19 Jul
2010
19 Jul
'10
5:06 p.m.
Thank you Beth for your comments. From your response I gather that
you have not encountered the kind of resistance Jeff referred to when
he mentioned the "grumbling" among some dancers when either a mixer
or a partner-swing-free contra is called?
I would be interested in knowing:
- Do you announce your mixers in advance?
- If so, when? At the end of the current dance? Or before the
walk-through of the current dance?
I would also be interested in the experience of other callers with
mixers and/or partner-swing-free contras. Do dancers embrace these
dance slots, or do you sense any resistance? Do you announce them in advance?
Beth also wrote:
The modern urban contra dance scene is welcoming to
people who would
fit in anyway. That's not necessarily a bad thing. It is the nature
of hobby activities. Since muc dancers go to a dance primarily to
dance "what they want to dance the way they want to dance it" then
anything outside of their hobby mind-set is anathema.
The "modern urban contra dance scene" seems to vary greatly from
venue to venue and from night to night depending--to a great
extent--upon the caller, the band, and the organizers. Framing
contras as a "hobby" activity is certainly a legitimate view, but
there are many other ways to frame the phenomenon. For many people
it is a hobby. But contras are also, by nature, open public social
events where newcomers are encouraged to attend without prior training.
Part of the appeal of contras, for at least some of us, is that they
allow for wide participation and are something more than merely a
gathering of dance enthusiasts. Making dances with live music
accessible to almost everyone is at the heart of what makes contras
somewhat unique in the realm of social dance.
But that might be another thread entirely.
- Greg McKenzie
19 Jul
19 Jul
5:36 p.m.
New subject: Integrating Newcomers (Was "Calling debut")
As a dancer, I much prefer mixers to no-partner-swing dances. I haven't
called either much, but in my experience as a dancer in various communities
I have often seen mixers favorably received. In fact, I've been to a number
of smaller dance weekends where mixers were welcomed as a way to see who was
there, "scout" for partners, add variety to the evening, etc. In those
situations, the idea of "forcing" beginners to integrate wasn't relevant.
I
think mixers at regularly scheduled dances can serve the same purpose.
Maybe in communities with a lot of booking ahead for partners mixers might
cause more of a stir.
Another point:
I (like many people) only dance with any particular partner once during the
course of a normal length dance evening. If a no-partner-swing dance means
I don't get to swing with a good/favorite partner, I feel gypped. However,
I don't count a mixer as a dance with any particular partner so I get the
benefit of lots of interaction with many dancers without feeling like I'm
ignoring or missing out on dancing with my partner.
That being said, I wouldn't totally discount dances without a partner swing.
If the dance were unique or particularly interesting in some way I would
consider it. But if there were a similar dance with a partner swing I would
chose that one instead.
-Bronwyn
5:48 p.m.
New subject: Integrating Newcomers (Was "Calling debut")
At my home dance I usually call a circle mixer as the second dance of
the evening. I often use La Bastringue, and I generally teach it from
the floor and dance it. (Fun for me, and a useful way to connect with
the dancers.) I don't sense any grumbling or resistance. (But then
again I'm an insensitive guy...)
Aside from other plusses, a mixer like La Bastringue gives us a
chance to dance all in one set (especially if one circle is possible)
and feel united in a different way than contras allow for.
Richard
On Jul 19, 2010, at 12:36 PM, Bronwyn Woods wrote:
As a dancer, I much prefer mixers to no-partner-swing
dances. I
haven't
called either much, but in my experience as a dancer in various
communities
I have often seen mixers favorably received. In fact, I've been to
a number
of smaller dance weekends where mixers were welcomed as a way to
see who was
there, "scout" for partners, add variety to the evening, etc. In
those
situations, the idea of "forcing" beginners to integrate wasn't
relevant. I
think mixers at regularly scheduled dances can serve the same purpose.
Maybe in communities with a lot of booking ahead for partners
mixers might
cause more of a stir.
Another point:
I (like many people) only dance with any particular partner once
during the
course of a normal length dance evening. If a no-partner-swing
dance means
I don't get to swing with a good/favorite partner, I feel gypped.
However,
I don't count a mixer as a dance with any particular partner so I
get the
benefit of lots of interaction with many dancers without feeling
like I'm
ignoring or missing out on dancing with my partner.
That being said, I wouldn't totally discount dances without a
partner swing.
