Contra Callers

contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net

14 participants
4360 discussions

How to explain the charms of square dances (was More on Programming)

by Jacob Nancy Bloom via Callers

Many thanks to Cary Ravitz for explaining why some dancers prefer contras to squares. (You can see that explanation below.) Tom Hinds said that, when dancers tell him they don't like squares, he tells them, "then stay home when I call". I wouldn't be comfortable giving that reply. While square dances might not offer dancers the " dancer, music, motion connection", without the voice of a caller intruding, that they might find in contra dances, the square dances offer other benefits. I would rather come up with a way of describing those benefits, in the hope that some of those dancers will find things to enjoy in the squares. How would those of you who enjoy both squares and contras describe what you get out of dancing square dances? Jacob On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 11:25 PM, Cary Ravitz via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 10:40 PM, Jacob Nancy Bloom via Callers >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> > Cary, some of your objections to squares seem a bit contradictory. Let >> me >> > re-state them, and see if I've understood you correctly. >> > >> > Some squares are unphrased, and those squares have less opportunity to >> > connect your movement to the music. >> > Yes. > > > Many squares are danced for a shorter time than contradances are usually >> > danced, and therefore take relatively longer to teach compared to the >> > dancing time. >> > No, in my experience as a dancer, squares take longer to teach and this is > compensated with shorter dance time. > > >> > Many squares are mixers, and therefore have less time dancing with your >> > original partner than in a contra. >> > Yes. > > >> > Some squares have visiting couple dances, in which the dancers can only >> make >> > movements in place during some of the music. >> > In my experience as a dancer, visiting couple square use the interaction > sequence 1-2, 1-3, 1-4 and 2-3, 2-3, 2-4, 2-1 and 3-4, ... so for 2/3 of > the dance half the dancers are not included. > > >> > In all square dances, the need to listen for the calls interferes with >> the >> > relationship you would like to have with the music. >> > Yes. > > >> > >> > Have I understood your points correctly? Or have I not quite >> understood >> > your meaning? >> > *For me*, this all comes down to > > dancer, music, motion connection. It can be wonderful in a contra. I've > never found it in a square. > >

9 years, 10 months

Re: [Callers] How to explain the charms of square dances (was More on Programming)

by Perry via Callers

There are two square dance series near me, one in DC and one in Baltimore, who get tremendously large crowds for their dances. They are young as well and most people there are not contra dancers but there are some contra dancers who happen to be square lovers too. I always wonder how these dances get up to 200 people and some of the contra dances struggle to draw. Perry Sent from my Galaxy S®III <div>-------- Original message --------</div><div>From: Tom Hinds via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> </div><div>Date:06/27/2015 8:38 AM (GMT-06:00) </div><div>To: Jacob Nancy Bloom <jandnbloom(a)gmail.com> </div><div>Cc: Shared_Weight_Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> </div><div>Subject: Re: [Callers] How to explain the charms of square dances (was More on Programming) </div><div> </div>Yes you are correct, pointing out the benefits of squares is a much better option than telling them to stay home. I included that comment in hopes that callers might consider being less afraid of what dancers think. I have no illusions that others would say that to a dancer. One aspect that makes squares attractive is the changing patterns. For myself and others, dancing choreography that wasn't walked through is very enjoyable. And changing the pattern doesn't have to be challenging. For partner changing squares there's a certain satisfaction/challenge in performing the choreography well as a group and ending with your partner again. Picking the correct square for this is crucial-not too easy and not too hard. Some people enjoy dancing squares to music where the phrasing is less distinct. It's hard for me to describe but it's like dancing without holding back. Or could it be described as charging ahead? Perhaps some of you can describe this gooder than I can. This works well with driving old time music. Although I don't enjoy the visiting couple type square, I understand that there are a number of groups who enjoy these types of squares with very fast music. In central Virginia there're getting large turnouts. I'm told that most of these dancers are young and not contra dancers. I often hear of other groups in the country where young dancers are discovering squares. Is this the future? T _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 10 months

