Contra Callers

contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net

24 participants
4363 discussions

by Martha Wild

Hi, John, This isn't quite the same thing, but I like ricochet heys, and I thought it would be nice to be doing the ricochet with your own partner. So I wrote a couple of dances where partners meet in the hey. I suppose they could be done without the ricochet and the partners could spin off each other. In the first one, the 2s are doing the hey while the 1s ricochet. In the second the 1s hey while the 2s ricochet. The first is a little more difficult, but both 1s and 2s get to swing, even though it is unequal. The second has the ones swing and a neighbor swing. I first danced these heys in a dance called Huntsville's Queen Bee Hey by Jane Ewing, where the women walk the hey pattern while the men ricochet. I figured that if the men were doing the hey it would be a King Bee Hey (so I wrote one like that) and so I named these Worker Bee Hey #1 and #2. Didn't know they were called ricochet heys until later. I'm just copying these from a little book I put together, sorry if there is duplication of any details. It is also possible that version 2, if you leave out the ricochet hey aspect, may have been devised by someone else, as it is fairly straightforward. Worker Bee Hey #1 Martha Wild Duple improper September 24, 2006 A1 Down the set four in line (1s inside) Turn as couples and return*, face in^ A2 “Worker bee” hey@, 2s start passing right shoulder B1 2s gypsy and swing, end swing facing up! B2 Handy-hand allemande ~1 ½ times (2s on the inside to start) 1s swing and face down * A little odd as the men are on the right of the women for the turn. ^ The line is not bent, all just turn to face center, 2s facing each other, 1s behind. @ I thought it would be nice to do the push off of a “queen bee” hey with one’s own partner. In this case, the #2 couple does a full hey, passing right shoulders to start, while the #1 couple meets at the center and pushes off backwards in little counterclockwise circles. It helps to instruct the 1s to stand a little above the 2s while they swing so they see them when they end and are ready for the handy-hand allemande. Worker Bee Hey #2 Martha Wild Duple Improper September 24, 2006 A1 Do-si-do neighbor Swing neighbor A2 Four in line down the set Turn as couples, come back up B1 Face in, “Worker Bee” hey, 1s start^ B2 1s gypsy and swing ^ Worker bee hey is as described above. I like version 1 because both 1s and 2s get a partner swing. This is an easier version, but unequal. Martha Wild On Aug 21, 2011, at 9:00 AM, callers-request(a)sharedweight.net wrote: > Send Callers mailing list submissions to > callers(a)sharedweight.net > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > callers-request(a)sharedweight.net > > You can reach the person managing the list at > callers-owner(a)sharedweight.net > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Heys Where Partners Meet (John Sweeney) > 2. Re: Callers Digest, Vol 84, Issue 15 (Tom Hinds) > 3. Re: Heys Where Partners Meet (Luke Donev) > 4. Re: 50% rule (Richard Hart) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 12:32:23 +0100 > From: "John Sweeney" <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk> > To: <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: [Callers] Heys Where Partners Meet > Message-ID: <21E3296A26AB4820B1BCF3FF5D672895@JohnT400> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > My wife and I like spinning off each other in Heys. But we very > rarely > meet in the middle of a Hey :-( > > Flirtation Reel is a great example of a dance where you meet your > Partner in the middle of the Hey, but I can't find any other dances > where that happens. > > Does anyone know of any other good dances where you meet your > Partner in > the middle of a Hey? > > Thanks. > > Happy dancing, > John > > John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & > 07802 940 574 > http://www.contrafusion.co.uk <http://www.contrafusion.co.uk/> for > Dancing in Kent > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:28:00 -0400 > From: Tom Hinds <twhinds(a)earthlink.net> > To: callers(a)sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 84, Issue 15 > Message-ID: <94D71EA1-0AA5-4F85-971A-35A3C71E6B7B(a)earthlink.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed > > Jim > > Although I can't answer your first question about keeping track of > all the dances, I can say something about what constitutes a new > dance. I remember Ted Sannella saying that a dance is new if it has > 50% new or unique choreography. By his definition if 50% or more of > the dance is different than any other dance then it's a new dance. > If a dance has less than 50% it's a variation. > > He didn't go into any more specifics and I wasn't wise enough to ask > any questions. But if you look at some of the old dances like > Petronella and Hull's victory, they have identical B parts and unique > A parts. The same applies to Chorus Jig and Rory O' More. > > Squares can also follow this 50% rule. For example there are a > number of squares like Queen's Quadrille that have unique A parts > while the B part is circle left half, swing corner, promenade. > > T > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:59:54 -0400 > From: Luke Donev <luke.donev(a)gmail.com> > To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] Heys Where Partners Meet > Message-ID: > <CAFrKOZY9sQXDyCnd5RPtG=4fJVYUFGr+WZrSW=8-Mpj1wEahPg(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > John Sweeney <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk> wrote: > >> Flirtation Reel is a great example of a dance where you meet your >> Partner >> in the middle of the Hey, but I can't find any other dances where >> that >> happens. >> > > Hi John, > > I think the structure of Flirtation Reel (*http://tinyurl.com/ > 3mlyrtm*) > highlights why it's uncommon. The down the hall of *A1* seems the > cleanest > way of setting up partners back to back at the start of a hey for > *A2*. The > *B1* neighbor swing flows well after the hey, which leaves you *B2* > to get a > partner swing and progression in. > > There are ways to gain the choreographic latitude you'd need. > If you're willing to spread a hey across phrases (I've met folks > who detest > that) you could shorted the neighbor swing and still end the swing > on phrase > (as opposed to interrupting a swing half phrase, which is > unpopular). For > example: > > *Restless Sunday Morning* > Improper > *A1* > 2s half figure eight and a little more to face their partner in the > middle > of a line of four > 2s start a hey for four passing partner by left > *A2* > finish hey for four, 2s have extra pass in middle > Neighbor swing on gent's home side* > B1* > Circle Left, > Partner swing * > B2* > Ladies chain across, > long lines forward and back > > The *B*'s have a lot more freedom for the partner swing and > progression, > those are just some of what you could do. > > If you're against splitting the hey, you could compress the > position results > of the line of four: > > *After the Honeymoon* > Improper > start with the 1s between the 2s, facing neighbor > *A1* > Pass Neighbor by Right to start a hey > *A2* > Neighbor balance and swing > *B1* > Give and (men) take > Partner swing (gent's home side) > *B2* > Circle Left 3/4 > Balance the ring > 2s make an arch, 1s duck through and move down to between new 2s, > facing > out. > > I think as a style point, I might teach the *B2*'s arch duck as the > 1s drop > partner's hand and are somewhat hand-casted through the arch by > their 2s. > Without a few folks to play with it in my living room, I'm not sure > yet. > > The *B1*'s give and take could be a Circle Left 3/4 for a simpler > dance, but > there's already a circle left in the dance, and I'm guessing this > wouldn't > be called in a situation where a give and take was problematic. > > I can't say that these are *good* dances where you pass your > partner mid-set > in a hey; but they're dances. Thanks for the question that got my > brain > choreographing. Hopefully others chip in (especially if I accidentally > re-wrote someone's dance). > > -- > Luke Donev > Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 10:50:04 -0400 > From: Richard Hart <rich(a)harts.mv.com> > To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> > Subject: Re: [Callers] 50% rule > Message-ID: <4E511B1C.4050800(a)harts.mv.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > There's one dance variation that I've recently noticed. > > Recently, I've noticed that callers and dancers have slightly > changed some existing dances. In both cases that I remember (Trip > to Lambertville & Tica Tica Timing) a R&L over has been changed to > a promenade across. Rights and lefts do seem to be more difficult, > especially at bigger dances, and with a larger proportion of > beginners. The promenade does appear to make the dance smoother in > these cases. > > Is it really true that right & lefts are becoming less popular in > large MUCDs? Are other dances being modified in this way now? > > Rich Hart. > > Tom Hinds remarked on 8/21/2011 9:28 AM: >> Jim >> >> Although I can't answer your first question about keeping track of >> all the dances, I can say something about what constitutes a new >> dance. I remember Ted Sannella saying that a dance is new if it >> has 50% new or unique choreography. By his definition if 50% or >> more of the dance is different than any other dance then it's a >> new dance. If a dance has less than 50% it's a variation. >> >> He didn't go into any more specifics and I wasn't wise enough to >> ask any questions. But if you look at some of the old dances >> like Petronella and Hull's victory, they have identical B parts >> and unique A parts. The same applies to Chorus Jig and Rory O' More. >> >> Squares can also follow this 50% rule. For example there are a >> number of squares like Queen's Quadrille that have unique A parts >> while the B part is circle left half, swing corner, promenade. >> >> T >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)sharedweight.net >> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >> >> > > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > End of Callers Digest, Vol 84, Issue 16 > ***************************************

