Import1 June 2015

import1@lists2.sharedweight.net

1 participants
123 discussions

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Perry Shafran via Callers

It's the person in that position at the start of the dance, and that designation stays with you throughout the dance. If you switch throughout the dance, then your corner designation may change. It also has meaning in dance terms, where larks/ravens etc are just made up names. As a matter of fact I'm more likely to remember my corner designation than whether I am a lark or a raven. Perry From: Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> To: Perry Shafran <pshaf(a)yahoo.com> Cc: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>; Andrea Nettleton <twirly-girl(a)bellsouth.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2015 8:45 AM Subject: Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling If you want to redefine "corner" as a person, not a position...On Jun 2, 2015 10:41 AM, "Perry Shafran via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: After thinking about this I think I am starting to agree with Andrea in that corners (first & second) just might be the perfect term to use. In ECD, where most dances are proper, the first corner is gent 1 and lady 2, because in proper dances there are different genders on the diagonal. In an improper dance (most contra dances), there are same genders on the diagonal. So therefore the ladies would be in the first corner positions (same positions as in a proper English dance), and the gents are the second corners. In a swing, first corners end up on the right. I think by thinking about it this way you could do any dance, easy to challenging, with the corner terminology in place. Just substitute any incidence of "gents" in your choreography with "second corner" and "ladies" with "first corner". Perry From: Andrea Nettleton via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> To: Michael Fuerst <mjerryfuerst(a)yahoo.com> Cc: "callers(a)sharedweight.net" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2015 2:31 AM Subject: Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling Hey Michael,I think you mean that those who began the dance as first corners, will always end swings on the right, just as they are standing relative to their partner in the hands four. The dance is obscure to the dancers only to the degree the caller is unable to elucidate it. It may take effort for callers to learn to teach as effectively this way, but that doesn't make it less clear. When I called to the SFQCD, ninety percent of the dancers were men. Even with bands and bare arms, so as clear an indication of role as they could achieve, they struggled with who ends where after stuff. What if I could have given them the tool of knowing their corners, and in addition, the clear instruction to note carefully which hand they held when standing next to their partner? That would always be their connector hand when standing as a couple after swings, chains, and R&L thrus. The twofold active attention might have served them far better than the arbitrary labels. Understanding that the pattern of the dance depends on knowing your geography makes sense. Adding into that the need to remember a label doesn't improve the odds the geography will stick, at least it didn't there. In my opinion, looking for a person is less reliable than knowing your place in the dance. People mess up, but the place is always there. AN Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask On Jun 2, 2015, at 4:05 AM, Michael Fuerst via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: Consider this dance E.J.M.J.F. in Cincinnati Duple Improper Michael Fuerst March, 1991 A1 Balance and swing neighbor. A2 Men allemande left 1 1/2 and swing partner. B1 Long lines forward and back. Women chain to neighbor. B2 Women allemande right (4). 1/2 hey, neighbors start passing left shoulder, until neighbors on the side they started the dance (8). Neighbors pass left shoulders and turn sharply left along set to meet new neighbors (4).Using this thread's suggestions, I think this becomes (as long as dancers understand that those starting as second corners always end the swing on the right)E.J.M.J.F. in Cincinnati Duple Improper Michael Fuerst March, 1991 A1 Balance and swing neighbor. A2 First corners allemande left 1 1/2 and swing partner. B1 Long lines forward and back. Second corners chain to neighbor. B2 Second corners allemande right (4). 1/2 hey, neighbors start passing left shoulder, until neighbors on the side they started the dance (8). Neighbors pass left shoulders and turn sharply left along set to meet new neighbors (4)This makes the dance obscure to beginning and intermediate dancers. Seems best to have names corresponding to the men's and women's roles, rather than to have dancer's determine which corners they are at any point in the dance. Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217 239 5844 On Tuesday, June 2, 2015 2:26 AM, Andrea Nettleton via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: Actually Alan, because we dance improper most frequently, and becket almost as much, I think I really don't want the labels applied to people so they stick. I'm just using the word corner the way Brooke and Chris use diagonal. In contra, we already have a use for the word diagonal, meaning the next pair along across the set to the right or left. The corner reference we have is actually close to right, probably having grown out of triple minor dances. Right diagonal is first corner, Left diagonal is second. Make it fit in a hands four and you have pairs of corners along opposite angles. It's a place not a person. Then I can write a dance beginning with a second corner chain, and it will be those formerly identified as gents, but will work totally fine. If the dance were proper, you could still have a second diagonals chain and it would be one of each 'role'. A direct transfer of the system to contra is not as useful as adapting, IMHO.Andrea Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask On Jun 2, 2015, at 3:07 AM, Winston, Alan P. <winston(a)slac.stanford.edu> wrote: I'm not Andrea but as someone who's appreciated the value of global calling since Chris and Brooke proselytized our West Coast English caller self improvement group about it in 2000 and who regularly uses it even in not gender free English as well as for gender free English I think I can answer. The Heather and Rose style (which they didn't invent but have published the most in) is designed for proper longways. Men's line is left file, ladies line is right file. In a square or Becket formation gents place are first diagonals, ladies are second diagonals. Corner is reserved for contra corners and the immediate neighbor in a square. However, mainstream English gives us first corners (in a proper set, first gent and second lady) and second corners (first lady and second gent). If you apply that to a typical improper contra, as Andrea was suggesting, the ladies are on the first corners, the gents on the second corners. The answer to each of your questions about how she'd indicate what we now do with gender is to substitute a corner reference. First corners make a wave in the middle of the set. They back up and second corners come in. You'd have to decide whether the same positional reference applies to becket, where it would be the gents, or have the corner assignments apply before you becketize, which would be my preference. Does that clear it up ? Alan Sent from my iPad On Jun 1, 2015, at 9:12 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: Andrea, how would you handle the following:1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to Lambertville, et all?2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star?3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, Jurassic Redheads, etc.4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey.5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate?6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways?None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated.Ron On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now.Cheers,Andrea Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to call gender free. If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, arcadian35(a)gmail.com. Thanks,Jim Hemphill _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Ron Blechner via Callers