Re: [Callers] More on Programming

by Rich Sbardella via Callers

I differ with Cary's generalized storyline of contra being "uniting of partners". If I had to generalize a storyline, it would be of building community. I may be wrong, but I think David Kaynor, in his calling booklet, referred to your "hands four" group as your "neighborhood". I love that terminology. I often choose new or weak dancers as partners, and I rely on the support of these neighborhoods to make the dance enjoyable. In a square the neighborhood changes from four dancers to eight but you stay with them longer. In most mixer squares, if called and danced correctly, the partner relationship is restored as the dance resolves. As a dancer, I love squares. It is a refreshing change, thus adding variety without difficulty, during an evening of contras. Squares often provide a rest period as others dance. This is a plus, not a minus; as I age, I appreciate the rest. I have found that some callers who are quite competent with contras, are terrible with squares, I also see callers choosing squares that are too difficult for an open contra dance, thus causing failure on the floor. Calling squares is a different art than calling contras. Choosing squares carefully with an adequate walk thru is essential. If a caller gets too much negative feedback, or no positive feedback, perhaps that caller should not be calling squares. Another problem is that squares are not called often enough at some series. The concept of corners, opposites, home position, RH lady, etc,, are foreign to many contra dancers. These are all EZ concepts but all together in a four minute blitz, every once in a while, can be overwhelming. Adding squares regularly to our programs would enhance and expand the experience. Squarely, (can I say that?) Rich Sbardella Stafford, CT On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Perry Shafran via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > See, this is what I mean, when I get advice from some callers that say one > thing and advice from other callers that say the complete opposite. > > I figure that there are lots of different people on the floor. Some > people LIKE squares, believe it or not. Whenever I see squares called, > yeah, there are some people who head for the sidelines, but generally I see > dancers on the floor having a good time. So I learned some time ago that > for everyone who grumbles about a square being called, there are 10 others > who love it. > > As for insisting that every dance has two swings AND the neighbor swing > MUST come before the partner swing, that seems to be a personal preference > rather than a hard and fast rule. I think that most dancers don't really > care which one comes first. I went to a dance weekend this past weekend > where there were more than a few dances with no neighbor swing, and it > appeared that everyone had a great time dancing. > > I have long been taught that variety is the spice of life, and people do > enjoy squares mixed in with a contra, as well as varied choreography. > Varied choreography makes the dance interesting. Hard and fast rules limit > the choreography that you can do and excludes many all-time great dances > that might have a neighbor swing or a partner swing first (like Joyride and > Ramsay Chase). And let's not even talking about throwing in an occasional > chestnut in there - we have to get rid of all those wonderful dances > because they are "boring" by today's standards. (Except to those folks who > love them of course!) > > Perry > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Cary Ravitz via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> > *To:* Shared_Weight_Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 24, 2015 10:34 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Callers] More on Programming > > Why swings in every dance - because that is a huge part of the contra > experience, a swing with the person that you asked to dance. > > Why should the partner swing follow the neighbor swing - because this is > an art form, not an exercise routine. The storyline of a contra is the > uniting of partners, not the the breaking up of partners (that's my > preference anyway). And in practical terms, I want to be with my partner at > the end of a dance to thank them quickly before finding another partner. > > "Squares are just like contras, only you have to listen" - this is not > correct. > > Some things that people to not like about squares - > > less movement/music connection due to lack of strict phrasing > having to listen to the caller breaks the movement/music connection > teaching time > mixer squares breaks the partner connection > visiting squares leave people "out of the dance" for long periods. > > I find squares and contras completely different. > > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM, George Mercer via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > I may not be a good example or even that good a caller, but ... I like > swings, I have no need to have a neighbor swing in every dance and most > certainly don't care where in the dance the neighbor swing happens. That's > making up rules for the sake of having rules. I like the buzz step, but to > put it mildly there are many dancers with whom a buzz step is impossible, > difficult or merely uncomfortable. I teach a walking swing and sometimes > demonstrate a buzz step with a little time for practice. Far too many > callers and beginner workshop instructors teach a buzz step in a way that > promotes bouncing, which in turn makes swinging difficult or worse. I've > also heard more than one caller-instructor tell dancers that to "give > weight" (an inadequate term) they should lean back. Just kill me. As a > dancer, I often combine a walking swing-with a buzz step -- especially if > we have gotten out of sync with the music. I come down on to the floor when > I think it's required. On two occasions recently while dancing, the person > I was dancing with said, "Well, this a dance the caller has never actually > danced before. If she or he had, she or he wouldn't have chosen it." Amen. > I was at an dance recently where a mixer was called near the end of the > evening. I'm not sure what that was all about. Once early in my limited > calling career,just as the first dance got underway about 20 newcomers > walked in. I then called several dances without swings, just to get them > acclimated to moving in rhythm and with the music. I'll never do that > again. I was too cautious and shouldn't have been. I honestly was afraid > the experienced dancers were going to hurt me. And they say I can't learn. > Perhaps my biggest peeve on the dance floor is the experienced dancers who > insist on sharing their bad dance habits (swinging backwards, excessive and > unexpected twirling -- I almost wrote twerking --, inappropriate dipping, > showing how athletic and fancy they are, etc.) with new dancers rather than > helping them learn the basic fundamentals, timing and courtesy. I love > squares. Not everyone does, but I often explain to people in my square, > "squares are just like contras, only you have to listen." And finally, > callers, please stop telling people that when they reach the end of the > line, "they're out." This seems to encourgae dancers to think, "Well now, > I don't have to pay attention." While they are on the floor they should > "stay in the dance." That just may be me. Thanks, George > > > > > -- > Cary Ravitz > caryravitz(a)gmail.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 10 months

Re: [Callers] Giving Weight

by Read Weaver via Callers

Are you asking about grapevine step? A twisting step, where you alternate the right foot going in front of and behind the left as you walk sideways. It’s how circles (of 4 or 8) are done in modern western square dancing, and in the last several years increasingly seen, to the dismay of all right-thinking people, on contra dance floors. Read Weaver Jamaica Plain, MA http://lcfd.org > On Jun 26, 2015, at 9:01 AM, Rich Sbardella <richsbardella(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Read, > I did not understand your reference to grapevining in MWSD. Can you elaborate? > Rich > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Read Weaver via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote: > In my separate beginners’ workshops, I have people take allemande hold, and then move around as fast as they comfortably can (“faster than you ever would in a dance”), paying attention to what that feels like in their hands and arms. I then have them do it again, starting fast and then slowing down a lot (slower than in a dance), keeping that same feeling in their hands/arms. Then I’ll have them do a 2-hand turn with that same feeling (my workshops most often combine contra & English), and then a circle of 4. I talk about the circle 4 being the most boring move in contra when it’s done without weight, and pointing out that it has quite a nice feeling when everyone is giving weight. (That’s also where I explain grapevining—why it’s done in MWSD (giving weight isn’t part of their style, so grapevine makes it a more interesting figure), and why it’s a bad thing to do in contra (because it makes it so much harder to give weight).) > > Giving weight is the first thing I teach in a beginners’ session, partly to emphasize how important it is, and partly because it gives me the opportunity to point out everywhere else where you do it, including just a little like in a courtesy turn. > > Read Weaver > Jamaica Plain, MA > http://lcfd.org <http://lcfd.org/> > > > On 6/24/2015 11:29 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers wrote: > >> > >> How do you descibe giving weight, and how do you teach it for circles, > >> allemandes, and, swings? > >> Rich > >> Stafford, CT

9 years, 10 months

Do these dances exist?

by Maia McCormick via Callers

Dance the First, improper A1: (new) N alle L 1 1/2 ladies alle R 1x A2: N b&s B1 circle L 3/4 P sw B2: circle L 3/4 N alle R 1 ½ Dance the Second, improper A1: neighbor gypsy half hey, women by L A1: neighbor gypsy neighbor swing B1: circle L 3/4 partner swing B2: R/L through across circle left 3/4 and pass through

