26 Jun
2013
26 Jun
'13
7:03 a.m.
When regulars teach by doing, it's great. Dance with a newcomer, during
the dance, point them in the right direction, give a verbal clue as to
who their next interaction is, etc. Another thing an experienced dancer
can do is ask the caller the question the dancer needs answered -- any
question that comes up is likely to come up in more than one person.
But this rarely happens. What is more common is what Jean points out.
I can't count how many times I've held up a walk through, waiting for
some "helpful" person, because that someone thinks it's important to
teach a person how to buzz step. An equal number of times someone is
holding up the movement of a star to teach the interlocking hands
formation. [1]
If people come back, they will learn these forms. And, again, if they
come back, their foot will learn the buzz step. There is never a need
for these things to be taught by a "helpful" regular during the course
of a walk through.
[1] An aside: many people call this the "wrist grip" form. I encourage
us all to remove the word "grip" from out teaching lexicon, as gripping
has led to griping, and that (IMHO) horrid no-thumb allemande... The
connection is through hooks and surfaces to lean on, not through
gripping. And, although I don't like the no thumb allemande, when do I
teach this form of star, I encourage all five fingers, thumb included,
going over the top of the wrist in front - no grip.
erik hoffman
~oakland, ca
On 6/25/2013 10:56 PM, jean francis wrote:
I disagree with the general concept of teaching by the
regular dancers, during the dance or walk-thru. I absolutely encourage helpful eye
contact, proffered hands, body language, friendly waves ("its me, here I am") by
all to all, but 'teaching' in the sense of doing what the caller is or should be
doing...no.
Greg Mackenzie says that regular dancers like to teach a much as does the caller. It is
my contention that among the several agendas a contra dance "regular" might have
when going to a dance, teaching is not one. I think the main agenda is to dance as much
and as seamlessly as possible with whomever ( no preconception about dancing only with
experienced folks) and to this end, folks hope the caller has done their homework and can
explain the moves so clearly that additional 'teaching' from the floor is
unnecessary. In the minority, there may be a few regulars who are compelled to tell others
what to do, or more benignly, just try to be helpful with verbal or physical instruction.
Here's a worst case scenario. Cpl B in the minor set isn't catching on to the
ladies chain....man A walks across to teach them how its done...while he is doing so the
caller has 2 choices Stop calling/teaching while one person in the hall instructs 2
others in the hall or keep calling....lets say caller goes with the latter option and
calls "and balance and swing a new neighbor". Cpl B is engaged in being taught
the previous move...they are out of place and out of time. Man A is over teaching cpl B:
he's out of place and out of time; Next female neighbor for Man B has no one to
balance. Instant set breakdown.
Even on a less dramatic scale, verbal instruction is best done by one person.
Historically this has been the caller. Historically, it has worked for a long time.
"Duelling teaching" is very disorienting to most newcomers..they want to listen
to the caller but feel its impolite to ignore the 'experienced' person in their
face. It is also disrespectful to the caller.
________________________________
From: Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com>
To: winston@sla