It also ups the syllables from one:two to three:four. On Jun 2, 2015 10:45 AM, "Ron Blechner" <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote: > If you want to redefine "corner" as a person, not a position... > On Jun 2, 2015 10:41 AM, "Perry Shafran via Callers" < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> After thinking about this I think I am starting to agree with Andrea in >> that corners (first & second) just might be the perfect term to use. In >> ECD, where most dances are proper, the first corner is gent 1 and lady 2, >> because in proper dances there are different genders on the diagonal. In >> an improper dance (most contra dances), there are same genders on the >> diagonal. So therefore the ladies would be in the first corner positions >> (same positions as in a proper English dance), and the gents are the second >> corners. In a swing, first corners end up on the right. I think by >> thinking about it this way you could do any dance, easy to challenging, >> with the corner terminology in place. Just substitute any incidence of >> "gents" in your choreography with "second corner" and "ladies" with "first >> corner". >> >> Perry >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Andrea Nettleton via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> >> *To:* Michael Fuerst <mjerryfuerst(a)yahoo.com> >> *Cc:* "callers(a)sharedweight.net" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> >> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 2, 2015 2:31 AM >> *Subject:* Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling >> >> Hey Michael, >> I think you mean that those who began the dance as first corners, will >> always end swings on the right, just as they are standing relative to their >> partner in the hands four. >> >> The dance is obscure to the dancers only to the degree the caller is >> unable to elucidate it. It may take effort for callers to learn to teach >> as effectively this way, but that doesn't make it less clear. When I >> called to the SFQCD, ninety percent of the dancers were men. Even with >> bands and bare arms, so as clear an indication of role as they could >> achieve, they struggled with who ends where after stuff. What if I could >> have given them the tool of knowing their corners, and in addition, the >> clear instruction to note carefully which hand they held when standing next >> to their partner? That would always be their connector hand when standing >> as a couple after swings, chains, and R&L thrus. The twofold active >> attention might have served them far better than the arbitrary labels. >> Understanding that the pattern of the dance depends on knowing your >> geography makes sense. Adding into that the need to remember a label >> doesn't improve the odds the geography will stick, at least it didn't >> there. In my opinion, looking for a person is less reliable than knowing >> your place in the dance. People mess up, but the place is always there. >> >> AN >> >> >> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >> >> >> >> On Jun 2, 2015, at 4:05 AM, Michael Fuerst via Callers < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> Consider this dance >> >> E.J.M.J.F. in Cincinnati Duple Improper Michael Fuerst March, 1991 >> >> A1 Balance and swing neighbor. >> >> A2 Men allemande left 1 1/2 and swing partner. >> >> B1 Long lines forward and back. Women chain to neighbor. >> >> B2 Women allemande right (4). >> 1/2 hey, neighbors start passing left shoulder, until >> neighbors on the side they started the dance (8). >> Neighbors pass left shoulders and turn sharply left along set to meet new >> neighbors (4). >> >> Using this thread's suggestions, I think this becomes (as long as dancers understand that those starting as *second corners* always end the swing on the right) >> >> E.J.M.J.F. in Cincinnati Duple Improper Michael Fuerst March, 1991 >> >> A1 Balance and swing neighbor. >> >> A2 *First corners* allemande left 1 1/2 and swing partner. >> >> B1 Long lines forward and back. *Second corners* chain to neighbor. >> >> B2 *Second corners* allemande right (4). >> 1/2 hey, neighbors start passing left shoulder, until >> neighbors on the side they started the dance (8). >> Neighbors pass left shoulders and turn sharply left along set to meet new >> neighbors (4) >> >> This makes the dance obscure to beginning and intermediate dancers. Seems best to have names corresponding to the men's and women's roles, rather than to have dancer's determine which corners they are at any point in the dance. >> >> >> Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217 239 5844 >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, June 2, 2015 2:26 AM, Andrea Nettleton via Callers < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >> Actually Alan, because we dance improper most frequently, and becket >> almost as much, I think I really don't want the labels applied to people so >> they stick. I'm just using the word corner the way Brooke and Chris use >> diagonal. In contra, we already have a use for the word diagonal, meaning >> the next pair along across the set to the right or left. The corner >> reference we have is actually close to right, probably having grown out of >> triple minor dances. Right diagonal is first corner, Left diagonal is >> second. Make it fit in a hands four and you have pairs of corners along >> opposite angles. It's a place not a person. Then I can write a dance >> beginning with a second corner chain, and it will be those formerly >> identified as gents, but will work totally fine. If the dance were proper, >> you could still have a second diagonals chain and it would be one of each >> 'role'. A direct transfer of the system to contra is not as useful as >> adapting, IMHO. >> Andrea >> >> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >> >> On Jun 2, 2015, at 3:07 AM, Winston, Alan P. <winston(a)slac.stanford.edu> >> wrote: >> >> I'm not Andrea but as someone who's appreciated the value of global >> calling since Chris and Brooke proselytized our West Coast English caller >> self improvement group about it in 2000 and who regularly uses it even in >> not gender free English as well as for gender free English I think I can >> answer. >> >> The Heather and Rose style (which they didn't invent but have published >> the most in) is designed for proper longways. Men's line is left file, >> ladies line is right file. In a square or Becket formation gents place >> are first diagonals, ladies are second diagonals. Corner is reserved for >> contra corners and the immediate neighbor in a square. >> >> However, mainstream English gives us first corners (in a proper set, >> first gent and second lady) and second corners (first lady and second >> gent). If you apply that to a typical improper contra, as Andrea was >> suggesting, the ladies are on the first corners, the gents on the second >> corners. >> >> The answer to each of your questions about how she'd indicate what we >> now do with gender is to substitute a corner reference. First corners make >> a wave in the middle of the set. They back up and second corners come in. >> >> >> You'd have to decide whether the same positional reference applies to >> becket, where it would be the gents, or have the corner assignments apply >> before you becketize, which would be my preference. >> >> Does that clear it up ? >> >> Alan >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On Jun 1, 2015, at 9:12 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to >> Lambertville, et all? >> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, >> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? >> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >> Ron >> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of >> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, >> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most >> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of >> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same >> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to >> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in >> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to >> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But >> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems >> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are >> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. >> Cheers, >> Andrea >> >> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >> >> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers < >> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment >> in gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis >> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a >> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings >> dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several >> dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or >> unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that >> there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 >> than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were >> gender free. >> >> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but >> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to >> call gender free. >> >> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of >> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >> >> Thanks, >> Jim Hemphill >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >>