9 years, 10 months

Dances with One Swing

by Rich Sbardella via Callers

I am happy to see that I am not alone in my perspective. I oftn dance 18th Century contras with little or no swinging and they are indeed enjoyable. That being said, I have very few mondern contras with one, or no swings included. Can anyone suggest some good ones to add to my collection? Rich Sbardella Stafford, CT On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Perry Shafran via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Completely agree with this perspective. Contra is, at its heart, more of > a community dance than a partner dance, because you dance with so many > different people during the course of one dance. I think that, over the > years, contra has become more of a partner-centered dance, and I often see > dancers outright ignore their neighbors to give full attention to their > partners at all times. > > I also must be from the old school, because short periods of inactivity > during a dance has never bothered me, and like Rich I do tend to appreciate > that. I think that the desire for contra to be fast-paced and > always-moving, while exciting for many contra dancers, has turned off many > other long-time contra dancers. > > But the trend does seem to be for fast-moving high-energy dancing, and I > do think that callers need to be somewhat concerned with that. However, I > also think that callers also need to be concerned with the folks who don't > move so fast and like the periods of inactivity, where they can get > themselves set if need be and be where they want to be for the next move. > Trying to integrate all types of dancers is what makes this a true form of > community dance. > > Perry > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Rich Sbardella <richsbardella(a)gmail.com> > *To:* Perry Shafran <pshaf(a)yahoo.com> > *Cc:* Shared_Weight_Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> > *Sent:* Thursday, June 25, 2015 2:41 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Callers] More on Programming > > I differ with Cary's generalized storyline of contra being "uniting of > partners". If I had to generalize a storyline, it would be of building > community. I may be wrong, but I think David Kaynor, in his calling > booklet, referred to your "hands four" group as your "neighborhood". I > love that terminology. I often choose new or weak dancers as partners, and > I rely on the support of these neighborhoods to make the dance enjoyable. > > In a square the neighborhood changes from four dancers to eight but you > stay with them longer. In most mixer squares, if called and danced > correctly, the partner relationship is restored as the dance resolves. > > As a dancer, I love squares. It is a refreshing change, thus adding > variety without difficulty, during an evening of contras. Squares often > provide a rest period as others dance. This is a plus, not a minus; as I > age, I appreciate the rest. > > I have found that some callers who are quite competent with contras, are > terrible with squares, I also see callers choosing squares that are too > difficult for an open contra dance, thus causing failure on the floor. > Calling squares is a different art than calling contras. Choosing squares > carefully with an adequate walk thru is essential. If a caller gets too > much negative feedback, or no positive feedback, perhaps that caller should > not be calling squares. > > Another problem is that squares are not called often enough at some > series. The concept of corners, opposites, home position, RH lady, etc,, > are foreign to many contra dancers. These are all EZ concepts but all > together in a four minute blitz, every once in a while, can be overwhelming. > > Adding squares regularly to our programs would enhance and expand the > experience. > > Squarely, (can I say that?) > Rich Sbardella > Stafford, CT > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 9:09 AM, Perry Shafran via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > > > See, this is what I mean, when I get advice from some callers that say one > thing and advice from other callers that say the complete opposite. > > I figure that there are lots of different people on the floor. Some > people LIKE squares, believe it or not. Whenever I see squares called, > yeah, there are some people who head for the sidelines, but generally I see > dancers on the floor having a good time. So I learned some time ago that > for everyone who grumbles about a square being called, there are 10 others > who love it. > > As for insisting that every dance has two swings AND the neighbor swing > MUST come before the partner swing, that seems to be a personal preference > rather than a hard and fast rule. I think that most dancers don't really > care which one comes first. I went to a dance weekend this past weekend > where there were more than a few dances with no neighbor swing, and it > appeared that everyone had a great time dancing. > > I have long been taught that variety is the spice of life, and people do > enjoy squares mixed in with a contra, as well as varied choreography. > Varied choreography makes the dance interesting. Hard and fast rules limit > the choreography that you can do and excludes many all-time great dances > that might have a neighbor swing or a partner swing first (like Joyride and > Ramsay Chase). And let's not even talking about throwing in an occasional > chestnut in there - we have to get rid of all those wonderful dances > because they are "boring" by today's standards. (Except to those folks who > love them of course!) > > Perry > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Cary Ravitz via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> > *To:* Shared_Weight_Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 24, 2015 10:34 PM > *Subject:* Re: [Callers] More on Programming > > Why swings in every dance - because that is a huge part of the contra > experience, a swing with the person that you asked to dance. > > Why should the partner swing follow the neighbor swing - because this is > an art form, not an exercise routine. The storyline of a contra is the > uniting of partners, not the the breaking up of partners (that's my > preference anyway). And in practical terms, I want to be with my partner at > the end of a dance to thank them quickly before finding another partner. > > "Squares are just like contras, only you have to listen" - this is not > correct. > > Some things that people to not like about squares - > > less movement/music connection due to lack of strict phrasing > having to listen to the caller breaks the movement/music connection > teaching time > mixer squares breaks the partner connection > visiting squares leave people "out of the dance" for long periods. > > I find squares and contras completely different. > > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:47 AM, George Mercer via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > I may not be a good example or even that good a caller, but ... I like > swings, I have no need to have a neighbor swing in every dance and most > certainly don't care where in the dance the neighbor swing happens. That's > making up rules for the sake of having rules. I like the buzz step, but to > put it mildly there are many dancers with whom a buzz step is impossible, > difficult or merely uncomfortable. I teach a walking swing and sometimes > demonstrate a buzz step with a little time for practice. Far too many > callers and beginner workshop instructors teach a buzz step in a way that > promotes bouncing, which in turn makes swinging difficult or worse. I've > also heard more than one caller-instructor tell dancers that to "give > weight" (an inadequate term) they should lean back. Just kill me. As a > dancer, I often combine a walking swing-with a buzz step -- especially if > we have gotten out of sync with the music. I come down on to the floor when > I think it's required. On two occasions recently while dancing, the person > I was dancing with said, "Well, this a dance the caller has never actually > danced before. If she or he had, she or he wouldn't have chosen it." Amen. > I was at an dance recently where a mixer was called near the end of the > evening. I'm not sure what that was all about. Once early in my limited > calling career,just as the first dance got underway about 20 newcomers > walked in. I then called several dances without swings, just to get them > acclimated to moving in rhythm and with the music. I'll never do that > again. I was too cautious and shouldn't have been. I honestly was afraid > the experienced dancers were going to hurt me. And they say I can't learn. > Perhaps my biggest peeve on the dance floor is the experienced dancers who > insist on sharing their bad dance habits (swinging backwards, excessive and > unexpected twirling -- I almost wrote twerking --, inappropriate dipping, > showing how athletic and fancy they are, etc.) with new dancers rather than > helping them learn the basic fundamentals, timing and courtesy. I love > squares. Not everyone does, but I often explain to people in my square, > "squares are just like contras, only you have to listen." And finally, > callers, please stop telling people that when they reach the end of the > line, "they're out." This seems to encourgae dancers to think, "Well now, > I don't have to pay attention." While they are on the floor they should > "stay in the dance." That just may be me. Thanks, George > > > > > -- > Cary Ravitz > caryravitz(a)gmail.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 10 months

