19 Mar
2012
19 Mar
'12
3:23 a.m.
I would never want to talk about a balance as a lurch, because it is one of
my favourite moves in contra dancing. It is one of the only steps which
cannot be done as a walk. I always demonstrate it in a variety of styles,
from one very close to the floor to one with much higher steps and kicks,
just to give people the idea that they can have fun with it and make it
their own. I appreciate Read's explanation of the function of it, but I
never think about any function of the balance other than the pleasure of
the balance in itself. What I don't appreciate in a partner doing a balance
is a lazy leaning in and out. I think the 1-2-3 footwork is essential to a
good balance, as is the weight in the arms.
Maura
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 12:04:07 -0400
From: Read Weaver <rweaver(a)igc.org>
To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] American with Style
Message-ID: <1CD4A97E-4B5B-4ABA-8557-E539C9E9345F(a)igc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes;
format=flowed
I assumed the lurch he was talking about was the pulling into the
swing. I'm not sure what the pedagogical (or Terpsichorean) advantage
is in describing it as something willfully inelegant, but I do think
that's what he's referring to.
When I teach beginners, I describe the point of the balance as moving
you away from (while connected to) your partner so that you can pull
in to your partner as you begin the swing (California twirl, etc.).
With experienced dancers, it can be worth reminding them that fancy
balances that end without that tension in the arms lose the pulling-
in aspect.
--Read Weaver
Jamaica Plain, MA
http://lcfd.org
On Mar 17, 2012, at 7:07 AM, John Sweeney wrote:
In his article Colin Hume says that the balance
before a swing is
"more
of a lurch". But I would disagree.
My experience is that most dancers do some sort of footwork - they
step
forward with a 1-2-3 and back with a 1-2-3 or do a step and kick
across
or anything else they fancy in the way of footwork.
What is the general view? What do you teach when you teach a balance
before a swing? What do people actually do on the dance-floor?
19 Mar
19 Mar
1:04 p.m.
New subject: teaching a balance
I approach the balance a little differently. At the beginners' workshop I walk them
through a simple 4 step foot work (step forward - step back). then I tell them to forget
it because the really important part happens in the arms. If you get that down - footwork
will follow and it doesn't make much difference what you settle on. I would never try
to get a new dancer to do the 123 footwork and I have had a great many satisfying balances
without that. However, if that connection through the arms is not solid and rhythmic the
enjoyment is significantly reduced.
Mac McKeever
St Louis
________________________________
From: Maura Volante <maura.volante(a)gmail.com>
To: callers(a)sharedweight.net
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Callers] teaching a balance
I would never want to talk about a balance as a lurch, because it is one of
my favourite moves in contra dancing. It is one of the only steps which
cannot be done as a walk. I always demonstrate it in a variety of styles,
from one very close to the floor to one with much higher steps and kicks,
just to give people the idea that they can have fun with it and make it
their own. I appreciate Read's explanation of the function of it, but I
never think about any function of the balance other than the pleasure of
the balance in itself. What I don't appreciate in a partner doing a balance
is a lazy leaning in and out. I think the 1-2-3 footwork is essential to a
good balance, as is the weight in the arms.
Maura
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 12:04:07 -0400
From: Read Weaver <rweaver(a)igc.org>
To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Subject: Re: [Callers] American with Style
Message-ID: <1CD4A97E-4B5B-4ABA-8557-E539C9E9345F(a)igc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes;
format=flowed
I assumed the lurch he was talking about was the pulling into the
swing. I'm not sure what the pedagogical (or Terpsichorean) advantage
is in describing it as something willfully inelegant, but I do think
that's what he's referring to.
When I teach beginners, I describe the point of the balance as moving
you away from (while connected to) your partner so that you can pull
in to your partner as you begin the swing (California twirl, etc.).
With experienced dancers, it can be worth reminding them that fancy
balances that end without that tension in the arms lose the pulling-
in aspect.
--Read Weaver
Jamaica Plain, MA
http://lcfd.org
On Mar 17, 2012, at 7:07 AM, John Sweeney wrote:
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
In his article Colin Hume says that the balance
before a swing is
"more
of a lurch". But I would disagree.
My experience is that most dancers do some sort of footwork - they
step
forward with a 1-2-3 and back with a 1-2-3 or do a step and kick
across
or anything else they fancy in the way of footwork.
What is the general view? What do you teach when you teach a balance
before a swing? What do people actually do on the dance-floor?
4630
days inactive
4630
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Maura Volante -
Richard Mckeever