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Bob Stein via Callers

This discussion of ECD just made me realize that the one move that is usually specifically gender related -- Ladies Chain -- is actually 2nd corners chain. If the idea of first and second corners is introduced to contra dancers than there would be no problem with most of the moves: chains, allemandes, heys. It all becomes position oriented. Bob

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Andrea Nettleton via Callers

In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. Cheers, Andrea Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were more dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. No one I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. > > It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to call gender free. > > If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, arcadian35(a)gmail.com. > > Thanks, > Jim Hemphill > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Kalia Kliban via Callers

Jim, as I look at your set of dances the first question that occurs to me is how you dealt with the improper formation without reference to gender/dance-role. Kalia On 6/1/2015 8:14 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers wrote: > A friend told me about Brooke Friendly's style of calling ECD and that > was part of the inspiration for this contra program. > Jim > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Roger Hayes <roger.hayes(a)gmail.com > <mailto:roger.hayes@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Check out Brooke Friendly and Chris Sackett's English Country dances > - they use "geographic" terms, and structure the dances without > gender roles. It's different, but the dance does keep changing, it's > a live art. > > http://www.brookefriendlydance.com/ > > Aside from Mr. Hemphill's effort recently here described, I know of > no comparable endeavor in contra dance choreography - I suppose > we're more traditional than ECD. Does anyone have info to share? > > Roger Hayes > > Jim - I don't think I am alone in wondering how you managed this > without telling the dancers. I take that to mean you didn't make it > gender free by the terminology you used (jets or whatever) but by > the kinds of dances you chose. I'd love to read more details about > what this entailed. > > Please share more! > > Amy > 206 330 7408 <tel:206%20330%207408> > Amy(a)calleramy.com <mailto:Amy@calleramy.com> > > On Jun 1, 2015, at 5:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote: > >> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an >> experiment in gender free calling. Last night I called the >> contra dance in St. Louis using gender free calling without >> telling anyone. The experiment was a great success. I received >> lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. At the break >> and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some >> were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or >> unusual about the dances or how I taught them. One person >> noticed that there were more dances that included a swing in the >> center for couple 2 than usual. No one I talked to noticed that >> the calls and teaching were gender free. >> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour >> program, but it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is >> not the only way to call gender free. >> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger >> collection of gender free dances I chose the program from, send me >> an email, arcadian35(a)gmail.com <mailto:arcadian35@gmail.com>. >> Thanks, >> Jim Hemphill >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net> >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net> > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Andrea Nettleton via Callers

