morris wrote:
>> I say keep one list. I too know where the delete key is.
>
> Agreed. And if volume is a problem for you, you can't be managing your
> email properly.
I'm for one list; I'm not a caller but find the discussions interesting.
Some readers may not know about the Digest feature which reduces the number of distinct pieces of email.
Also all posters should try to remove all the irrelevant stuff and then the content is smaller and more readable.
For people like Jeff and Dave, who value the musical part of the dance experience so very highly, a steady diet of contras seems like the best one. Squares have other satisfactions, and other people may value those. For example, the experience of fast-paced southern squares, with some degree of unpredictability in the breaks, danced to a hard-driving southern band, is a different but also pleasurable kind of high.
But I realize that's a bit off my original topic, which was, what squares do you tend to pull out of your box when you have decided to call one or two at a contra dance? Saying you would never call any squares at a contra dance is of course a valid response.
Richard
Richard Hopkins
hopkinsrs(a)comcast.net
850-894-9212
850-544-7614 cell
Sent from my iPad
Jim said:
= = = = = = = =
By the way, contra choreographer Al Olson coined the term "line heys for
threes" to describe actions such as [starting with 1's already below 2's]
Gypsy R with Neighbor
Gypsy L with next neighbor
I've also seen actions similarly analogous to heys for four--e.g., from
duple improper starting formation, pass N by R sh to meet future N and gypsy
L, then pass orig N by R sh again to meet N from previous round and gypsy L.
= = = = = = = =
I love these moves and have heard them called Gypsy Heys. That's
another one for your list, Sam.
And while we are on heys, do you have these on your list:
Tapsalteerie Hey (Ladies half hey, men ricochet, ladies ricochet, ladies
half hey) (Tapsalteerie is Scottish for topsy-turvy, apparently)
Cupid's Hey (see Jim Hemphill's dance of the same name)
Celtic Hey (see Kathy Anderson's "The Tropical Gentleman")
Wizard's Walk
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
Hi all;
I'm looking for a complete (or, as complete as this sort of thing can
be) list of Contra Dance moves. Once I exchausted all of the ones I
could think of off the top of my head, I started using Wikipedia's
list [1].
Can anyone think of any less-common moves that are missing from that
list? I know there are lots of square dance moves that are adapted to
contra dances fairly regularly that might be missing from the article
on Contra; I'm basically looking for any move that's ever been used in
a contra dance (even if only once). Contra squares (in which any
square dance move is more or less valid) probably don't count. The
move should work in `normal' contra dance formations and/or mescolanzas.
Thanks,
Sam
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_dance_choreography
--
Sam Whited
pub 4096R/EC2C9934
https://samwhited.com/contact
Hi Jeff,
You said, " At contra dances I've only heard seesaw to mean a left
shoulder Dosido". Since Sam was going for "fluid motion", and Seesaw can
mean Left Shoulder Gypsy, and that would make a smoother flow into a Shadow
Swing, then I was actually guessing he meant Left Shoulder Gypsy. I always
say what I mean when I call a Seesaw. Just in case... :-)
You said, " In contra all balances are with joined hands". Well,
that depends on exactly how you define a contra dance. If you include
ancient and traditional ones, then I am pretty sure that you will find
plenty of examples of balances without hands. :-)
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
"other names for chase and cut thru"?
In 1939 it was documented as "The lady round two And the gent fall through,
The gent around two, And the lady fall through" in a square dance called
"The Lady Round Two".
It is also know as "Back Door Key", "Old Side Door", "The Outside Door" and
"Little Back Door" - variants include who leads, whether the leader leads
the follower by the hand, and how many times you go around.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Aahz Maruch <aahz(a)pobox.com> wrote:
> Tangenting: Not sure what the contra community considers "correct", but
> for MWSD the correct pair of calls would be "walk around corner, see saw
> partner", which would translate to gypsy instead of dosido. That would
> obviate the need for the footnote. ;-)
Actually, this is worthy of it's own discussion. I wrote this dance ages
ago and called it once (with mixed feedback; mostly with concerns that it
was too complicated), but never really could figure out what the see saw
should be called (it's not really a see saw or a mad robin; somewhere in
between). It's almost a Mad Robin in which you don't want to be looking at
your opposite. For those who don't want to parse my markup from the last
message, here's the dance written out in a more traditional style:
Code's Compiling by Sam Whited (Duple becket)
>
> A1. Neighbor dosido (8); Partner see saw (8)
> A2. Shadow swing (16)
>
> B1. Balance and petronella (8); Balance and petronella (8)
> B2. Partner swing (8); Left diagonal: Right and left through (8)
>
> Notes: The Neighbor dosido into a partner see saw should be one fluid
> motion. Resist spinning in the dosido and start revolving slowly over your
> right shoulder as you enter the see saw and everything will flow. Make sure
> lines have lots of space for the dosido [since it's across the lines which
> I normally don't like].
>
The important thing is to make sure dancers know that they don't have to
stop and change direction for the dosido into a see saw (which makes the
dance horribly jerky). In general, it probably needs revision. Also,
probably a stupid question, but what's MWSD?
—Sam
--
Sam Whited
pub 4096R/EC2C9934
https://samwhited.com/contact