If the dance were unique or particularly interesting in some way I
would
consider it. But if there were a similar dance with a partner
swing I would
chose that one instead.
-Bronwyn
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
6:02 p.m.
New subject: Integrating Newcomers (Was "Calling debut")
Bronwyn Woods wrote:
I (like many people) only dance with any particular partner once
during the course of a normal length dance evening. If a
no-partner-swing dance means I don't get to swing with a
good/favorite partner, I feel gypped. However, I don't count a
mixer as a dance with any particular partner so I get the benefit of
lots of interaction with many dancers without feeling like I'm
ignoring or missing out on dancing with my partner.
That makes a lot of sense. When a caller says "find a partner for a
mixer" everyone knows it doesn't really matter who they end up with
because they're not going to stay with them. If you already have a
partner and you find out there's no swing, it's sad in the same way as
if you find out its a mixer.
For people who book ahead (which I don't anymore), a mixer, square, or
couple dance is generally seen as "not counting". So if you've booked
the dance after next with someone and that turns out to be a mixer,
you really booked the dance after. Partnerswingless dances confuse
this, as they do 'count'.
That being said, I wouldn't totally discount dances without a
partner swing. If the dance were unique or particularly interesting
in some way I would consider it. But if there were a similar dance
with a partner swing I would chose that one instead.
During international money musk month we danced the money musk at
bida. Adina was calling and said something that included both that
the next dance would be money musk and that it had no swings. People
had fun with it, though some of that may have been respect for the
dance.
Jeff
9:44 p.m.
New subject: Integrating Newcomers (Was "Calling debut")
I've been dancing for years and enjoy circle mixers as part of an evening.
It gives me a chance to at least dance a bit with lots of people, and if it
has a swing in it I find out who is a good swinger and who digs their
fingers into my back - and then I know who to ask for the next dance!
I also like the "community" feel to circle mixers - it gets people out of
their own little cliques and gives you a chance to look at the whole and
feel like a part of the whole, which I feel is very important to building
community.
Nancy
-----Original Message-----
From: callers-bounces(a)sharedweight.net
[mailto:callers-bounces@sharedweight.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Kaufman
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 1:03 PM
To: Caller's discussion list
Subject: Re: [Callers] Integrating Newcomers (Was "Calling debut")
Bronwyn Woods wrote:
I (like many people) only dance with any particular partner once
during the course of a normal length dance evening. If a
no-partner-swing dance means I don't get to swing with a
good/favorite partner, I feel gypped. However, I don't count a
mixer as a dance with any particular partner so I get the benefit of
lots of interaction with many dancers without feeling like I'm
ignoring or missing out on dancing with my partner.
That makes a lot of sense. When a caller says "find a partner for a
mixer" everyone knows it doesn't really matter who they end up with
because they're not going to stay with them. If you already have a
partner and you find out there's no swing, it's sad in the same way as
if you find out its a mixer.
For people who book ahead (which I don't anymore), a mixer, square, or
couple dance is generally seen as "not counting". So if you've booked
the dance after next with someone and that turns out to be a mixer,
you really booked the dance after. Partnerswingless dances confuse
this, as they do 'count'.
That being said, I wouldn't totally discount dances without a
partner swing. If the dance were unique or particularly interesting
in some way I would consider it. But if there were a similar dance
with a partner swing I would chose that one instead.
During international money musk month we danced the money musk at
bida. Adina was calling and said something that included both that
the next dance would be money musk and that it had no swings. People
had fun with it, though some of that may have been respect for the
dance.
Jeff
7:03 p.m.
New subject: Integrating Newcomers (Was "Calling debut")
I (like many people) only dance with any particular partner once during the
course of a normal length dance evening. If a no-partner-swing dance means
I don't get to swing with a good/favorite partner, I feel gypped. However,
I don't count a mixer as a dance with any particular partner so I get the
benefit of lots of interaction with many dancers without feeling like I'm
ignoring or missing out on dancing with my partner.
It has been pointed out to my that the word 'gypped' is offensive to some
due to its origins as a racial slur. I wasn't aware/thinking of this when I
used it and certainly didn't mean to cause offense if I did. I revise the
statement to say that "I feel cheated".
5239
days inactive
5239
days old
contracallers@lists.sharedweight.net
5 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Bronwyn Woods -
Greg McKenzie -
Jeff Kaufman -
Richard Allen Fischer -
Rickey