4 Jan
2013
4 Jan
'13
3:20 p.m.
The middle of a swing is a beautiful (almost) symmetrical move with the
man and lady (almost) completely equal.
I added the "almost"s because it is traditional for the man to place his
right arm under the lady's left arm causing a small, but important,
asymmetry.
Of course you can do completely symmetrical swing (Galway Swings,
Northumberland Swing, Ceilidh Swing, Sweetheart Swing, etc.), and
indeed, especially in the more reserved UK, I always go for a Galway
Swing when I meet a man for a swing. (Galway Swing = start an Allemande
Right, use your left hand to cup your partner's right elbow, buzz-step
and fly!)
But in a swing there is also the entry and exit.
Question 1:
In your community if one partner twirls under the other person's arm
while entering or exiting a swing, then is it the man or the lady that
twirls?
In my experience, watching countless dancers in many US states and UK
counties over the years, it is the lady who twirls 99% of the time.
Question 2:
When you do that type of twirl, do you find it easier if, as a man, you
provide a good lead, or, as a lady, you follow well?
In my experience (mainly as a man) then it is MUCH easier to execute
those twirls without effort and on time if the lady is a good follower.
Then there are more complex swing-exit-flourishes such as an extended
Apache Whip (the last part of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSLttdtKOHs
then raise your arm so that the lady keeps turning under it). Also
Ladies' Chains where the lady wants to twirl half a dozen times. These
work MUCH better if there is good lead and follow (in fact, you can do a
lot of damage in an extended Apache Whip exit if you DON'T have good
lead and follow).
Question 3:
In a swing, who decides when to stop turning? Have you ever been jerked
by someone deciding to stop the swing earlier than you had planned? Or
been left late for the next move by someone carrying on for an extra
turn when there is no time?
Is there lead & follow in deciding when to stop?
So, yes, the middle of a swing doesn't involve lead and follow. But
taken as a whole maybe it does!
:-)
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
4 Jan
4 Jan
4:54 p.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
I'd like to point out that all twirls, whether entry or exit, are flourishes, added to
the basic dance. The basic dance has a symmetrical pull into the swing position. As
danced, and taught by most callers, on this side of the pond, both partners have a hand on
the other's back, so it is as close to symmetrical as it can be. No matter which role
I dance, I encounter neighbors, or sometimes have a partner, who have no idea how and when
to end the swing appropriately, and I assure you, I can end it myself, from either
position, without doing harm to my co-swinger. Even when people try to put me in a bad
position with a poorly executed flourish, 9 times out of 10 I can reposition us as we move
to end fairly close to the right position. But the dance doesn't assume flourishes.
It assumes a basic swing with an open like a book exit, which it is possible to accomplish
with neither party leading. Those of us who enjoy flourishes can do so, and lead them
from whatever position and in whatever manner we like, but it is wrong to impose
lead/follow terminology on the whole dance form because of the personal choice of some
dancers.
Cheers
Andrea
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:20 PM, "John Sweeney" <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk>
wrote:
The middle of a swing is a beautiful (almost)
symmetrical move with the
man and lady (almost) completely equal.
I added the "almost"s because it is traditional for the man to place his
right arm under the lady's left arm causing a small, but important,
asymmetry.
Of course you can do completely symmetrical swing (Galway Swings,
Northumberland Swing, Ceilidh Swing, Sweetheart Swing, etc.), and
indeed, especially in the more reserved UK, I always go for a Galway
Swing when I meet a man for a swing. (Galway Swing = start an Allemande
Right, use your left hand to cup your partner's right elbow, buzz-step
and fly!)
But in a swing there is also the entry and exit.
Question 1:
In your community if one partner twirls under the other person's arm
while entering or exiting a swing, then is it the man or the lady that
twirls?
In my experience, watching countless dancers in many US states and UK
counties over the years, it is the lady who twirls 99% of the time.
Question 2:
When you do that type of twirl, do you find it easier if, as a man, you
provide a good lead, or, as a lady, you follow well?
In my experience (mainly as a man) then it is MUCH easier to execute
those twirls without effort and on time if the lady is a good follower.
Then there are more complex swing-exit-flourishes such as an extended
Apache Whip (the last part of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSLttdtKOHs
then raise your arm so that the lady keeps turning under it). Also
Ladies' Chains where the lady wants to twirl half a dozen times. These
work MUCH better if there is good lead and follow (in fact, you can do a
lot of damage in an extended Apache Whip exit if you DON'T have good
lead and follow).
Question 3:
In a swing, who decides when to stop turning? Have you ever been jerked
by someone deciding to stop the swing earlier than you had planned? Or
been left late for the next move by someone carrying on for an extra
turn when there is no time?
Is there lead & follow in deciding when to stop?
So, yes, the middle of a swing doesn't involve lead and follow. But
taken as a whole maybe it does!
:-)
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
6:49 p.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
Andrea wrote:
Those of us who enjoy flourishes can do
so, and lead them from whatever position
and in whatever manner we like, but it is wrong to impose lead/follow
terminology on the whole dance form because of the personal choice of some
dancers.
_________________
Yes! Thank you for that!
I personally use "Ladies/Gents" when I call because those words are role
defining--not gender defining (like the "boys/girls in MWSD or the
"purple/green" as suggested earlier or "bands and barearms").
Since there are no real/true to life "gents and ladies" (according to Websters
Dictionary) on the floor (at least I haven't found any where I dance/call) I have
defined these words by saying "The Lady is on the right/the Gent is on the left"
(side of the couple). At that point anyone assuming the position on either side of the
couple is free to dance the role according to my definition.
I believe using "Lead/Follow"terminology in contra dancing will confuse any
dancer familiar with the terminology as used in couple/ballroom dancing which gives very
different responsibilities to dancers in those positions.
Donna Hunt
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Nettleton <twirly-girl(a)bellsouth.net>
To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Fri, Jan 4, 2013 4:54 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Lead/Follow in a Swing
I'd like to point out that all twirls, whether entry or exit, are flourishes,
added to the basic dance. The basic dance has a symmetrical pull into the swing
position. As danced, and taught by most callers, on this side of the pond, both
partners have a hand on the other's back, so it is as close to symmetrical as it
can be. No matter which role I dance, I encounter neighbors, or sometimes have
a partner, who have no idea how and when to end the swing appropriately, and I
assure you, I can end it myself, from either position, without doing harm to my
co-swinger. Even when people try to put me in a bad position with a poorly
executed flourish, 9 times out of 10 I can reposition us as we move to end
fairly close to the right position. But the dance doesn't assume flourishes.
It assumes a basic swing with an open like a book exit, which it is possible to
accomplish with neither party leading. Those of us who enjoy flourishes can do
so, and lead them from whatever position
and in whatever manner we like, but it is wrong to impose lead/follow
terminology on the whole dance form because of the personal choice of some
dancers.
Cheers
Andrea
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:20 PM, "John Sweeney" <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk>
wrote:
The middle of a swing is a beautiful (almost)
symmetrical move with the
man and lady (almost) completely equal.
I added the "almost"s because it is traditional for the man to place his
right arm under the lady's left arm causing a small, but important,
asymmetry.
Of course you can do completely symmetrical swing (Galway Swings,
Northumberland Swing, Ceilidh Swing, Sweetheart Swing, etc.), and
indeed, especially in the more reserved UK, I always go for a Galway
Swing when I meet a man for a swing. (Galway Swing = start an Allemande
Right, use your left hand to cup your partner's right elbow, buzz-step
and fly!)
But in a swing there is also the entry and exit.
Question 1:
In your community if one partner twirls under the other person's arm
while entering or exiting a swing, then is it the man or the lady that
twirls?
In my experience, watching countless dancers in many US states and UK
counties over the years, it is the lady who twirls 99% of the time.
Question 2:
When you do that type of twirl, do you find it easier if, as a man, you
provide a good lead, or, as a lady, you follow well?
