I had a request from Karin Neils to post my dance Mad, Mad World on Shared Weight as she had seen it mentioned here recently (I missed that) but not the details. So here are the details:
Mad, Mad World
Martha Wild, August 8, 2008
Duple Improper
A1 Long lines forward and back
Mad robin (women to the right in front of men)
A2 Women pass by the left shoulder and
Gypsy and swing partner
B1 Pass through across the set and California twirl
Mad robin (men pass to the right in front of women)
B2 Men pass by the left shoulder and
Gypsy and swing neighbor
The women can give a gentle tug to the men after the Cal twirl to ease them into their mad robin.
Note: This dance can be done without the gypsies to a slow slip jig.
The dance can be seen on youtube here www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHscaBxLW5c with Firecloud and Lynn Ackerson, and here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrQcayS9CrM with Perpetual Emotion and Susan Petrick.
I'm glad people are having fun with it.
Martha
Linda Leslie pointed out three errors/clarifications in the list of easily dances I previously posted at http://aptsg.org/Dance/easy_dances.rtf
The file has been updated to reflect these.
1. To Turn a Phrase is missing the last Neighbor swing
2. Lanny's Back starts with a Neighbor gypsy and swing
3. InCows are Watching: after the zig right, couples do not face; the
men should have left sides close by each other, and can go into the
allemande in beautiful flow.
Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217-239-5844
Links to photos of many of my drawings and paintings are at www.ArtComesFuerst.com
I see that Tom published his dance in 1991 in his book "Dance All Night
2". I can't say when I wrote the dance down that I have, but it could
very well have been before that date since I've been calling since
1981. However, I have no problem with two different types of dances
with the same name!
Suzanne
-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill Olson
>Sent: Oct 9, 2013 2:26 PM
>To: Caller's discussion list
>Subject: Re: [Callers] A Walk In The Park
>
>Of course, (the) Carousel is also a duple inproper contra by Tom
Hinds..
>
>hmm,... so, that's sort of *the point* here, right??
>
>bill
>
>
>
>
>> Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 14:23:47 -0700
>> From: suzanneg(a)wolfenet.com
>> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
>> Subject: Re: [Callers] A Walk In The Park
>>
>> Michael, that is indeed the dance I have on my card "Carousel" as a
>> Sicilian circle. It looks like a dance I got a long time ago, and
the
>> callers that were travelling at that time were very different from
>> these days. And, I didn't write down who I got it from,
unfortunately.
>> It could have been Fred Park, or Frank Hall, or John Krumm, or
soemone
>> else. Sorry I can't be more help on the provenance.
>>
>>
>> However, it is a fun, very accessible dance, and goes really well
with
>> bouncy rags.
>>
>>
>> Suzanne
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: Michael Dyck
>> >Sent: Oct 8, 2013 10:34 PM
>> >To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
>> >Subject: Re: [Callers] A Walk In The Park
>> >
>> >On 13-10-08 06:05 PM, Ron T Blechner wrote:
>> >> Has the dance name "A Walk In The Park" been taken? If not, dibs.
>> >
>> >In my personal collection, I have the following dance:
>> >
>> > "A Walk in the Park"
>> > author unknown
>> > Sicilian circle
>> >
>> > A1 neighbor dosido
>> > partner dosido
>> >
>> > A2 ring balance x 2
>> > circle left
>> >
>> > B1 ring balance x 2
>> > circle right
>> >
>> > B2 men link left arms,
>> > partner star promenade 1.5
>> > (and whirl to face new neighbors, presumably)
>> >
>> >I collected it in 1990 from Marian Rose. (Are you on this list,
>> Marian?)
>> >
>> >Given that the author is unknown, it's possible that the true title
is
>> >also unknown (i.e., that "A Walk in the Park" was simply a name
that
>> >Marian attached to the sequence). My notes indicate that Suzanne
>> >Girardot also called it, but under the name "Carousel". (But it's
>> >certainly not the dance of that name by Tom Hinds, nor the one by
Don
>> >Flaherty.)
>> >
>> >(It's 3/4 the same as another dance I have, "Wobbler's Jig" by Tim
>> >Gerard, collected in 1994 from Marian again.)
>> >
>> >Does anyone have better information on this sequence? Note that it
>> might
>> >originally have been longways rather than Sicilian.
>> >
>> >-Michael
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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
>
>_______________________________________________
>Callers mailing list
>Callers(a)sharedweight.net
>http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Michael, that is indeed the dance I have on my card "Carousel" as a
Sicilian circle. It looks like a dance I got a long time ago, and the
callers that were travelling at that time were very different from
these days. And, I didn't write down who I got it from, unfortunately.
It could have been Fred Park, or Frank Hall, or John Krumm, or soemone
else. Sorry I can't be more help on the provenance.
However, it is a fun, very accessible dance, and goes really well with
bouncy rags.
Suzanne
-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Dyck
>Sent: Oct 8, 2013 10:34 PM
>To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
>Subject: Re: [Callers] A Walk In The Park
>
>On 13-10-08 06:05 PM, Ron T Blechner wrote:
>> Has the dance name "A Walk In The Park" been taken? If not, dibs.
>
>In my personal collection, I have the following dance:
>
> "A Walk in the Park"
> author unknown
> Sicilian circle
>
> A1 neighbor dosido
> partner dosido
>
> A2 ring balance x 2
> circle left
>
> B1 ring balance x 2
> circle right
>
> B2 men link left arms,
> partner star promenade 1.5
> (and whirl to face new neighbors, presumably)
>
>I collected it in 1990 from Marian Rose. (Are you on this list,
Marian?)
>
>Given that the author is unknown, it's possible that the true title is
>also unknown (i.e., that "A Walk in the Park" was simply a name that
>Marian attached to the sequence). My notes indicate that Suzanne
>Girardot also called it, but under the name "Carousel". (But it's
>certainly not the dance of that name by Tom Hinds, nor the one by Don
>Flaherty.)
>
>(It's 3/4 the same as another dance I have, "Wobbler's Jig" by Tim
>Gerard, collected in 1994 from Marian again.)
>
>Does anyone have better information on this sequence? Note that it
might
>originally have been longways rather than Sicilian.
>
>-Michael
>_______________________________________________
>Callers mailing list
>Callers(a)sharedweight.net
>http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Those of you using a tablet for calling, what size do you have? Do you
wish you had a larger/smaller tablet? (I'm currently leaning toward 7-8"
but am happy to get swayed by majority opinion -- particularly with
reasons. ;-)
--
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
<*> <*> <*>
Chekov's Rule for musicals: if there's a barrel, it must be danced on.
When I first started calling, I despaired when I heard experienced callers
say I must memorize my dances! I couldn't imagine keeping the order of
each dance straight in my mind! But now that I've been calling a couple of
years, I find that there are a few dances I know by heart and that there
are other dances I recognize when someone else calls them. The longer I
call, the larger my group of dances with which I am very familiar without
my notes.
I keep my dances in a google docs spreadsheet which I can access from my
Nexus 7 tablet with or without internet. But I print up the dances I am
calling and a few backups in a binder on a music stand on the stage with
me. The notes are not in my hands so I find it easier to pay attention to
the dancers instead of being glued to my notes. While the dances are not
"memorized" in the sense that I couldn't call it again next week without
reviewing the notes, for that evening, I am familiar enough with the dance
that I only need to glance at the notes before I start the walk-through.
This gets easier as time goes by.
So if you're a newbie caller, don't despair! It could be that the dances
will start sticking with you for longer and longer periods of time.
--
JoLaine Jones-Pokorney
"We are as gods and might as well get good at it!"
- Stewart Brand
Great dance! The back to back roll aways really build energy. John
Coffman mentions the potential timing problem and suggests a solution in
his teaching notes:
"Notes: A2: For ladies that like to twirl (ladies choice), a twirl works
nicely with the Right and Left Through. [Without the twirl, some men may
roll the ladies away prematurely, mildly disrupting the flow of the
dance.] So, when teaching, I like to suggest a twirl for the ladies that
like to twirl.
We have noticed that without careful teaching, many dancers will attempt
the first (ladies roll) prematurely, because lots of dances have the right
and left through and courtesy turn and roll away compressed into 8 counts
of music. For this dance to flow properly, dancers need to take the full 8
counts to do the right and left through (including the courtesy turn).
Then the first (ladies) roll away takes place during the first 4 counts of
the following (8 count) phrase."
Jim Hemphill
Hi all,
I need help with 2 dances:
(1) Where is the progression in Steve Zakon-Anderson's 3-33-33
(2) Alternating Current is a great dance by John Coffman. The A2 has a
Right and left Through into a men roll his neighbor lady away along the line
and then she rolls him into (B2) Ladies Allemande Right (once and a half). A
great sereis of moves that zip. But dancers are consistently getting
through the 2 roll aways early. I thought of putting a 'power turn' in at
the end of the Right and Left Through (i.e. an extra turn as a couple coming
out of the Right and left Through), but have not tried that yet. Anyone
else have experience with this dance or have other suggestions?
Rickey Holt,
Fremont, NH
Of course, the ultimate question with regarding to calling a CC BY-NC dance
at a paid event: is it in fact noncommercial use? What would describe
'commercial use' of a contra sequence, other than republishing it? (It is
my understanding the rich tradition of collecting dances from performers
and caller friends would fall under SA, but i'd require legal verification
of that before i chose to advocate adding specific protections to
choreography.) (p.s. while copyright/left exists to provide an incentive
for creatives to create, i highly doubt that the people who write
contradances require that incentivization for dance composition, or that
there is significant economic gain to be had in the publication of contra
dances...)
also REALLY sorry i couldn't delete the quoted text, trackpad button isn't
working to cut & paste atm
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:00 PM, <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. Orange You Glad We Met? (Aahz Maruch)
> 2. Re: Orange You Glad We Met? (Aahz Maruch)
> 3. Re: Orange You Glad We Met? (Bill Olson)
> 4. Re: Scheduling/programmer Question (Aahz Maruch)
> 5. Re: See Saw (was Re: Code's Compiling) (Aahz Maruch)
> 6. Re: Norms/Ethics of Dance Choreography Sharing (Aahz Maruch)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 13:57:47 -0700
> From: Aahz Maruch <aahz(a)pobox.com>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Subject: [Callers] Orange You Glad We Met?
> Message-ID: <20130925205747.GA28591(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> In light of the earlier discussion about both double-progression and
> dances with neighbor swing that don't have circle left 3/4, I wrote the
> following. I'd first like to double-check that this doesn't already
> exist under some other name, nor does the name exist for some other
> dance; I'd also like feedback on the choreography.
>
> Orange You Glad We Met?
>
> Becket
>
> A1
> Men L allemande 1/2 (4)
> Neighbor B&S (12)
>
> A2
> L star 1/2 to prev neighbor (6)
> R star full to current neighbor (10)
>
> B1
> Pass thru current neighbor to new neighbor (4)
> PROGRESSION
> End in wave
> Balance wave (4)
> Square thru 3.5 (8)
>
> B2
> Partner B&S (16)
> --
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> <*> <*> <*>
> "It's 106 miles to Chicago. We have a full tank of gas, a half-pack of
> cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "Hit it."
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:09:02 -0700
> From: Aahz Maruch <aahz(a)pobox.com>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Orange You Glad We Met?
> Message-ID: <20130925210902.GA21016(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Ignore this, I hate when I hit "send" and immediately realize there's a
> major choreography boo-boo...
>
> (The square thru doesn't work.)
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013, Aahz wrote:
> >
> > In light of the earlier discussion about both double-progression and
> > dances with neighbor swing that don't have circle left 3/4, I wrote the
> > following. I'd first like to double-check that this doesn't already
> > exist under some other name, nor does the name exist for some other
> > dance; I'd also like feedback on the choreography.
> >
> > Orange You Glad We Met?
> >
> > Becket
> >
> > A1
> > Men L allemande 1/2 (4)
> > Neighbor B&S (12)
> >
> > A2
> > L star 1/2 to prev neighbor (6)
> > R star full to current neighbor (10)
> >
> > B1
> > Pass thru current neighbor to new neighbor (4)
> > PROGRESSION
> > End in wave
> > Balance wave (4)
> > Square thru 3.5 (8)
> >
> > B2
> > Partner B&S (16)
> > --
> > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> > <*> <*> <*>
> > "It's 106 miles to Chicago. We have a full tank of gas, a half-pack of
> > cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "Hit it."
> > _______________________________________________
> > Callers mailing list
> > Callers(a)sharedweight.net
> > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
> --
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> <*> <*> <*>
> "It's 106 miles to Chicago. We have a full tank of gas, a half-pack of
> cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "Hit it."
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:10:15 +0000
> From: Bill Olson <callbill(a)hotmail.com>
> To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Orange You Glad We Met?
> Message-ID: <BAY177-W3731E9DF4F06A5F1A4CE35C62F0(a)phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> well, better here than on the dance floor.. *been there*.. hee hee..
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2013 14:09:02 -0700
> > From: aahz(a)pobox.com
> > To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> > Subject: Re: [Callers] Orange You Glad We Met?
> >
> > Ignore this, I hate when I hit "send" and immediately realize there's a
> > major choreography boo-boo...
> >
> > (The square thru doesn't work.)
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 25, 2013, Aahz wrote:
> > >
> > > In light of the earlier discussion about both double-progression and
> > > dances with neighbor swing that don't have circle left 3/4, I wrote the
> > > following. I'd first like to double-check that this doesn't already
> > > exist under some other name, nor does the name exist for some other
> > > dance; I'd also like feedback on the choreography.
> > >
> > > Orange You Glad We Met?
> > >
> > > Becket
> > >
> > > A1
> > > Men L allemande 1/2 (4)
> > > Neighbor B&S (12)
> > >
> > > A2
> > > L star 1/2 to prev neighbor (6)
> > > R star full to current neighbor (10)
> > >
> > > B1
> > > Pass thru current neighbor to new neighbor (4)
> > > PROGRESSION
> > > End in wave
> > > Balance wave (4)
> > > Square thru 3.5 (8)
> > >
> > > B2
> > > Partner B&S (16)
> > > --
> > > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> > > <*> <*> <*>
> > > "It's 106 miles to Chicago. We have a full tank of gas, a half-pack of
> > > cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "Hit it."
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Callers mailing list
> > > Callers(a)sharedweight.net
> > > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
> >
> > --
> > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> > <*> <*> <*>
> > "It's 106 miles to Chicago. We have a full tank of gas, a half-pack of
> > cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses." "Hit it."
> > _______________________________________________
> > Callers mailing list
> > Callers(a)sharedweight.net
> > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 07:39:24 -0700
> From: Aahz Maruch <aahz(a)pobox.com>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Scheduling/programmer Question
> Message-ID: <20130926143923.GA6566(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013, Colin Hume wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:57:04 -0400, Linda Leslie wrote:
> >>
> >> A few dances, such as the Concord MA Scout House, follow the
> >> quarterly rule (with exceptions for traveling callers/bands from
> >> far away). But others seem to schedule up to a year (or more!) in
> >> advance.
> >
> > Groups in England book bands and callers much further ahead. I have
> > 12 bookings for 2014 (it would often be more by this time of the year)
> > and 3 for 2015.
>
> How do y'all bring in new talent?
> --
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> <*> <*> <*>
> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:06:35 -0700
> From: Aahz Maruch <aahz(a)pobox.com>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] See Saw (was Re: Code's Compiling)
> Message-ID: <20130926150635.GA17999(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013, James Saxe wrote:
> >
> > So it appears from the above that CALLERLAB has officially deprecated
> > use of "See Saw" to mean a left shoulder Dosado for ten years (as of
> > tomorrow). I don't have a copy of the CALLERLAB Basic/Mainstream
> > definitions from just before that time, but it seems clear that the
> > prescribed for "See Saw" would have been (left) gypsy-like in some
> > cases and (left) dosado-like in others.
> >
> > Ten years may seem like a long time to younger members of this list,
> > and to people who first took MWSD lessons within the last ten years,
> > it may seem like the definitions they learned describe the way things
> > were from time immemorial. But by 2003 MWSD had already substantially
> > diverged from "traditional" SD for forty years or so.
>
> Well, I certainly appreciate the history lesson. Memory is unreliable,
> of course, but I don't remember ever doing See Saw in MWSD as a left
> dosado, starting in 1986 at UCDavis nor the Stanford Quads a year later
> (just to nail down the timing and locations more precisely). From what
> I can tell, Callerlab seems to be more in the descriptivist camp than
> prescriptivist, so almost certainly the definitional changes you describe
> followed majority practice that started earlier.
>
> If anyone's curious, I can do more digging into people's memories on the
> MWSD side.
> --
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> <*> <*> <*>
> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:31:49 -0700
> From: Aahz Maruch <aahz(a)pobox.com>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Norms/Ethics of Dance Choreography Sharing
> Message-ID: <20130926153149.GA12176(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> [late again]
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013, Don Veino wrote:
> >
> > I freely offer that some of the distinctions may or may not make sense to
> > others, but feels right to me in this environment. The grey area one
> above
> > would probably be stifling to several of the choreography review and
> > criticism threads which are otherwise very helpful were it made "not OK."
> >
> > I'd love to hear what others think!
>
> Not sure what I think yet, but because of this and Sam's thread, I've
> stuck "CC BY-NC-SA" on the dances I'm writing -- can't hurt.
>
> I prefer that over Sam's CC BY-NC because the SA requires a pass-along
> license: if there's ever a situation where copyright is relevant, I want
> to force the copyleft.
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/
> --
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> http://rule6.info/
> <*> <*> <*>
> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)sharedweight.net
> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
>
> End of Callers Digest, Vol 109, Issue 47
> ****************************************
>
