13 Dec
2011
13 Dec
'11
2:13 p.m.
I'm a little late responding to this thread, but after reading some of Greg's
comments below, I had to reply, specifically to Greg's contention that it is
misleading and incorrect to try and categorize dancers into beginners, intermediate and
advanced.
Well, I think I understand the desire not to pigeonhole dancers, but those categories are
sometimes useful. If I'm calling a dance out of town where I've never called
before, I would find it helpful if the dance organizer told me ahead of time "you
should expect that at least half of the dancers will be total novices", or "our
group consists mostly of very experienced dancers who will welcome new and challenging
dances from a visiting caller". When I call a dance I don't just pull dance cards
out at random, I develop a program for the evening, usually beginning with less
complicated dances. And having some basic information about the average skill level of the
group I'm calling to is really useful. It's just common sense.
If Greg has not been able to identify any beginning dancers at any of the venues where
he's been a caller, he may be trying a little too hard to overlook those poor souls
who need the caller to continue calling for longer than usual (and yes, sometimes all the
way to the end).
The argument against categorizing dancers reminds of a similar argument, that because
there exists a spectrum of human skin color based on the amount of melanin in our skin,
then there's no such thing as race. In a real world, practical sense, we all know
that's not true. -Lewis Land
---- Greg McKenzie <grekenzie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Friends,
Below is a discussion in which I am challenging some basic assumptions
common on this list. The statements I am analyzing come from one dance
caller. But I want to make it clear that I am not criticizing any
individual caller. I am challenging some of the frames we all use to think
about our open, public, contra dances. These frames are used by the vast
Martha also wrote:
I believe strongly that we must try to meet the
needs of at least three
groups of dancers: beginners, intermediate dancers and advanced dancers.
This is an area that I have done research on and I was unable to find any
"beginners,"intermediate dancers," or "advanced dancers" at any
of the
contra dance events I surveyed. None. In the contra dance tradition there
is no "course of study" available to anyone that would define such
demarcations. There is not even any typical path to gaining experience in
dancing contras.
Furthermore you cannot define these terms in any meaningful way. (I have
tried using the number of contras attended and the time spent dancing
contras. Neither one makes sense for these categories.) My challenge to
any of you who use these terms is to show me a system for categorizing any
contra dancer into one, and only one, of these three classifications. It
must be based upon observable and verifiable behaviors that we can come to
some agreement on such as "figures or moves mastered by each level" and a
means of testing dancers.
You cannot do that.
If you try you will meet substantial resistance from many of us who love
this dance form.