13 years, 9 months

Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 84, Issue 15

by Tom Hinds

Jim Although I can't answer your first question about keeping track of all the dances, I can say something about what constitutes a new dance. I remember Ted Sannella saying that a dance is new if it has 50% new or unique choreography. By his definition if 50% or more of the dance is different than any other dance then it's a new dance. If a dance has less than 50% it's a variation. He didn't go into any more specifics and I wasn't wise enough to ask any questions. But if you look at some of the old dances like Petronella and Hull's victory, they have identical B parts and unique A parts. The same applies to Chorus Jig and Rory O' More. Squares can also follow this 50% rule. For example there are a number of squares like Queen's Quadrille that have unique A parts while the B part is circle left half, swing corner, promenade. T

13 years, 9 months

multitides of dances

by Jim Phillips

1 I've always wondered how one can know if choreographers are duplicating some dance that's already been done? Is it pretty much always callers comparing notes or is anyone out there making attempts to catalog dances move by move, maybe in a spreadsheet or something like that? 2 Comparing dances, how much variation between sequences qualifies a dance as an individual separate dance, or is custom that rigid? My question is prompted by: In another thread Linda Leslie wrote about "Rollin To The Grey Eagle" "I have this same dance in my collection with the name "32 Seconds" by Tom Calwell. I don't know who might have written it first." Thanks Jim, Not a caller just lurking.

13 years, 9 months

Contact information for Hank Morris

by Bob Green

Two questions: Does anyone have an email address or contact information for Hank Morris? (please send off-list, thanks) I have the name of his dance as *Rollin' to the Grey Eagle, *but I believe this might not be exactly right, does anyone know for certain? I have rendered a video of the dance for the dance archive that I would like to get his permission to use. thanks, Bob Green

13 years, 9 months

david giusti...

by Laur

David, I know you were on shared weight at one time. Is Contra House your dance and can you post it here for clarification? Thanks - Laur

13 years, 9 months

Non-Alternate Formats

by John Sweeney

In a recent post I defined a contra dance as: - longways for as many as will - first couples Improper, or Becket formation - flowing choreography - no-one stationary for more than 16 beats (e.g. First Couple Balance & Swing, finish facing down to make Lines of Four) - containing at least one swing - 95% of the moves to be from a set of well-know moves that they know already Is that what most Americans understand by a "contra dance"? I asked: Are you allowed to do Proper dances at a "contra dance"? Or a four-couple dance that has all the other characteristics listed above? Or a Sicilian Circle (space allowing)? But got no answer. Taking it a step further - this is a popular dance over here in the UK: Childgrove (Playford 1701) A1: Partner Siding; Partner Dosido A2: Neighbour Siding; Neighbour Dosido B1: Neighbour Two-Hand Turn 1 & 1/2 (skip step) Partner Two-Hand Turn B2: #1s Full Figure Eight up through the #2s (who can cast to turn it into a double-figure-eight if they like) (skip step) It has all the characteristics defined above apart from the swing being replaced by a skipped two-hand turn. And of course the moves may not be all familiar to contra dancers. If I called that at an American contra dance, to great music from a live band, what reaction would I get? Thanks. Just trying to understand. :-) Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

13 years, 9 months

Re: [Callers] Non-Alternate Formats

by John Sweeney

Thanks for the answers, Alan. Alan wrote "If you play it like a contra dance tune, you won't get an English dance out of it." Ah - but I don't want an "English dance" - I just want a dance that is fun :-) so I would ask the band to funk it up or play any tune they like. And I have no objection to adding twirls in "English" dosidos. I really don't believe that the 17th and 18th century dancers were as staid as some people would have us believe. I have studied the history of many dance forms and constantly see improvisation and innovation - these are all living traditions. I also don't believe that the dances were done only to specific tunes, except for the ones that have a really strong connection to the dance or are strange lengths. Too many elements get fossilized by people who think that it should only be done the way they learnt it 50 years ago. Your "Trash English" (or xEnglish - eXtreme English - as some people are trying to re-brand it) sounds great - some of us have been doing it for decades! Shame that we need to pigeon-hole dances - it is much more fun just to do everything :-) Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