I can think of two ways to tell which corner is which at any given time during a teach. When facing Across IN ANY GIVEN HANDS FOUR, if you have a R diagonal person you are at first corner, L diagonal- second corner. Likewise WITHIN a hands four, facing up and down (like at the beginning of a dance facing N for example)those whose inside hand is the L are at first corner, those whose inside hand is R, are at second corner. They need to think not that they are identifying themselves, but remembering the diagonals we call first and second, because as soon as they swing to swap, they are on a different diagonal/ at a different corner. Swinging. Who puts their R hand on the back, who the L? Or do you teach symmetrical swings? The latter is a matter for organizers, but if you are going to teach ballroom hold, I'd get them becket, and tell them to face across. The hand they are holding is the one they put behind their partner's back, and the one they come back to holding after the swing. Ending the swing. I think at the beginning of the evening, and maybe with refreshers through the night, you should get them becket, and have them swing their P, and end where they began. Call this relative position swung position. Whichever hand you are giving to your partner, always give that hand to those you swing. If switching roles each dance, be careful to remember which hand you will give after the swing. First and second corner could be any pairs within the hands four. If you start proper you have one set, swap the ones you have another set, then swing your N and have yet another. They can be sane role or opposite, but these positions, note again, positions not people, are constant and neutral. In ECD we use ones and twos much more frequently than current contra typically does and ECD also makes extensive use of corners. It's something to learn, but not especially confusing. If you wanted you could call them alpha and beta corners, but you'd lose the connection to contra corners. I kinda think I might start the night with a contra corners triplet. Really trains you to look right for a first corner, left for a second corner when facing across. When teaching a bunch of new dancers, you could first teach ones and twos and have them swing and DSD in turn. Then teach corners and have them allemande and DSD in turn. Then tell the number one first corner to raise a hand. Number two second corner to clap, etc, so they get used to having two roles. Have them swing the neighbor and do it all again. There might be even more expedient ways. I would love to hear from those who have danced Morris or other single gender sets in hands four whether they use numbered corners or some other designation. Best, Andrea N. Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > On Jun 1, 2015, at 11:03 PM, Amy Carroll via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > > I'm feeling really thick in the head in reading these discussion thread. How do you explain to the dancers who is a first corner and who is second corner. > > How do you explain swinging and who should end in which spot? > > > > Isn't 1st corner and 2nd corner the way you are using them just another substitute for gents/ladies; jets/rubies; etc etc etc? > > > > Wouldn't new dancers be confused about being a #1 or #2 couple but also a 1st or 2nd corner at the same time? > > This seems super confusing to newer dancers, but I haven't seen the program you called. > > > > I'd love to know more. It's very intriguing. > > > > Amy Carroll > > > >> On June 1, 2015 at 7:27 PM Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >> Jim, >> >> I think this approach is great for adding more dances with choice. ... >> but at some point, people want advanced dances and/or medleys, and >> limiting the move-set I don't find an acceptable compromise. >> >> -Ron >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Jim Hemphill <arcadian35(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > Proper Dance, gender free yet not too simple >> > A1 Neighbor allemande left 1 1/2 >> > 1st corners allemande right 1 1/2 >> > A2 Scoop your partner as you go by, star promenade then butterfly >> > 2nd corners swing in the center, then separate >> > B1 Partner balance and swing >> > B2 Take hands in a ring, balance and petranella >> > Couple 2 swing in the center, end facing up >> > >> > Dances can have variety and challenges without gender reference. In this >> > dance, as long as you make clear in the teaching that after the neighbor >> > allemande left 1 1/2 if you are facing in, you are a 1st corner so you >> > allemande right, if facing out you are a 2nd corner, get ready to be scooped >> > you can end the swings any way you want. >> > >> > Ron, you are certainly right that not all dances can be easily taught in >> > this manner, but in no way are all of these type of dances simple. I >> > struggled with translating a "choose your noun" for ladies or gents because >> > that is how I learned and think about the dance roles. The translation >> > process adds a layer of complexity for me. I am just offering a different >> > approach that works for me. >> > >> > Thanks >> > Jim >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers >> > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> RE: Dave: >> >> >> >> Clockwise / counterclockwise - too wordy, and some people have trouble >> >> with this regardless. >> >> >> >> Hey: What about on the left diagonal? Along the set? >> >> >> >> I also really don't like the blaming of the dance if it's not 100% >> >> intuitive. Plenty of dances flow great but have a counter-intuitive >> >> element. Restricting dances to those without counter-intuitive moves >> >> is basically saying, "Sorry, if we want to be genderfree, we need to >> >> put a cap on how difficult a dance is. Sorry genderfree dancers, you >> >> aren't allowed to dance too advanced." That's a big problem. >> >> >> >> Rollaways can *not* be handled from left to right - who does the >> >> rolling is not indicated at all! >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly >> >> <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and >> >> > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and >> >> > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with >> >> > Bob >> >> > that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass >> >> > left >> >> > shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted one >> >> > way, >> >> > so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be >> >> > handled >> >> > with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right >> >> > to >> >> > the left." >> >> > >> >> > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to >> >> > call a >> >> > dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first >> >> > or >> >> > second corners. >> >> > >> >> > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. >> >> > Here's >> >> > one (just picking a common, typical dance): >> >> > >> >> > Square Affair, by Becky Hill >> >> > >> >> > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing >> >> > with >> >> > experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) >> >> > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by >> >> > partner, pull by neighbor >> >> > B1 New neighbors balance and swing >> >> > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing >> >> > >> >> > Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global >> >> > terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper >> >> > dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For >> >> > Chorus >> >> > Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or >> >> > "lady"? >> >> > Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor >> >> > around-the-waist >> >> > turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. Nothing that any >> >> > particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time. >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers >> >> > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> With regard to Ron's questions >> >> >> >> >> >> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave >> >> >> >> >> >> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners >> >> >> >> >> >> 3. Not so familiar with these. >> >> >> >> >> >> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I >> >> >> think >> >> >> >> >> >> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is >> >> >> how >> >> >> I call it anyway >> >> >> >> >> >> Bob >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers >> >> >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip >> >> >>> to >> >> >>> Lambertville, et all? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal >> >> >>> Pushers, >> >> >>> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >> >> >>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? >> >> >>> Rollaways? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Ron >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" >> >> >>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >> >> >>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use >> >> >>>> of >> >> >>>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if >> >> >>>> used, >> >> >>>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only >> >> >>>> the most >> >> >>>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition >> >> >>>> of >> >> >>>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible >> >> >>>> for same >> >> >>>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without >> >> >>>> reference to >> >> >>>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >> >> >>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those >> >> >>>> standing in >> >> >>>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second >> >> >>>> corners to >> >> >>>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. >> >> >>>> But >> >> >>>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this >> >> >>>> seems >> >> >>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some >> >> >>>> folks are >> >> >>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before >> >> >>>> now. >> >> >>>> Cheers, >> >> >>>> Andrea >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers >> >> >>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment >> >> >>>> in >> >> >>>> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. >> >> >>>> Louis >> >> >>>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment >> >> >>>> was a >> >> >>>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings >> >> >>>> dance. >> >> >>>> At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several >> >> >>>> dancers, some >> >> >>>> were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual >> >> >>>> about >> >> >>>> the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were >> >> >>>> more >> >> >>>> dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. >> >> >>>> No one >> >> >>>> I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, >> >> >>>> but >> >> >>>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only >> >> >>>> way to >> >> >>>> call gender free. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection >> >> >>>> of >> >> >>>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >> >> >>>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Thanks, >> >> >>>> Jim Hemphill >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >> >>>> Callers mailing list >> >> >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >> >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >> >>>> Callers mailing list >> >> >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >> >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >>>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >> >>> Callers mailing list >> >> >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >> >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> Callers mailing list >> >> >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >> >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > David Casserly >> >> > (cell) 781 258-2761 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Callers mailing list >> >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > 206-330-7308 > calleramy.com > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Michael Fuerst via Callers

How can one simply, consistently and clearly designate two persons to participate in an allemande ? Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217 239 5844 On Monday, June 1, 2015 5:41 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: RE: Dave: Clockwise / counterclockwise - too wordy, and some people have trouble with this regardless. Hey: What about on the left diagonal? Along the set? I also really don't like the blaming of the dance if it's not 100% intuitive. Plenty of dances flow great but have a counter-intuitive element. Restricting dances to those without counter-intuitive moves is basically saying, "Sorry, if we want to be genderfree, we need to put a cap on how difficult a dance is. Sorry genderfree dancers, you aren't allowed to dance too advanced." That's a big problem. Rollaways can *not* be handled from left to right - who does the rolling is not indicated at all! On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with Bob > that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass left > shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted one way, > so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be handled > with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right to > the left." > > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to call a > dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first or > second corners. > > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. Here's > one (just picking a common, typical dance): > > Square Affair, by Becky Hill > > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing with > experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by > partner, pull by neighbor > B1 New neighbors balance and swing > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing > > Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global > terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper > dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For Chorus > Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or "lady"? > Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor around-the-waist > turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. Nothing that any > particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time. > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> With regard to Ron's questions >> >> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave >> >> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners >> >> 3. Not so familiar with these. >> >> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I >> think >> >> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is how >> I call it anyway >> >> Bob >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>> >>> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >>> >>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip to >>> Lambertville, et all? >>> >>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >>> >>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, >>> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >>> >>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >>> >>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >>> >>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? >>> >>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >>> >>> Ron >>> >>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" >>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use of >>>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if used, >>>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only the most >>>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition of >>>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible for same >>>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without reference to >>>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those standing in >>>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second corners to >>>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. But >>>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this seems >>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some folks are >>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before now. >>>> Cheers, >>>> Andrea >>>> >>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >>>> >>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers >>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >>>> >>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment in >>>> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. Louis >>>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment was a >>>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings dance. >>>> At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several dancers, some >>>> were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual about >>>> the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were more >>>> dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. No one >>>> I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. >>>> >>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, but >>>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only way to >>>> call gender free. >>>> >>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection of >>>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >>>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Jim Hemphill >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Callers mailing list >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Callers mailing list >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> > > > > -- > David Casserly > (cell) 781 258-2761 _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Amy Carroll via Callers

