Afternoon all,
So, whilst on a half term break from working in a school, I set myself a challenge to write my first dance… and I’ve done it. I have tried it with a small group of confident dancers to check that it works! But I am yet to try it on a big group, hoping to try it out in the next few weeks. I have copied it below so if you would like to give it a go, please do, and let me know what you think! The name (Never Forgotten) as you can probably guess, is a personal one, I don’t know what people think about giving dances names which have some personal meaning behind them, but for me, with a certain event coming up (I won’t divulge on here) it just seemed right.
I have got a suggested track to use for it, but would rather people asked me directly about that, to be honest it would fit with most 32 bar reels.. I just have a preference.
Anyway, let me know what you think,
Many Thanks,
Liam Binley.
liam.binley(a)me.com
Hi Allison,
I would echo Alan and Rich... especially if the folks LIKED those dances. I
have run many beginner dancers events over the last ten years and folks
want to do the dances they enjoyed from last time (sometimes you have to
remind them that you have other new fun dances to teach too). :-)
The one complaint I have heard from long time dancers are that some of the
dance groups don't repeat favorite dances often enough in a goal to do as
many different dances over the course of a year as possible so keep that
“fun” factor in mind when selecting them.
You have a nice list of dances! Don't forget about the classic Sicillian
Circle dance where there's clapping and hooting when the gents go in then
the ladies go in. Folks love to clap and hoot and it brings up the energy!
Let us know how it went!
Darlene
Historical Tea & Dance Society
Pasadena, CA
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:44 PM <callers-request(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
wrote:
> Send Callers mailing list submissions to
> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> callers-request(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> callers-owner(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. "Second" ONS (Allison Jonjak)
> 2. Re: "Second" ONS (Winston, Alan P.)
> 3. Re: "Second" ONS (Rich Sbardella)
> 4. Re: "Second" ONS (jim saxe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 12:25:51 -0500
> From: Allison Jonjak <allisonjonjak(a)gmail.com>
> To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
> Subject: [Callers] "Second" ONS
> Message-ID:
> <
> CAK2+5bksFF_tEGH_YZcFuYn8qHJFw1BfdGagg2D5NSQJevL1Qg(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi all,
>
> I hail from a rural area with no nearby dance communities. This June I held
> a free community barn dance, featuring lots of Linda Leslie's "very easy
> dances". Through the magic of newspapers I was able to connect with a
> string band, and we had about 25 dancers, lots of whom left their email
> addresses 'so you can invite us again next time.'
>
> I'll head home for the holidays, the band is willing and the hall is
> willing, so I'm planning to host another dance. The question is: should I
> prepare
> -the same dances
> -the same easiness-level of dances, but different actual dances
> -a dance or two that uses progressions?
>
> The dancers in June learned very quickly, and aced the proto-progressions
> in both Jefferson & Liberty, and Peak Bagger.
>
> How much of that practice in June do I expect to carry forward to
> November? Here was the program I wound up calling,
> https://contradb.com/programs/76 , pardon that the calling notes are mixed
> in with my followup notes. Here were the dances I had prepared:
> https://contradb.com/programs/71
>
> Thanks all in advance for your help!
>
> --
> Allison Jonjak, M.S., E.I.T.
> allisonjonjak(a)gmail.com
> allisonjonjak.com
>
Thanks Alan, Rich, Mac, and Jim!
>> and have a couple slightly more challenging ones - with progression, etc
- up your sleeve but without any emotional investment in actually using
them.
"without emotional investment in using them" is very well-put, and I think
it describes my philosophy overall for this dance "series"
>Definitely agree on the "without any emotional investment" part.
Long-term, do you have an ambition for these events to evolve into "contra"
dances, or would you be happy as a clam to keep having events where
facility at ending a swing side-by-side with the _____ on the left and the
_____ on the right is not an important skill, so long as you have a room
full of smiling dancers?
I haven't emotionally invested in an outcome :) I don't live there, so I
can realistically only hold dances when I visit my parents. I think I'd *feel
glad *if I was able to help sow seeds of an eventual dance community. But
since I'm not present to spearhead growth, it seems like the best seed I
can sow is "have a room full of smiling dancers every once in a while."
Give people good memories of connecting with family and friends through
music and dance.
> I have a few comments and questions about your notes:
> The notes say "beginner's lesson (circle, Lark Raven, ...)" but the dance
descriptions use "ladles" and "gentlespoons". What terms did you actually
use? If you used "Larks" and "Ravens", did you say anything at all about
their relation to traditional gender roles? In practice how much
correlation was there between what people looked like and which role they
danced in?
That's a website feature---if you're logged in, you can choose a dialect to
print your program. So you (not logged in) saw gentlespoons, while I logged
in to print that program saw Larks & Ravens. When I print a program for
Childgrove open calling I print the roles as ladies & gents.
https://contradb.com/dialect
I picked Larks and Ravens for this dance, and introduced them like this:
"ask someone to dance, take their hand, and line up facing the band.
Somebody's on the left, lefts are Larks, raise your left hand. The other
person's on the right, rights are Ravens, raise your right hand. You can be
a lark one dance and a raven the next dance, the roles only matter so you
know when I'm talking to you."
As you notice only 2 dances really "had" roles, but this worked fine,
nobody seemed confused, and everybody danced with each other. The 'I can
dance with anyone" persisted from the beginners' lesson through the rest of
the dance too (you don't name them lark & raven or lady & gent to do
Virginia Reel, but you still find a partner. Men and women partnered, women
and women partnered, men and men partnered---which seems like the ideal
outcome for a twice-a-year dance? Who knows what ratio of people will come
in the door---my hope is to have people only have to sit out when they
choose to sit out.)
>Leaving aside the waltz and the polka, it looks like the only two dances
where the roles of Lark/Gentlespoon vs. Raven/Ladle were significant were
the roll away dance and Mad Scatter.
I didn't say anything but 'find a partner for a waltz / polka' for the
couples dances. People did pair off more-or-less by gender for those; a
fair number of attendees were married couples.
>Notes on the roll away dance say "succeeded at walkthrough, weren't going
to make it through the dance." If you could tell, did the confusion seem
to have to do with figuring out who was in what role, or was it mostly
about something else, such as getting from the star to the lines of four?
I think that the difficulty was that there were TWO roles to remember: a
person was a head OR a side, AND a raven OR a lark. That was too much
intricacy for people who don't know at least one of the roles on autopilot.
Lesson learned.
>[Two side comments on that dance: (1) Notes say "This variation is Wade
Pearson's, removing the right-left-through. ...", but the "original"
version you link to doesn't have a right and left through. It has a cross
trail. (2) Personally, I don't think it would be a great loss to drop this
dance from the repertoire, regardless of the role terminology or the manner
of setting up the lines of four. I could say more on both points but don't
want to go even further off topic.]
Agreed, I really wanted something with a rollaway since it's my favorite
move for "teaching giving weight," but it seems to require intricate
choreography to get people back to place. I hoped the square would do it,
but I overshot the audience. They were gracious when I had us switch, at
least :)
>The other dance description that mentions the roles is Mad Scatter. How
did that work out in practice? I note that it doesn't really matter which
member of each pair goes into the center for an allemande or star and which
one orbits, provided nobody minds who they get for new partner. But I'm
curious about what actually happened.
>Notes on Mad Scatter say "Avoid a mixer last even though they voted for
it." Do you have reason to believe that people were disappointed about
that? I certainly know of many dance series where people would bristle at
having a mixer as the "last" dance of the evening (even if followed by a
waltz as the really last dance), but I'm wondering whether you actually
sensed such bristling at your event. Note also Rich's comment on ending a
barn dance with a circle mixer.