In my experience (mainly as a man) then it is MUCH easier to execute
those twirls without effort and on time if the lady is a good follower.
Then there are more complex swing-exit-flourishes such as an extended
Apache Whip (the last part of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSLttdtKOHs
then raise your arm so that the lady keeps turning under it). Also
Ladies' Chains where the lady wants to twirl half a dozen times. These
work MUCH better if there is good lead and follow (in fact, you can do a
lot of damage in an extended Apache Whip exit if you DON'T have good
lead and follow).
Question 3:
In a swing, who decides when to stop turning? Have you ever been jerked
by someone deciding to stop the swing earlier than you had planned? Or
been left late for the next move by someone carrying on for an extra
turn when there is no time?
Is there lead & follow in deciding when to stop?
So, yes, the middle of a swing doesn't involve lead and follow. But
taken as a whole maybe it does!
:-)
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
8:23 p.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
Sorry: In the future I'll reready my post before I hit "send".
Clarification: What I meant to say is that I like the idea of using
"gent/ladies" (for the reasons given) and will try to use them more when I call.
Now I use "gents" and "men" interchangeably and always use
"ladies" (for no good reason just habit).
Donna Hunt
-----Original Message-----
From: Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com>
To: callers <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Fri, Jan 4, 2013 6:49 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Lead/Follow in a Swing
Andrea wrote:
Those of us who enjoy flourishes can do
so, and lead them from whatever position
and in whatever manner we like, but it is wrong to impose lead/follow
terminology on the whole dance form because of the personal choice of some
dancers.
_________________
Yes! Thank you for that!
I personally use "Ladies/Gents" when I call because those words are role
defining--not gender defining (like the "boys/girls in MWSD or the
"purple/green" as suggested earlier or "bands and barearms").
Since there are no real/true to life "gents and ladies" (according to Websters
Dictionary) on the floor (at least I haven't found any where I dance/call) I
have defined these words by saying "The Lady is on the right/the Gent is on the
left" (side of the couple). At that point anyone assuming the position on
either side of the couple is free to dance the role according to my definition.
I believe using "Lead/Follow"terminology in contra dancing will confuse any
dancer familiar with the terminology as used in couple/ballroom dancing which
gives very different responsibilities to dancers in those positions.
Donna Hunt
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Nettleton <twirly-girl(a)bellsouth.net>
To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>
Sent: Fri, Jan 4, 2013 4:54 pm
Subject: Re: [Callers] Lead/Follow in a Swing
I'd like to point out that all twirls, whether entry or exit, are flourishes,
added to the basic dance. The basic dance has a symmetrical pull into the swing
position. As danced, and taught by most callers, on this side of the pond, both
partners have a hand on the other's back, so it is as close to symmetrical as it
can be. No matter which role I dance, I encounter neighbors, or sometimes have
a partner, who have no idea how and when to end the swing appropriately, and I
assure you, I can end it myself, from either position, without doing harm to my
co-swinger. Even when people try to put me in a bad position with a poorly
executed flourish, 9 times out of 10 I can reposition us as we move to end
fairly close to the right position. But the dance doesn't assume flourishes.
It assumes a basic swing with an open like a book exit, which it is possible to
accomplish with neither party leading. Those of us who enjoy flourishes can do
so, and lead them from whatever position
and in whatever manner we like, but it is wrong to impose lead/follow
terminology on the whole dance form because of the personal choice of some
dancers.
Cheers
Andrea
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 4, 2013, at 3:20 PM, "John Sweeney" <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk>
wrote:
The middle of a swing is a beautiful (almost)
symmetrical move with the
man and lady (almost) completely equal.
I added the "almost"s because it is traditional for the man to place his
right arm under the lady's left arm causing a small, but important,
asymmetry.
Of course you can do completely symmetrical swing (Galway Swings,
Northumberland Swing, Ceilidh Swing, Sweetheart Swing, etc.), and
indeed, especially in the more reserved UK, I always go for a Galway
Swing when I meet a man for a swing. (Galway Swing = start an Allemande
Right, use your left hand to cup your partner's right elbow, buzz-step
and fly!)
But in a swing there is also the entry and exit.
Question 1:
In your community if one partner twirls under the other person's arm
while entering or exiting a swing, then is it the man or the lady that
twirls?
In my experience, watching countless dancers in many US states and UK
counties over the years, it is the lady who twirls 99% of the time.
Question 2:
When you do that type of twirl, do you find it easier if, as a man, you
provide a good lead, or, as a lady, you follow well?
In my experience (mainly as a man) then it is MUCH easier to execute
those twirls without effort and on time if the lady is a good follower.
Then there are more complex swing-exit-flourishes such as an extended
Apache Whip (the last part of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSLttdtKOHs
then raise your arm so that the lady keeps turning under it). Also
Ladies' Chains where the lady wants to twirl half a dozen times. These
work MUCH better if there is good lead and follow (in fact, you can do a
lot of damage in an extended Apache Whip exit if you DON'T have good
lead and follow).
Question 3:
In a swing, who decides when to stop turning? Have you ever been jerked
by someone deciding to stop the swing earlier than you had planned? Or
been left late for the next move by someone carrying on for an extra
turn when there is no time?
Is there lead & follow in deciding when to stop?
So, yes, the middle of a swing doesn't involve lead and follow. But
taken as a whole maybe it does!
:-)
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
5 Jan
5 Jan
1:35 a.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:20 PM, John Sweeney <info(a)contrafusion.co.uk> wrote:
The middle of a swing is a beautiful (almost)
symmetrical move with the
man and lady (almost) completely equal. ... But in a swing there is also the
entry and exit.
It depends how you dance. In the way I'm most used to dancing the
whole swing is a time for interesting variations, and this includes
the middle as much as the beginning and end. I think of the swing,
middle included, as much more lead-follow than the rest of contra.
Jeff
4:51 a.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
Sometimes a dance weekend comes along just in time. So I am at Chattaboogie in TN, and
thought very hard about what was going on between me and all the people I danced with, and
I think I finally understand why, in my mind, lead/follow are actively bad terms to use in
contra, and why when we teach the idea of flourishes, I really don't want anyone
thinking of one role as lead, and the other as follow.
The evening rolled along, and I danced both positions with both genders of partners. Late
in the evening, I reflected about which dances I had enjoyed the most. It came down to
one dance with a woman, who is a very accomplished younger than me dancer. We fluidly
played off one another, making no distinction about who was in charge, a different one
landing in the 'you go' position at the last second at every possible opportunity.
It was like contact improv in a contra line. We could not have said who was leading, and
neither could anyone watching. It was transcendent. The other wonderful dance was with a
man. He dances in the usual position, is a wonderful dancer, but doesn't often offer
a flourish. Instead he absolutely loves for me to create sequences of flourishes for both
of us to do, but I end on the right. Why were these experiences so notable, I had to ask
myself. It is because most men have come to think they must be in charge of flourishes,
to the point that they don't seem open to my flourishes, or at best are in a state of
surprise which makes reacting to the suggestions awkward. Most women I dance with are
entirely passive, can receive a flourish from me if I am in the lefty role, but don't
have anything to give back, sometimes not even good weight. There are a few who can swap
positions, and offer flourishes from the lefty position, but in my transcendent dance, we
were completely interchangeable, and the game was who would wind up where. Even we
didn't know!
I think the root of the problem is that, without meaning to, we have begun to foster a
culture of expectations of bifurcated roles. Using the terms lead/follow only codifies
and ultimately ossifies something I would like to do away with. I know some people are
only going to dance one role, and some may only be able to participate in one way lefty to
righty flourishes. But I want more people to be able to open their minds to the kind of
experience I had tonight. Using the terms lead/follow to indicate the expectations of
dancing one side or the other will tend to shut that down, and I think it would be a
crying shame. We have subtly given up something I treasure. It is not the right to dance
in a staid old fashioned way, it is a formerly pervasive concept of the dance as a an
equal opportunity chance to play being replaced with a male dominated one way I am in
charge of you thing. I can't listen to defenses of that, to me, perversion of my
beloved play space. I don't want the experiences I had to be rare, outside the box,
ones. I want them to be as obvious a choice as any.
The discussion began with the idea that maybe we need a better set of terms for the two
positions we dance. This was to acknowledge that some in our community don't want
their dance position defined, even by archaic implication, as something to do with gender.
I am not personally bothered by gent/lady, but if I'm going to call to people who
are, let the alternate terms not imply something about the dance which I do not wish to
convey. Let them not limit, by seeming to prescribe and proscribe who can and should do
what, what we in fact choose to do. Let's try to generate something humorous,
elevating, easy to say and remember, and truly neutral. All we need them for is to say who
is crossing in a chain, and who needs to end the swing where in order for the dance not to
turn into a mixer. We could always resort to diagonals for same role moves, even chains
for that matter.
So. Some people want no change from trad terms. Fine. Know that a certain number of
dancers may object or not return, but it's your dance. Some want new terms. Ok. If
they are awesome, I bet even trad series might adopt them eventually. Arguing whether we
should change them is different from arguing which of the terms we already use to keep
using, and different again from evaluating the merits of new alternatives. It's
become a bit of a mash up.
I don't know whether we should, as a whole community, abandon trad terms for new
ones.
That doesn't keep me from gleefully generating new terms, just in case we hit on that
totally perfect set. (See the FB thread.)
But when I see people arguing for terms which by their use change how it is likely for
people to conceptualize the roles, in a way that curtails the potential for the kind of
beautiful shared dancing I saw and felt tonight, I have to say no. No, that is not a set
of terms which serve us well. No fine tuning of your arguments will convince me that they
will. Please, stop defending the terms lead/follow as if they were something we might
find desirable. Broaden your vision to imagine the grace they impede.
Soulfully,
Andrea
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 5, 2013, at 1:35 AM, Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:20 PM, John Sweeney
<info(a)contrafusion.co.uk> wrote:
The middle of a swing is a beautiful (almost)
symmetrical move with the
man and lady (almost) completely equal. ... But in a swing there is also the
entry and exit.
It depends how you dance. In the way I'm most used to dancing the
whole swing is a time for interesting variations, and this includes
the middle as much as the beginning and end. I think of the swing,
middle included, as much more lead-follow than the rest of contra.
Jeff
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers 
5:22 a.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
Beautiful!
Thank you, Andrea.
-- Alan
On 1/5/2013 1:51 AM, Andrea Nettleton wrote:
Sometimes a dance weekend comes along just in time.
So I am at Chattaboogie in TN, and thought very hard about what was going on between me
and all the people I danced with, and I think I finally understand why, in my mind,
lead/follow are actively bad terms to use in contra, and why when we teach the idea of
flourishes, I really don't want anyone thinking of one role as lead, and the other as
follow.
The evening rolled along, and I danced both positions with both genders of partners.
Late in the evening, I reflected about which dances I had enjoyed the most. It came down
to one dance with a woman, who is a very accomplished younger than me dancer. We fluidly
played off one another, making no distinction about who was in charge, a different one
landing in the 'you go' position at the last second at every possible opportunity.
It was like contact improv in a contra line. We could not have said who was leading, and
neither could anyone watching. It was transcendent. The other wonderful dance was with a
man. He dances in the usual position, is a wonderful dancer, but doesn't often offer
a flourish. Instead he absolutely loves for me to create sequences of flourishes for both
of us to do, but I end on the right. Why were these experiences so notable, I had to ask
myself. It is because most men have come to think they must be in charge of flourishes,
to the point tha
t they don't seem open to my flourishes, or at best are in a state of surprise
which makes reacting to the suggestions awkward. Most women I dance with are entirely
passive, can receive a flourish from me if I am in the lefty role, but don't have
anything to give back, sometimes not even good weight. There are a few who can swap
positions, and offer flourishes from the lefty position, but in my transcendent dance, we
were completely interchangeable, and the game was who would wind up where. Even we
didn't know!
I think the root of the problem is that, without meaning to, we have begun to foster a
culture of expectations of bifurcated roles. Using the terms lead/follow only codifies
and ultimately ossifies something I would like to do away with. I know some people are
only going to dance one role, and some may only be able to participate in one way lefty to
righty flourishes. But I want more people to be able to open their minds to the kind of
experience I had tonight. Using the terms lead/follow to indicate the expectations of
dancing one side or the other will tend to shut that down, and I think it would be a
crying shame. We have subtly given up something I treasure. It is not the right to dance
in a staid old fashioned way, it is a formerly pervasive concept of the dance as a an
equal opportunity chance to play being replaced with a male dominated one way I am in
charge of you thing. I can't listen to defenses of that, to me, perversion of my
beloved play space. I don't w
ant the experiences I had to be rare, outside the box, ones. I want them to be as
obvious a choice as any.
The discussion began with the idea that maybe we need a better set of terms for the two
positions we dance. This was to acknowledge that some in our community don't want
their dance position defined, even by archaic implication, as something to do with gender.
I am not personally bothered by gent/lady, but if I'm going to call to people who
are, let the alternate terms not imply something about the dance which I do not wish to
convey. Let them not limit, by seeming to prescribe and proscribe who can and should do
what, what we in fact choose to do. Let's try to generate something humorous,
elevating, easy to say and remember, and truly neutral. All we need them for is to say who
is crossing in a chain, and who needs to end the swing where in order for the dance not to
turn into a mixer. We could always resort to diagonals for same role moves, even chains
for that matter.
So. Some people want no change from trad terms. Fine. Know that a certain number of
dancers may object or not return, but it's your dance. Some want new terms. Ok. If
they are awesome, I bet even trad series might adopt them eventually. Arguing whether we
should change them is different from arguing which of the terms we already use to keep
using, and different again from evaluating the merits of new alternatives. It's
become a bit of a mash up.
I don't know whether we should, as a whole community, abandon trad terms for new
ones.
That doesn't keep me from gleefully generating new terms, just in case we hit on that
totally perfect set. (See the FB thread.)
But when I see people arguing for terms which by their use change how it is likely for
people to conceptualize the roles, in a way that curtails the potential for the kind of
beautiful shared dancing I saw and felt tonight, I have to say no. No, that is not a set
of terms which serve us well. No fine tuning of your arguments will convince me that they
will. Please, stop defending the terms lead/follow as if they were something we might
find desirable. Broaden your vision to imagine the grace they impede.
Soulfully,
Andrea
S
10:53 a.m.
New subject: Lead/Follow in a Swing
Thank you. Andrea!
I'd like to repeat the point that the terms lead/follow are implicitly
communicating to (some) male dancers that they are in charge. Not only does
this create pressure, but I think it contributes to a growing trend I'm
noticing at my local dance; fairly new male dancers assume I'll happily
follow their lead and seem dismayed (even insulted) if I choose not to. This
sets up a dynamic of conflict rather than the friendly cooperation I
consider the soul of contra dancing.
Bree Kalb
Carrboro, NC
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Nettleton
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 4:51 AM
To: Caller's discussion list
Subject: Re: [Callers] Lead/Follow in a Swing
Sometimes a dance weekend comes along just in time. So I am at Chattaboogie
in TN, and thought very hard about what was going on between me and all the
people I danced with, and I think I finally understand why, in my mind,
lead/follow are actively bad terms to use in contra, and why when we teach
the idea of flourishes, I really don't want anyone thinking of one role as
lead, and the other as follow.....
4136
days inactive
4137
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
7 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Alan Winston -
Andrea Nettleton -
Bree Kalb -
Donna Hunt -
Jeff Kaufman -
John Sweeney