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Ron Blechner via Callers

Jim, I think this approach is great for adding more dances with choice. ... but at some point, people want advanced dances and/or medleys, and limiting the move-set I don't find an acceptable compromise. -Ron On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Jim Hemphill <arcadian35(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Proper Dance, gender free yet not too simple > A1 Neighbor allemande left 1 1/2 > 1st corners allemande right 1 1/2 > A2 Scoop your partner as you go by, star promenade then butterfly > 2nd corners swing in the center, then separate > B1 Partner balance and swing > B2 Take hands in a ring, balance and petranella > Couple 2 swing in the center, end facing up > > Dances can have variety and challenges without gender reference. In this > dance, as long as you make clear in the teaching that after the neighbor > allemande left 1 1/2 if you are facing in, you are a 1st corner so you > allemande right, if facing out you are a 2nd corner, get ready to be scooped > you can end the swings any way you want. > > Ron, you are certainly right that not all dances can be easily taught in > this manner, but in no way are all of these type of dances simple. I > struggled with translating a "choose your noun" for ladies or gents because > that is how I learned and think about the dance roles. The translation > process adds a layer of complexity for me. I am just offering a different > approach that works for me. > > Thanks > Jim > > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> RE: Dave: >> >> Clockwise / counterclockwise - too wordy, and some people have trouble >> with this regardless. >> >> Hey: What about on the left diagonal? Along the set? >> >> I also really don't like the blaming of the dance if it's not 100% >> intuitive. Plenty of dances flow great but have a counter-intuitive >> element. Restricting dances to those without counter-intuitive moves >> is basically saying, "Sorry, if we want to be genderfree, we need to >> put a cap on how difficult a dance is. Sorry genderfree dancers, you >> aren't allowed to dance too advanced." That's a big problem. >> >> Rollaways can *not* be handled from left to right - who does the >> rolling is not indicated at all! >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly >> <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and >> > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and >> > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with >> > Bob >> > that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass >> > left >> > shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted one >> > way, >> > so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be >> > handled >> > with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right >> > to >> > the left." >> > >> > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to >> > call a >> > dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first >> > or >> > second corners. >> > >> > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. >> > Here's >> > one (just picking a common, typical dance): >> > >> > Square Affair, by Becky Hill >> > >> > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing >> > with >> > experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) >> > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by >> > partner, pull by neighbor >> > B1 New neighbors balance and swing >> > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing >> > >> > Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global >> > terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper >> > dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For >> > Chorus >> > Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or >> > "lady"? >> > Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor >> > around-the-waist >> > turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. Nothing that any >> > particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time. >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers >> > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> With regard to Ron's questions >> >> >> >> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave >> >> >> >> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners >> >> >> >> 3. Not so familiar with these. >> >> >> >> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I >> >> think >> >> >> >> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is >> >> how >> >> I call it anyway >> >> >> >> Bob >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers >> >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Andrea, how would you handle the following: >> >>> >> >>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip >> >>> to >> >>> Lambertville, et all? >> >>> >> >>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? >> >>> >> >>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal >> >>> Pushers, >> >>> Jurassic Redheads, etc. >> >>> >> >>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. >> >>> >> >>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? >> >>> >> >>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't >> >>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? >> >>> Rollaways? >> >>> >> >>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. >> >>> >> >>> Ron >> >>> >> >>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" >> >>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at >> >>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use >> >>>> of >> >>>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if >> >>>> used, >> >>>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only >> >>>> the most >> >>>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition >> >>>> of >> >>>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible >> >>>> for same >> >>>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without >> >>>> reference to >> >>>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for >> >>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those >> >>>> standing in >> >>>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second >> >>>> corners to >> >>>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. >> >>>> But >> >>>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this >> >>>> seems >> >>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some >> >>>> folks are >> >>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before >> >>>> now. >> >>>> Cheers, >> >>>> Andrea >> >>>> >> >>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask >> >>>> >> >>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers >> >>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment >> >>>> in >> >>>> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. >> >>>> Louis >> >>>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment >> >>>> was a >> >>>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings >> >>>> dance. >> >>>> At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several >> >>>> dancers, some >> >>>> were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual >> >>>> about >> >>>> the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were >> >>>> more >> >>>> dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. >> >>>> No one >> >>>> I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. >> >>>> >> >>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, >> >>>> but >> >>>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only >> >>>> way to >> >>>> call gender free. >> >>>> >> >>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection >> >>>> of >> >>>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, >> >>>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. >> >>>> >> >>>> Thanks, >> >>>> Jim Hemphill >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Callers mailing list >> >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Callers mailing list >> >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Callers mailing list >> >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Callers mailing list >> >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > David Casserly >> > (cell) 781 258-2761 >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