13 years, 9 months

First Time Dancers

by John Sweeney

Hi Greg, Your definition: "open public dances, with live music and a caller, that are sponsored and hosted by a group of dance enthusiasts" is basically any dance community - specifically contra in your case since you added "primarily featuring duple contras". As to how many new dancers turn up at such contra dances in the UK? Well, there are less than 10 active contra dance clubs in the UK as far as I know - they are listed at http://www.contrafusion.co.uk/Links.html, and some are quite small. So it is difficult to provide any sensible statistics based on such a small sample. There are a few big successful ones like the monthly London Barndance Company dance in Cecil Sharp House (never billed as a contra, and not guaranteed to be, but generally at least 90% contra dancing to great contra dance bands and with great contra dance callers). Usually around 80 to 150 dancers I believe, peaking to 300 for special events. Most attendees are regulars; I suspect the number of new dancers is well under 10%, but sometimes boosted by a party (literally - someone brings their birthday party guests along for a dance) - however the party members very rarely ever come back for another dance. There are of course countless community dances (One Night Stands - weddings, birthdays, fund-raisers, etc.) but in my experience it is very rare to get one of those attendees to come to a dance community event. There is a Modern Western Square Dance community with around 150 clubs - see http://www.uksquaredancing.com/page5.htm. I don't know how they do, but in the southeast (where I live) it has virtually died out. There is a Ceilidh community, who dance relatively simple dances with lots of energy and stepping (hornpipe step-hops, rants, skip steps, skip-change/polka steps, etc.) to great bands who are experimenting with lots of musical influences (a similar evolution to the contra dance music one, but exploring different musical genres) - lots of information at http://www.cix.co.uk/~net-services/ec/ and http://www.webfeet.org/ - there are usually around 10 big ceilidhs around the country each weekend. Sadly none in my area, so I have no idea how they are doing at getting new dancers. There are also lots of ceilidhs at all the big folk festivals with lots of attendees. This is the dance community that attracts the most younger people in the UK. There are no ECD clubs in the UK (well there might be one that calls itself that) - but lots of Folk Dance Clubs and other groups which have a lot of similarity, but who are normally prepared to try any dance. Sadly the average age is quite high at many of these clubs and so the dances chosen, and the style in which they are danced, reflect the physical ability of the dancers. They will happily dance contra dances, but generally without the twirls and spins that Americans add. Many of the clubs are quite small, but as you can see at http://www.setandturnsingle.org.uk/ there are hundreds of them, and lots of open dances at the weekends and at festivals. Sadly, the percentage of new dancers is, I believe, very small. Again, the word "club" above is not intended to imply a closed group - just a regular event open to anyone, but attended primarily by regulars. So, sorry, no specific answers, but I hope that helps a little. Note: this is my personal perception of what is happening in the UK - if anyone can add to it please do. Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

13 years, 9 months

Re Alternate Formations

by John Sweeney

Hi Greg, Sorry, I used the word "club" in a very generic way - I meant any form of regular gathering, series, dance or session where contra dances are danced. My note was a response to your words: "The term "contra dance" as an event name seems pretty clear." Your response seems to agree with my understanding, i.e. that the term is not well defined and is used by anyone running a dance to mean what they want it to mean, just like the terms "barn dance", "ceilidh" and even "square dance" are used over here. We often get people asking us to run a square dance when they want simple dances in any formation, and never notice if I don't call a square all night! And, strangely, they often dress up as cowboys and cowgirls even though we are doing English dances to English tunes. Ah, the power of the media! Happy dancing, John John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802 940 574 http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent

13 years, 9 months

Re: [Callers] Firedancing/ Hooping while calling and other possible future Burning Man innovations

by John W Gintell

> > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 11:05:16 PDT > From: "Brian Hamshar" <bhamshar(a)yahoo.com> > To: callers(a)sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] Firedancing/ Hooping while calling and other > possible future Burning Man innovations > Message-ID: <761638.47077.qm(a)smtp105-mob.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I was just thinking the same thing...we could integrate lighting signals into "techno" contras to help reinforce the dance phrasing as an alternative or adjunct to the extensive vocal cueing that is often called for with this music. I'm looking forward to exploring this idea. > > Brian Hamshar Note this discussion about calling with lights started by Jeff Kaufman on Google+ http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/users/08/cbr/news/2011-08-07.html

13 years, 9 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