This dance itself went smoothly, people retained their roles and knew what
to do. People sort of made larger and larger 'blobs' by the end of the
tune. I thought I sensed something like stress, though---in a scatter
mixer, it seemed like there were moments of "oh we're left out, there's no
new partner for us" and so sometimes people would have a
disappointed/stressed look on their face while looking for the 'lost and
found'. I had a broad age range, and it seemed like people who had lower
mobility were more-often the left-out, stressed ones.
Since those were the first non-smiles I saw all evening, I'd rather avoid
it next time, especially as the closing dance. I think a circle mixer would
be a great closer for this type of dance though, since you will meet
everyone to bid farewell, while always having a 'next partner'
close-at-hand.
Thanks for asking! I hope I've answered the spirit of all your
questions---if I've missed anything let me know,
Allison
--
Allison Jonjak, M.S., E.I.T.
allisonjonjak(a)gmail.com
allisonjonjak.com
Hi all,
I hail from a rural area with no nearby dance communities. This June I held
a free community barn dance, featuring lots of Linda Leslie's "very easy
dances". Through the magic of newspapers I was able to connect with a
string band, and we had about 25 dancers, lots of whom left their email
addresses 'so you can invite us again next time.'
I'll head home for the holidays, the band is willing and the hall is
willing, so I'm planning to host another dance. The question is: should I
prepare
-the same dances
-the same easiness-level of dances, but different actual dances
-a dance or two that uses progressions?
The dancers in June learned very quickly, and aced the proto-progressions
in both Jefferson & Liberty, and Peak Bagger.
How much of that practice in June do I expect to carry forward to
November? Here was the program I wound up calling,
https://contradb.com/programs/76 , pardon that the calling notes are mixed
in with my followup notes. Here were the dances I had prepared:
https://contradb.com/programs/71
Thanks all in advance for your help!
--
Allison Jonjak, M.S., E.I.T.
allisonjonjak(a)gmail.com
allisonjonjak.com
Hi John and Austin,
Thanks for your feedback and references.
I tried the SP version last Thursday with 12 dancers at our house.
It went over well and Line balance R/L worked fine. If I had an odd
number of couples I would have done the DP version which I like
better.
Cheers, Bill
Regarding the Oval Petronella figure:
Admittedly, I haven't tried dancing it, but it doesn't seem that appealing.
Most of the satisfaction I get from a balance comes when two dancers are
both moving towards or away from a shared handhold and can share weight
accordingly.
Think of your ideal balance in ocean waves of 4: step right, step left. Now
contrast that with a wave balance where your neighbor steps the wrong way
first, meaning the two of you move in the same direction: that shared
handhold loses all its energy. It's very underwhelming.
If the balance is done in long lines with everyone moving the same way,
then the hand hold lacks energy. (As an aside: LLFB doesn't even tend to
get the good handhold energy it deserves). I did notice John Sweeney called
it "Long Lines Set Right & Left" on his website, and not in fact a Balance,
which seems much more accurate. Not wanting to get into the issue(s) of
wanting contra dancers to appreciate "setting" and other figures from ECD,
I see it devolving into a hokey 4-beat 'shuffle' on the floor.
Granted, that's one opinion. I'm sure others disagree.
Best,
Austin
Hi All,
Two Petronella balance and spins can be done around the whole set and are
equivalent
to a double slice right (but different timing).
Anyone know if this has been used before in contra dance?
Here are two simple dances I wrote with this. I've not tried them out yet,
but the oval petronella that was in the grid dance I did at our last dance went
over well.
What do you think? I'd appreciate your thoughts.
Oval Petronella DP Becket CCW DP
best with odd number of couples
A1: Oval Balance & Petronella 2x
A2: G AL 1 1/2; N SW
B1: CL 3/4, P SW
B2: Prom Across; LLFB
Oval Petronella SP Becket CCW SP
A1: Oval Balance & Petronella 1x; G AL 1 1/2
A2: N Bal & SW
B1: CL 3/4, P SW
B2: Prom Across; LLFB
I searched the callers box database for dances with double slice (always left)
and with a bit a adjustment most can be tweaked to use oval petronella.
Oval Petronella at Pinewoods Becket CW
derived from A Slice of Pinewoods by Bob Isaacs, Ann Cowan, Tina Fields,
Jillian Hovey, Mark Lattanzi, and Chris Weiler
A1: Oval Balance & Pet 2x
A2: N2 CL 3/4, Pass R along set to; N1 SW
B1: LC; 1/2 Hey
B2: Pass R across set, P SW
Another Oval Petronella at Pinewoods Becket CW
derived from Another Slice of Pinewoods by Bob Isaacs and Chris Weiler
A1: N Bal & SW
A2: Oval Balance & pet x2
B1: (w/2nd Shadow) LH* 3/4, Pass 1st Shadow R to; P SW
B2: CL 3/4; Bal ring, California Twirl
Thanks
Cheers, Bill
PS Don't confuse this with Oval Petronella by Rembrant :-)
Hi, folks.
I threw the following dance in a medley on Saturday night, and I have no
idea who wrote it or what the name of the dance is. Anybody recognize it?
Thanks, Grant.
?? (learned from Lisa Greenleaf)
Improper
A1. ( 8) Cir lf
( 8) 1s sw, end facing dn
A2. (16) Down hall 4-in-line, turn alone, ret, face N
B1. (16) N bal & sw
B2. ( 8) Long lines fwd & bk
( 8) 2s sw, end facing up
--
Grant Goodyear
web: http://www.grantgoodyear.org
e-mail: grant(a)grantgoodyear.org
Hi Seth and Luke,
This discussion has inspired me to revisit grid contras.
We danced a grid contra yesterday at our monthly dance in Christchurch.
The majority of the dancers (24) were experienced but 8 were less so.
Even so it went well and all found it fun.
Here is a video of the setting up, teaching, walk throughs and the dance.
With a bit of computer animation thrown in.
https://youtu.be/gLKBm4j7gbQ
There were a few hiccups with the filming as my camera suffered tripod
droop! I had a great birds eye view from the stage, but the
camera less so :-(
I called a variation of Petronella Fancy which I wrote in 2012.
It was inspired by Kim's Game by Colin Hume. Petronella Fancy
was originally a type of 4 face 4, but easily extended to
an arbitrary regular grid.
The variation I used last night changed the order (to suit the
music better) and used both a double progression and
double transgression.
We danced on a grid of 4 adjacent contra lines of length 4 couples.
Total of 32 dancers. The dance has a period of 10 during which
each dancer will swing 5 different neighbors (each twice).
The 2s in the left line, 1s in the right line, 2s in front hands-four
and 1s in back hands-four all travel around the perimeter of the grid.
The 6 remaining couples form 3 pairs that vibrate back and forth.
This is the version we danced.
Petronella Fancy DP
A1 (4) [Entire oval along the set] Balance ring (4) Petronella turn
(4) [Entire oval along the set] Balance ring (4) Petronella turn
A2 (4) Pass through along (NR)
(4) Pass through along (N2R)
(8) N2 neighbor swing; face partner
B1 (8) Men allemande left 1 & 1/2
(8) Partner swing
B2 (8) [Groups of four] Circle left 3/4 [with N2]; face along
(8) Lines across the set forward and back
In general this dance is interesting if the grid does not have many
interior hands-four rings, as those couples vibrate and see very
few neighbors.
Here is the original
http://www.ibiblio.org/contradance/thecallersbox/dance.php?id=12042
It had a single progression and this means that couples traveling around the
perimeter are out very frequently which is not much fun.
I can easily generate animations for other size grids if anyone is interested.
Cheers, Bill
On 10/10/2018 9:05 a.m., Tepfer, Seth via Callers wrote:
> When a couple moves up and down the lines, we call that 'progression'.
> When a couple moves ACROSS the lines, I call that 'transgression'. Not
> counting four face fours (aka mescolanzas, double countras) I know of three
> dances that 'transgress' in some form or another:
