29 Sep
2018
29 Sep
'18
9:15 p.m.
I gathered that was the case - it just isn't something I've come across and
it seems redundant to use the double option. Is it really widespread
enough that it needs mentioning?
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 5:02 PM Read Weaver via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
Sorry I was unclear. Because some contra callers say
“mad robin” and some
contra callers say “double mad robin,” meaning the same thing, and if
you’ve learned it as “mad robin” and a new-to-you caller says “double mad
robin,” you’ll think it’s a different figure.
On Sep 28, 2018, at 8:51 AM, Folk Dance <ceilidh.caller.bob(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I don't think the distinction is necessary is it? "mad robin with your
neighbour" is clearly distinct from "1s in the middle mad robin" so why
add
double mad robin? It'd be like calling most petronella's double
petronellas because they have four people moving but the original
petronella is for 1s only.
Bob
On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:29 PM Read Weaver via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
It’s perhaps worth saying during the teaching
“also called a double mad
robin,” since dancers will sometimes hear that (from callers who know ECD).
I’ve seen confusion on moderately experienced contra dancers’ faces (and
feet) at the term “double mad robin” (thinking you go around twice, or that
it involves more than 4 people) because they’ve only ever seen the figure
with 4 people moving and they’ve only ever heard it called “mad robin.”
(In the English country dance “Mad Robin,” only two people are moving in
the eponymous figure.)
_______________________________________________
List Name: Callers mailing list
List Address: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/