Re: [Callers] Tripled Chestnuts?

Hello all, I've just returned from the Flurry, where among other wonderful things, I got to dance a Cracking Chestnut's session. I was struck by the constant need to shorten the sets and make more sets. The Chestnuts are popular. Even using the width of the hall, I know there were some 2s that never became 1s for some dances. Several of the Chestnuts end with a Right and Left across and back. If you changed that to a pass through, with new neighbor courtesy turn; pass through, with new new neighbor courtesy turn; you'd add two more progressions to the dance, moving dancers up and down the hall much more quickly. Adding a new move to a Chestnut might seem the most egregious of anachronisms, and/or it might help dancers enjoy them when the sets are long. I imagine the idea of adding progressions to Chestnuts is not new. Is it important to dance the Chestnut as close to form as possible, and any deviation defeats the purpose? Or is the joy of Chestnuts the time-tested match of moves with tune? I'd really like to hear others thoughts. Thanks -- Luke Donforth Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com> www.lukedonev.com _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers