25 Oct
2012
25 Oct
'12
4:34 p.m.
This might be a little stretch, but due to a conversation with a colleague
about "what makes a good program", i've given a bit of thought lately to
the question of integrating newcomers vis-a-vis the (common?) programming
model that suggests a caller should focus more on neighbor interaction
early on, with partner-heavy dances later in the evening. In the
theoretical stages right now, but here goes...
Some dance organizations/communities (applause!!) have been quite
successful in creating a culture where experienced dancers identify
themselves in some way and/or actively seek out newbies with whom to
partner, at least early in the evening. In such a situation, it strikes me
that choosing choreography which emphasizes neighbor interaction may
undercut these dancers' efforts; when experienced dancers have successfully
partnered with newbies, using the choreography to help them teach by
emphasizing partner interaction - in swings, california twirl, promenade
across, R&L through, hey, et cetera - might be a way for the caller to
amplify the efforts of a proactively integrative dance culture. (Perhaps
arcing from partner emphasis at the start, to neighbor emphasis as newbies
become more integrated, and back to partner towards the end?) As was said,
announcing a mixer well in advance would also ensure that proactive dancers
aren't being undercut by caller choices.
On the flip side, dance communities/cultures that tend to be cliquey are
often also less open to mixers. In this situation i would think emphasizing
neighbor interaction to be very important, and if a mixer was viable (eg
not too much a threat to the caller's social capital), i would tend to
"spring" it on the dancers so as to confound cliquey dancers' partnering
practices.
The bottom line emerging for me is that programming choices should work in
concert with what's happening on the floor - amplifying the efforts of
proactive dancers, confounding cliquishness when possible - and to some
extent rely on substantial knowledge or observation of the dancers'
partnering behaviors - but these are just half-formed thoughts...
25 Oct
25 Oct
9:07 p.m.
New subject: Integrating Newcomers ( was "Circle Mixers for newbies")
Tavi wrote:
This might be a little stretch, but due to a
conversation with a colleague
about "what makes a good program", i've given a bit of thought lately to
the question of integrating newcomers vis-a-vis the (common?) programming
model that suggests a caller should focus more on neighbor interaction
early on, with partner-heavy dances later in the evening. In the
theoretical stages right now, but here goes...
Yes. It is a "little stretch," but one that we need very much. Your post
is quite brilliant! This represents exactly the kind of deep and strategic
thinking we need from callers to keep contra dances a living tradition for
our children. Good work!
More neighbor interaction early is an excellent tactic. By the same token
less partner interaction would have a similar effect. Both tend to lower
what I call "partnering pressure" which is that feeling that you need to
focus on finding the "right" partner, or any partner quickly, so as to
insure you and your partner will have fun in the next dance. There may be
a good reason that more neighbor interaction early is a "common"
programming model that has emerged. Lowering partnering pressure fosters a
more generous and welcoming spirit by keeping the focus on the entire
community.
I would caution, however, that there is no need to "confound" the efforts
of any dancer. When first-timers are well-integrated into the hall the
walk-throughs are shorter or non-existent, there is more time both to
socialize and to dance, and everyone has more fun. As soon as they get a
sense of what you are doing--and see that you can, in fact, do it well
during the first dance--all of the dancers will be with you. You can
assume their full support and there is no need to set up an adversarial
relationship by "springing" anything on them.
This is why I never use "tricks", "ploys," or "gimmicks" to
manipulate the
dancers. I want to maintain a mutually-respectful and supportive
relationship with the dancers. Making the evening "work" at a contra dance
is a collaborative effort of the caller working with the regular dancers.
I see "cliquishness" as the actions of good people who are working to have
fun for themselves as well as for their partner when the situation on the
floor is not being handled well by a responsible caller. (It's always the
caller's fault.)
By changing the environment in subtle ways the caller can have a
significant influence over how the dancers behave. I would love to hear
any other ideas you have about encouraging the integration of newcomers at
open, public dances.
- Greg McKenzie
********************
Some dance organizations/communities (applause!!) have
been quite
successful in creating a culture where experienced dancers identify
themselves in some way and/or actively seek out newbies with whom to
partner, at least early in the evening. In such a situation, it strikes me
that choosing choreography which emphasizes neighbor interaction may
undercut these dancers' efforts; when experienced dancers have successfully
partnered with newbies, using the choreography to help them teach by
emphasizing partner interaction - in swings, california twirl, promenade
across, R&L through, hey, et cetera - might be a way for the caller to
amplify the efforts of a proactively integrative dance culture. (Perhaps
arcing from partner emphasis at the start, to neighbor emphasis as newbies
become more integrated, and back to partner towards the end?) As was said,
announcing a mixer well in advance would also ensure that proactive dancers
aren't being undercut by caller choices.
On the flip side, dance communities/cultures that tend to be cliquey are
often also less open to mixers. In this situation i would think emphasizing
neighbor interaction to be very important, and if a mixer was viable (eg
not too much a threat to the caller's social capital), i would tend to
"spring" it on the dancers so as to confound cliquey dancers' partnering
practices.
The bottom line emerging for me is that programming choices should work in
concert with what's happening on the floor - amplifying the efforts of
proactive dancers, confounding cliquishness when possible - and to some
extent rely on substantial knowledge or observation of the dancers'
partnering behaviors - but these are just half-formed thoughts...
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
4207
days inactive
4208
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Greg McKenzie -
tavi merrill