Giving Weight

by Rich Sbardella via Callers

How do you descibe giving weight, and how do you teach it for circles, allemandes, and, swings? Rich Stafford, CT

9 years, 10 months

content of introductory lesson

by Dave Casserly via Callers

Hi all, I've included John's comments below, but thought I'd start a new thread on introductory lessons, which is sort of the bigger picture of what we talk about when we talk about a caller teaching the swing. I don't call much, but I still teach introductory lessons before weekly dances every now and then. In my community, it's pretty common for local callers (or even some local dancers who aren't callers) to teach the lesson when there's an out-of-town caller booked for the night. I think this system has advantages and disadvantages: as an organizer, I like being able to control what goes in the lesson, since, as discussed below, I have some fairly strong opinions on what makes an introductory lesson welcoming and successful, but if I were a traveling caller calling my home dance, I would feel at a disadvantage if I could not tailor the lesson the program I intended to call. So, what do you all focus on when teaching the lesson? It seems from the previous thread that there are several approaches: - teach the moves that are most difficult for dancers to get (right and left through, ladies' chain) - teach the moves in proportion to how many times you call them during the night (swing, allemande, circle) - teach the moves that will mess you up the most if you don't do them right (half promenade across, half chain, half anything, really) - teach skills, such as sharing weight My approach is really to do none of these. I do teach dancers how to share weight, and generally teach it in the context of a circle, then a two hand walk around with one other person, then a buzz-step swing. If I have time after that I may quickly go through a few other moves, but I don't consider that a necessity. Instead, what I focus on is teaching newcomers to dance with a variety of partners, ask experienced dancers to dance, listen to the caller, look up for help when lost, and clap to show their appreciation for the performers at the end of each dance. I tell them explicitly what I think is most important and what I am there to help them get out of the night: I want nobody to get hurt, and I want them all to have a good time. At the end of the lesson, I will even try to point out experienced dancers who I think the newcomers should dance with at some point. I tell the newcomers that they should dance each dance with a different person, that it is totally fine to sit dances out if they need a break, and that if somebody asks them to dance but they don't want to dance with that person, simply say "no thank you." I also identify members of the dance committee who are in the room in case they have any questions at all or have any problems during the dance, and again stress to them that we are here to help them have a great time. The way I view it, if I teach 20 moves in a 30-minute lesson, the newcomers will not remember those moves after an hour of dancing. If I teach them that the community is committed to ensuring they have a safe, fun dancing experience, and that experienced dancers will help them through the rest, I think that is 90% of what helps newcomers get the most out of their first dance. Obviously, my view of how the lesson should be only works in communities with a lot of experienced dancers. I'd never be able to get away with teaching a lesson without telling anybody what an allemande is if the hall is full of beginners. -Dave Washington, DC On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:13 AM, John Sweeney via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Thanks for all the great ideas/ > > > > Yes, I should say gallop instead of skate-board – I start with “Now walk > fast on the spot” before I tell them to turn, so I assume they are going to > keep alternating their feet, but some don’t! Maybe “gallop” will help. I > did get one guy at a workshop tell me that he had been taught to keep one > foot fixed on the floor on a single spot. I showed him what would happen > if we both did that – in slow motion, otherwise it could have been quite > painful J > > > > Ron asked, “Okay, so what about my first comment: Not everyone is > physically able to do the buzzstep swing?” > > > > Well, my first statement was “Yes, of course I always tell dancers that > they can walk instead of buzz” and the last line of my sample teach was, > “If you are having trouble with the buzz-step then you can always just > walk.” > > > > So I thought I had covered that. Sorry if I have misunderstood. > > > > At one of the weekly sessions I run we get around 25 to 30 people each > week; most of them are ladies, and the ages range mainly from 50s to > mid-80s. We provide badges saying, “Please swing gently” and we tell them > they can walk. I always teach the buzz-step and they all try it. Most of > them carry on doing a buzz-step and very few wear the badges after the > first few weeks once they have got used to swinging. > > > > They also love my no-swing contras – they don’t need swings to have fun! > > > > Ron also said, “The single most important thing to teach a dancer is "it's > okay to make mistakes".”. I agree that that is important and we joke about > the mistakes a lot. Sometimes they have the most fun when they fail > completely! > > > > But my Rule #1 is: > > “Every dancer has the right to get on the dance-floor and have fun without > getting hurt.” > > > > I have been hurt a lot on the dance-floor. I used to dance Ceroc/Modern > Jive three or four nights a week. You know the way that some people yank on > you when they step back in the Balance before a swing? Well in Modern Jive > you step apart about once every eight steps, and the general level of > technique teaching at Modern Jive classes is very low, so most of the > dancers have never been told that they shouldn’t pull when they step back. > In fact some of the <expletive deleted> teachers actually tell them to pull > to generate tension, without mentioning that the level of tension required > is around the one ounce level, not the one ton level! So I ended up with > repetitive stress injuries which weakened my muscular infrastructure and > when an aerial move went wrong in a practice session I ended up tearing one > of my rotator cuff (shoulder) muscles badly. > > > > Aerials: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJnL_Y63AnY – that’s me in black. > > > > So, having had two shoulder operations, and not wanting any more, if my > partner appears to be about to throw their whole weight at me when they > step back in a Balance & Swing then I step forward to prevent it. (Once > having asked a lady to stop pulling on the step-back as she was hurting me, > and failing to get through to her, next time we stepped back I pulled on > her. She immediately got cross and said I had hurt her. The irony appeared > to be completely lost on her!). And if a lady leans back in a swing then I > move my hand from her shoulder blade to her waist so she has to stand up or > fall over! I have learnt a lot of self-defence skills over the years! > > > > I recently ran a “Contra Skillz – Style and Technique” workshop at a UK > festival and the experienced dancers loved it – most of them do want to > improve and do want the caller to do some teaching. (Of course, they > self-selected by attending the workshop in the first place!) > > > > One of the guys is a very good dancer, but my wife, Karen, complained that > his swinging was far too forceful; he was rigid and using too much power. > The first thing I taught in the workshop was that most people will swing > better if they relax. Next time she swung with him, he was, as usual, > rigid, but, because I had empowered her by teaching relaxation, she felt > able to say, with a big smile, “And relax <she breathed out>” – he did the > same and suddenly turned into a wonderful swing partner. She heaped on the > praise and he felt good that he was giving Karen a better swing. > > > > I agree with Tom that we all have different perspectives and so we > approach things differently. That is a good thing as far as I am > concerned. If all callers ran their evening the same way then the dancers > would get bored. Different approaches help different people, and give the > variety needed to keep the dance alive. > > > > My perspective is based on learning the Galway Swing from my Irish mother > when I was a teenager (take an Allemande Right hold, each of you cup your > left fingertips around your partner’s right elbow, buzz – great fun!), so I > have been buzzing for fifty years and would always choose it. But of > course I walk if I or my partner is tired, or if my partner can’t cope with > a fast swing, or if they are such a bad swinger that I need to slow the > swing down to avoid damage. Though actually you can do a slow, controlled > buzz-step swing and that can feel great too. > > > > I also agree that programming is crucial to a successful evening. Apart > from avoiding overuse of particular moves or sequences, providing variety, > and trying to include something a bit different, I am also building the > move set slowly so that newcomers get to a point where they can do great > dances later in the evening because they have seen all the bits already. > > > > The Right & Left Through is such a counter-intuitive move that I often > leave it out completely. If I need it for a particular dance then I can > change it to a Half Promenade. I certainly never spend time teaching it in > a beginner’s workshop unless I am planning to use it multiple times in the > evening. > > > > Thanks again for all the great ideas in this thread. > > > > Maybe I should stop rambling now… J > > > > Happy dancing, > > John > > > > John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 > 940 574 > > http://www.modernjive.com for Modern Jive Events & DVDs > > http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > -- David Casserly (cell) 781 258-2761

9 years, 10 months

Re: [Callers] Buzz Step Swing

by John Sweeney via Callers

Thanks for all the great ideas/ Yes, I should say gallop instead of skate-board - I start with "Now walk fast on the spot" before I tell them to turn, so I assume they are going to keep alternating their feet, but some don't! Maybe "gallop" will help. I did get one guy at a workshop tell me that he had been taught to keep one foot fixed on the floor on a single spot. I showed him what would happen if we both did that - in slow motion, otherwise it could have been quite painful :) Ron asked, "Okay, so what about my first comment: Not everyone is physically able to do the buzzstep swing?" Well, my first statement was "Yes, of course I always tell dancers that they can walk instead of buzz" and the last line of my sample teach was, "If you are having trouble with the buzz-step then you can always just walk." So I thought I had covered that. Sorry if I have misunderstood. At one of the weekly sessions I run we get around 25 to 30 people each week; most of them are ladies, and the ages range mainly from 50s to mid-80s. We provide badges saying, "Please swing gently" and we tell them they can walk. I always teach the buzz-step and they all try it. Most of them carry on doing a buzz-step and very few wear the badges after the first few weeks once they have got used to swinging. They also love my no-swing contras - they don't need swings to have fun! Ron also said, "The single most important thing to teach a dancer is "it's okay to make mistakes".". I agree that that is important and we joke about the mistakes a lot. Sometimes they have the most fun when they fail completely! But my Rule #1 is: "Every dancer has the right to get on the dance-floor and have fun without getting hurt." I have been hurt a lot on the dance-floor. I used to dance Ceroc/Modern Jive three or four nights a week. You know the way that some people yank on you when they step back in the Balance before a swing? Well in Modern Jive you step apart about once every eight steps, and the general level of technique teaching at Modern Jive classes is very low, so most of the dancers have never been told that they shouldn't pull when they step back. In fact some of the <expletive deleted> teachers actually tell them to pull to generate tension, without mentioning that the level of tension required is around the one ounce level, not the one ton level! So I ended up with repetitive stress injuries which weakened my muscular infrastructure and when an aerial move went wrong in a practice session I ended up tearing one of my rotator cuff (shoulder) muscles badly. Aerials: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJnL_Y63AnY - that's me in black. So, having had two shoulder operations, and not wanting any more, if my partner appears to be about to throw their whole weight at me when they step back in a Balance & Swing then I step forward to prevent it. (Once having asked a lady to stop pulling on the step-back as she was hurting me, and failing to get through to her, next time we stepped back I pulled on her. She immediately got cross and said I had hurt her. The irony appeared to be completely lost on her!). And if a lady leans back in a swing then I move my hand from her shoulder blade to her waist so she has to stand up or fall over! I have learnt a lot of self-defence skills over the years! I recently ran a "Contra Skillz - Style and Technique" workshop at a UK festival and the experienced dancers loved it - most of them do want to improve and do want the caller to do some teaching. (Of course, they self-selected by attending the workshop in the first place!) One of the guys is a very good dancer, but my wife, Karen, complained that his swinging was far too forceful; he was rigid and using too much power. The first thing I taught in the workshop was that most people will swing better if they relax. Next time she swung with him, he was, as usual, rigid, but, because I had empowered her by teaching relaxation, she felt able to say, with a big smile, "And relax <she breathed out>" - he did the same and suddenly turned into a wonderful swing partner. She heaped on the praise and he felt good that he was giving Karen a better swing. I agree with Tom that we all have different perspectives and so we approach things differently. That is a good thing as far as I am concerned. If all callers ran their evening the same way then the dancers would get bored. Different approaches help different people, and give the variety needed to keep the dance alive. My perspective is based on learning the Galway Swing from my Irish mother when I was a teenager (take an Allemande Right hold, each of you cup your left fingertips around your partner's right elbow, buzz - great fun!), so I have been buzzing for fifty years and would always choose it. But of course I walk if I or my partner is tired, or if my partner can't cope with a fast swing, or if they are such a bad swinger that I need to slow the swing down to avoid damage. Though actually you can do a slow, controlled buzz-step swing and that can feel great too. I also agree that programming is crucial to a successful evening. Apart from avoiding overuse of particular moves or sequences, providing variety, and trying to include something a bit different, I am also building the move set slowly so that newcomers get to a point where they can do great dances later in the evening because they have seen all the bits already. The Right & Left Through is such a counter-intuitive move that I often leave it out completely. If I need it for a particular dance then I can change it to a Half Promenade. I certainly never spend time teaching it in a beginner's workshop unless I am planning to use it multiple times in the evening. Thanks again for all the great ideas in this thread. Maybe I should stop rambling now. :) Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England <mailto:john@modernjive.com> john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 <http://www.modernjive.com> http://www.modernjive.com for Modern Jive Events & DVDs <http://www.contrafusion.co.uk> http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

9 years, 10 months

Fwd: Buzz Step Swing

by Read Weaver via Callers

But keep in mind that no beginner _ever_ does a walking swing, unless that is specifically taught, and usually not even then. They see and/or feel that others are doing a double-time step so they do one too, and since the swing is a clockwise (to-the-left) circle they lead with their left, hence a slipping step rather than a buzzstep. (Either that or they skip.) When I do an actual beginners’ workshop I teach both walking and buzzstep swing, but for something quick on the floor, I think teaching the buzzstep gives better results. Read Weaver Jamaica Plain, MA http://lcfd.org On Jun 20, 2015, at 10:28 AM, Lindsay Morris via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > John, respectfully, I have to disagree with your disagreement. A simple walking swing works just fine even when the other person is doing a buzz step. > > The HUGE problem that I see with beginner lessons is that people stand around bored while the teacher talks and talks. All the air goes out of the room. Keeping the beginners moving is job number one. > > So, I have them do a right elbow swing, to get the body dynamics right. Then maybe 30 seconds of talking about ballroom position, have them do a walking swing, a moment on how to balance, and they are good for the night. Especially if they get to practice that with three or four different people during the lesson. > > I can move a competent newcomer from walking-swing to buzz-step swing during the dance, just with "look at my feet." > > Always appreciate the perspectives on this list though. > >> On Jun 20, 2015, at 5:16 AM, John Sweeney via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> Dale said, "Don't teach advanced techniques to new dancers. Forget the buzz >> step." >> >> Sorry, but I must disagree most strongly. >> >> In an average evening of contra dancing you will spend nearly thirty minutes >> swinging (if the dances are in the Modern Urban Contra Dance style rather >> than the older styles). >> >> I think it is incredibly unfair to a newcomer to make them suffer for thirty >> minutes rather than teach them how to swing. They can also cause a lot of >> suffering to whomever they are swinging with if they have lousy technique. >> >> I would not agree that it is advanced either. I strongly believe that a >> couple of minutes teaching the basics of a buzz step swing will give >> everyone a much more enjoyable evening. Some of them won't get it, but for >> those that do it can completely change their experience of the evening. >> >> Happy dancing, >> John >> >> John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 >> http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

9 years, 10 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Contra Callers