2 Jan
2013
2 Jan
'13
9:48 p.m.
My feeling is a lot of the lead function is not needed in contra. The caller and
choreography eliminate the need for a leader who decides what and when things will happen
and then the role of follower also becomes meaningless.
We still have the component where one dancer will provide a firm 'lead' for the
other as they start a specific figure. This certainly adds to the enjoyment of the
dance. Often it is the gent doing this (courtesy turn, or ladies chain). It can be the
lady (into a gents allemand left) or both (as in a balance) - or even between same gender
dancers.
I think it is a misuse of the terms to try to apply lead and follow roles to contra
dancing
Mac McKeever
________________________________
From: Louise Siddons <louise(a)eden2.com>
To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 2, 2013 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Alternate Role Terms
(b) I don't like giving up control to someone
else. (In Maia's terms, I like being 'in control' and 'taking care
of' the other dancers.) I simply don't like ceding all agency, in general, and I
have never relied on the gent role to tell me where I am going when contradancing. I can
imagine it could be sweet to feel that someone else is taking care of you, but what if
they're taking you down the wrong path? Or what if they're forcibly making you do
something you just don't want to do? Or what if they have no clue? No thanks.
Perhaps part of the problem is that this is what people are hearing when they hear
"lead/follow." But a good lead-follow experience *is* a team sport, *is* about
give-and-take, communication, offers from both sides, and all the rest of it. Don't
let terrible dancing define dancing!
Louise.
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers