Re: [Callers] How to devise a program

Kalia asked:: This is a good question. I know that I need to be careful on this issue. I, like you, thought that my slots were "shorter than other callers" at one time. My thanks to Jim Saxe who took the time to come to one of my dances and timed every slot. It was a real wake-up call to see that my slots were not that "short" after all. Slots often seem shorter from behind the mike. Since then I hope I have made some progress. This is an ongoing effort. The fact is that it is hard work to keep the slots short. You need to work closely with the band. They need to be on board with this goal, otherwise ending too soon can be frustrating for the musicians. If you are diligent you can shave enough time off of the early slots to gain enough time for one extra dance slot in the evening. The important factors here are: 1. Where do you shave off the time? and 2. How does this change the perception of the dancers? I try to shave a minute, if possible, off of the walk-through and teaching time. This is one reason I don't teach from the mike and leave this job to the regulars. It just makes sense to keep things moving. I do NOT shave time off of the set formation and socializing time. I see this time as part of the dancer socializing time that belongs to them. When callers try to quiet the crowd too early it encourages the dancers to ignore them. You have to strike a careful balance. I also try to shave off about one time through the tune by ending the dance sooner. That's about half a minute. The dancers will perceive a shorter walk-through and dance time as evidence that the caller is skilled and effective at calling. (This is part of what I call "building and maintaining the illusion of competence.") When the dancers trust the caller they will be more likely to support her efforts and will listen more carefully. This also shortens the time needed for a slot. By keeping the walk-throughs short and starting the music early (at full tempo--more on that later) the caller and band signal to the crowd that they will make the evening fun and that everyone will be successful. This increases dancer confidence and those dancers are then more likely to be generous in their partnering decisions. If a slot is only nine minutes rather than ten this seems like less of an investment in each partnering decision. When the regulars see how much fun others are having while dancing with first-timers they will want to be a part of that. You can, with some effort, gain one extra dance slot for the evening. But the perception will be of an evening with more partnering opportunities. Remember: Most callers start the evening more slowly with longer walk-throughs and often start the music at a slower pace. If you break that "tradition" you will be perceived to be a dynamic caller who can make a high-energy dance evening happen. (Or, more likely, they will simply think that the band is really hot! Good calling will not make you famous or popular, but that's another thread.) In reality your walk-throughs will never get shorter. In fact they may get longer during the second half as you introduce more complex material and add a "mini-lecture." But the initial impression will last through the evening. When I mentioned the NEFFA Dance Planning Matrix Kalia asked: Yes. It looks like he may have altered it. I have altered it a little myself. (I don't, for example, include the "angry robin" figure because I don't call dances with that figure. You should alter it to fit your own needs. The original is in the back of "Give and Take," I believe. Kalia then asked: I started out using a difficulty scale of 1-10. That seemed excessively graduated but I have kept it. I seldom call a dance above a level 6. I have two dances I have rated at 8 in my database but none higher than that. I know there are some of them out there but I have no need for them so I keep the scale as it is to remind me that such dances exist. I tend to think of such dances as just poorly choreographed contra dances. I use a combination of factors to rate a dance and I often rate the difficulty level differently than the original author. I use the piece count, demanding sequences, good or poor flow, unusual or awkward transitions, etc. to come up with a level assignment. I use the ratings to help me choose dances and to place them in my program. Over the years I have changed the ratings on a few dances. I don't know if I moved more of them up or down in difficulty level. I have done it in both directions based upon my experience calling them. My approach is to pick dances with good flow, with less emphasis on the difficulty level. My target audience is the regulars at a series. If the regulars are comfortable with the dance and my calls then they will pull the first-timers through it well. I don't teach figures or transitions at an open, public contra dance. I leave that up to the regulars. My experience is that the regulars accept their role as hosts with enthusiasm. The trick is to give them all of the information they need at exactly the moment they need it. If there is a sudden influx of first-timers I try to speak on behalf of the regulars and graciously welcome the newcomers into the hall. The regulars seem to take this cue well and make sure the hall gets integrated. That solves most of the problems with such influxes. I don't start teaching from the mike. I know that the regulars will be much more effective at leading the newcomers. My teaching from the mike will only make everyone more nervous. It's a team effort. In solidarity, Greg McKenzie West Coast, USA **********************