Re: [Callers] How to devise a program

Maia wrote: Yes. That helps. This gig sounds like a contemporary open, public contra dance, a form that is what I specialize in calling and also a form that I consider to be possibly the most challenging kind of event to call. Some others have given good advice here. I do some things differently and I will focus on those differences. Please keep in mind that my own approach is quite different than how most other callers do it. This approach comes from how I “define” or “frame” these events, so I need to explain that briefly. I think most of us, if we think about it at all, tend to frame these open, public contra dances as, simply; “a dance gathering of contra dance enthusiasts with a live band and a caller.” This is most certainly true…but this frame leaves out some essential elements and there are other true ways to frame these events. I frame them as; “an open, public social event—both sponsored and hosted by a group of dance enthusiasts—that includes live music and, primarily, progressive set dances facilitated by a caller.” In this frame the first-timers are seen more as a central purpose of the event. It’s an open social event. Consequently the task of integrating newcomers into the hall becomes a primary task of the caller. Yes dancers and other organizers can help but the caller is in a key position to lead the assembly in the process of integration…and although there are many integration strategies and tactics, one way the caller can encourage integration is through programming. Integrating the hall is a leadership task. There are many leadership strategies, and some of the best ones are very subtle and sometimes subconscious. One of them is called “leadership by omission.” In that case the leader encourages action by what they do NOT do. Another one is a variant of that and I call it “leadership by assumption.” In this strategy I assume that the dancers will support me and do as I ask them. That’s the deal. I ask them to integrate the hall and then assume their full support in this effort. In the practice of programming that means I choose dances with the assumption that every first-timer in the hall will be partnered with a regular and that they will be distributed throughout the hall. My program is designed to make this process both fun and successful for everyone. There are many other strategies needed to make this work but I am only discussing programming here. I do prepare a specific program, but I include 14 dances and one or two of them will be dropped as I see how the evening progresses. Occasionally I will add a dance while at the event. I start by picking a first and a last dance. I have a few dances marked for these positions and I rotate through them. The first dance has to be easy, familiar to the regulars, and with lots of connection. It must be a dance that can guarantee success for everyone in the hall with little, if any, teaching and it should have good neighbor interaction. (swings) The last dance should also have excellent neighbor interaction and a similar profile. (I have several dances that I can use for either the first or last dance.) The idea here is to give everyone a chance to interact with everyone else and pay their respects before ending the evening. (This is a chance to apologize for not partnering with a favored partner that night, for example.) It’s a chance to say good night to everyone. This dance, however, should also have excellent partner interaction. The first three dances of the evening are where I put most of my programming effort. The goal of this segment of the evening is to build the confidence of all of the dancers and to minimize the perceived importance of partnering decisions. This helps to limit any cliquish or defensive partnering behaviors by the dancers early in the evening. I do this first by keeping the dance slots as short as possible with little or no walk-through. For this early segment of the evening I also select dances with excellent neighbor interaction and with minimal partner interaction. By “minimal partner interaction” I am speaking in context. I am very aware of the fact that some dancers will complain if there are dances with no partner swing. By “minimal” I mean, generally, keeping the number of counts of partner swinging down compared to other dances. I often call at least one “no partner swing” dance during the evening, and this will happen during the first three dances. Most callers do this in the form of a “mixer” during the evening. I will often substitute a “no partner swing” contra dance because I see the entire evening as a “mixer”…particularly the first half of the evening. Another way to “minimize” partner swinging is to program dances in which only the ones have a partner swing. “Scout House Reel” for example, is an excellent first dance choice. During the first half of the evening I try to show some variation and add a few figures as I go. The primary goal though is to make sure the dancers who have partnered with first-timers will have fun. Key to this is to keep the dances easy enough that there is only a quick walk-through and that the music starts right away. If the band is willing I try to do roll-ins for the first three dances and as often as possible in the first half of the evening. That means choosing dances where no demonstrations or explanations are needed. During the first half I try to do no “teaching from the mike.” The regulars are in charge of showing the moves to the newcomers. I step back and stay out of that process, (leadership by omission). The strategy here is to limit what I call “partnering pressure” which I define as: “that feeling that one needs to find a particular kind of partner or any partner quickly.” By programming short slots with easy dances that allow minimal walk-throughs I can subtly create a sense that there will be many more partnering opportunities during the evening. This also reduces the apprehension of some dancers that they will get “stuck” with a “bad partner” for a long dance slot. In general this programming encourages more generous and community-minded partnering behaviors. It is, after all, a social event. In the second half of the evening I will program one or two dances in a longer dance slot to allow the band to work their magic and to allow the dancers to enter “trance dance” mode. It is in the second half that I may include a “mini-lecture” or a dance that requires a demonstration or some “teaching from the mike.” But I work to maintain a precise and clear calling style with impeccable timing using the most effective word order. “Teaching from the mike” is usually limited to about two minutes per evening. Those are my goals and strategies. I use Filemaker Pro to keep my database of dances. I have set up an interface that allows me to select dances for the evening and order them in slots from 1-14. Dances that are being held for possible inclusion are assigned to slot 15 so I can display them at will if I need another dance. Changing the slot number moves that dance into the program. I have coded my database using the NEFFA dance planning matrix. This is a great tool, by the way. I use it to plan every evening. I can instantly display my program in the matrix and see if I have selected too many “down the hall” dances or other distinctive figures or transitions. The matrix also helps me to collect dances that will round out my program. (Dances that start without “neighbor, balance and swing” but which include another specific figure, for example. I’m always on the lookout for easy dances that will also satisfy those regulars who want “interesting” dance sequences.) I print out my cards using Filemaker Pro and they are color-coded for difficulty level. I am in the process of creating a key on the back of the cards that will allow me to select from the NEFFA matrix criteria by looking at the backs of the cards—without using a computer—while at a dance. That’s how I plan my programs. Greg McKenzie West Coast, USA