18 Oct
2016
18 Oct
'16
3:25 p.m.
Regarding attribution, I like the way David Kaynor puts it on this website:
"Some of my dances are "compositions" only in the loosest sense of the
word; they fall into the category of "glossary" contras which basically
amount to minimally imaginative resequencing of ordinary contra dance
elements. Do such dances…especially if conceived spontaneously in a
teaching/calling situation… qualify as "compositions?" Maybe. Maybe not."
I'm in the maybe not camp. They're not protected by any copyright here (at
least in my view, which has generally been shared by most people on this
list when the topic comes up on occasion). I don't call regularly; most of
the time when I call dances, I'm doing so late at night after a singing
event or at somebody's house or at a more-or-less spontaneous outdoor
gathering, where I don't have dance cards with me. I know several dances
by name and memory, but most of the dances at such events are things I've
made up on the spot. I am almost certain that every single one of these
dances is a progression I have danced before at some point in the past, and
that somebody has written and put their name on Partner Balance and Swing,
Circle Left 3/4, Neighbor Swing, Long Lines, Ladies Chain, Left-Hand Star,
New Neighbor Do-Si-Do. Good for whoever that person is, and if it's a
catchy title, that can be a useful way for us to refer to that particular
glossary dance. But I wouldn't call it a composition, and I certainly
wouldn't feel like I need to research whoever wrote that dance and the
title and attribute it to that person.
Where I differ from Neal is that I don't really want a dozen people to be
putting their name on that above dance I just made up (after I've danced it
many times already, after somebody else made it up, etc). It's just not
interesting enough of a sequence to be worth attributing at all.
It gets a bit tougher when we're talking about dances that, when written,
were really compositions, adding something new or fresh to the repertoire,
but could now be considered glossary dances because of how common those
figures have become in modern contra dances. But that's not the case for
most of the dances.
-Dave
Washington, DC
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
As someone with an academic background in the field of
Folklore, the way
we talk about attribution and authorship bothers me.
(NOTE: what I'm talking about here is distinct from trying to track down
the source of a dance you collected somewhere, or according respect to the
first person to dream up a sequence. Both of those goals are entirely
legitimate.)
The dance Luke described was created by him, not Mark Goodwin. The
sequence happens to be the same as one dreamed up by Mark Goodwin at a
previous place and time, which is very important to know, but Luke's
creation was independent and should be attributed to Luke. If we attribute
everything to the first person ever to dream up a sequence, we are grossly
misrepresenting how dances are created and spread.
When we attribute Luke's dance to Mark, we are saying that Luke (and
everyone else) got the dance from Mark, or from a source tracked back to
Mark. That is factually incorrect in this case; Luke can point to when and
why he came up with the dance. Legally, it would also mean we are claiming
that Mark holds the only legitimate copyright claim, which is again both
incorrect and total nonsense (as copyright usually becomes when applied to
folk genres).
As both an academic and participant in our tradition, I want to know if
many people independently came up with the same dance (making it a FOLK
DANCE). Otherwise, I am falsely giving credit and responsibility to a
single creative genius. The difference between those two is a significant
matter in the question of how folklore is created and who owns it.
Personally, I feel our cultural tendency to accord authorial rights has
misled us.
So please...if you came up with a dance put your name on it along with
some of the details---and then tell me who else came up with it, too.
Don't just stick their name on it.
Just my 2 cents.
Neal
Neal Schlein
Youth Services Librarian, Mahomet Public Library
Currently reading: *The Different Girl* by Gordon Dahlquist
Currently learning: How to set up an automated email system.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761
Thanks. I'll attribute it to Mark Goodwin.
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Michael Barraclough via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
I have that exact dance as To Wedded Bliss by
Mark Goodwin (2014). I use
that in my Lesson and then, after teaching ladies chain and right & left
through, follow that with my dance The Lesson (2009) which is
A1 -----------
(8) Neighbor Do-si-do
(8) Neighbor swing
A2 -----------
(8) Ladies chain
(8) Long lines, forward and back
B1 -----------
(8) Right & left through
(8) Partner promenade across
B2 -----------
(8) Circle Left 3/4
(4) Balance the Ring
(4) Pass through
and yes, I know it doesn't have a swing - it's in the lesson and I want
to minimize the use of partner swings so that new couples don't get bad
habits.
Michael Barraclough
www.michaelbarraclough.com
--
On Mon, 2016-10-17 at 22:45 -0400, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
Hello all,
I was thinking about what I do at the "welcome to our contra dance"
introduction, and what dance would easily move in to that. Noodling around
with moves, I thought of a sequence with glossary moves, but I didn't have
it in my box. Anyone recognize it?
Improper
A1 -----------
(8) Neighbor Do-si-do
(8) Neighbor swing
A2 -----------
(8) Men allemande Left 1-1/2
(8) Partner swing
B1 -----------
(8) Promenade across the Set
(8) Long lines, forward and back
B2 -----------
(8) Circle Left 3/4
(4) Balance the Ring
(4) Pass through
During the introduction, I often teach the progression with a "ring
balance, walk past this neighbor", and I wanted something that included
that. There are lots of great accessible dances with that (The Big Easy,
Easy Peasy, etc), but I'm not seeing one with a partner promenade
(something I also use in the introduction; to go from a big circle to lines
of couples for a contra set).
If someone already wrote it, I'll happily give them credit. If not, I'll
call it "If you can walk, then you can dance" (which I'll note is not an
if
and only if statement).
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing
listCallers@lists.sharedweight.nethttp://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
--
Luke Donforth
Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net