9 years, 6 months

Re: [Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

by Jim Hemphill via Callers

Proper Dance, gender free yet not too simple A1 Neighbor allemande left 1 1/2 1st corners allemande right 1 1/2 A2 Scoop your partner as you go by, star promenade then butterfly 2nd corners swing in the center, then separate B1 Partner balance and swing B2 Take hands in a ring, balance and petranella Couple 2 swing in the center, end facing up Dances can have variety and challenges without gender reference. In this dance, as long as you make clear in the teaching that after the neighbor allemande left 1 1/2 if you are facing in, you are a 1st corner so you allemande right, if facing out you are a 2nd corner, get ready to be scooped you can end the swings any way you want. Ron, you are certainly right that not all dances can be easily taught in this manner, but in no way are all of these type of dances simple. I struggled with translating a "choose your noun" for ladies or gents because that is how I learned and think about the dance roles. The translation process adds a layer of complexity for me. I am just offering a different approach that works for me. Thanks Jim On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > RE: Dave: > > Clockwise / counterclockwise - too wordy, and some people have trouble > with this regardless. > > Hey: What about on the left diagonal? Along the set? > > I also really don't like the blaming of the dance if it's not 100% > intuitive. Plenty of dances flow great but have a counter-intuitive > element. Restricting dances to those without counter-intuitive moves > is basically saying, "Sorry, if we want to be genderfree, we need to > put a cap on how difficult a dance is. Sorry genderfree dancers, you > aren't allowed to dance too advanced." That's a big problem. > > Rollaways can *not* be handled from left to right - who does the > rolling is not indicated at all! > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly > <david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers 2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and > > who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and > > "counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with > Bob > > that if the dance is good, it should be obvious, but even if not, "pass > left > > shoulders in the middle for a hey for four" can only be interpreted one > way, > > so that fixes the issue of referring to roles. Roll-aways can be handled > > with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right > to > > the left." > > > > I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to > call a > > dance without referring to roles at all, even without resorting to first > or > > second corners. > > > > Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used. > Here's > > one (just picking a common, typical dance): > > > > Square Affair, by Becky Hill > > > > A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing > with > > experienced dancers and don't want to use the corners terminology) > > A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by > > partner, pull by neighbor > > B1 New neighbors balance and swing > > B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing > > > > Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global > > terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper > > dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For > Chorus > > Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use the term "gent" or > "lady"? > > Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and neighbor > around-the-waist > > turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and swing. Nothing that any > > particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time. > > > > On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers > > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> > >> With regard to Ron's questions > >> > >> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave > >> > >> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners > >> > >> 3. Not so familiar with these. > >> > >> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I > >> think > >> > >> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is > how > >> I call it anyway > >> > >> Bob > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers > >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> Andrea, how would you handle the following: > >>> > >>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip > to > >>> Lambertville, et all? > >>> > >>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star? > >>> > >>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers, > >>> Jurassic Redheads, etc. > >>> > >>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey. > >>> > >>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate? > >>> > >>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't > >>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways? > >>> > >>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated. > >>> > >>> Ron > >>> > >>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers" > >>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at > >>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use > of > >>>> global terminology for gender free contra. I would contend that if > used, > >>>> everyone would become more aware of the structure of dances. Only > the most > >>>> unusual figures/sequences would be unable to be called. The addition > of > >>>> first and second corner positions to the arsenal makes it possible > for same > >>>> role dancers to also be called upon to dance together without > reference to > >>>> gender. Second corners chain, or first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for > >>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those > standing in > >>>> those positions at that moment. In ECD we use first and second > corners to > >>>> refer to the people, first and second diagonals for the positions. > But > >>>> since we use diagonal to refer to those across and over one set, this > seems > >>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions works better. I'm glad some > folks are > >>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped for an opportunity myself before > now. > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> Andrea > >>>> > >>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask > >>>> > >>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers > >>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment > in > >>>> gender free calling. Last night I called the contra dance in St. > Louis > >>>> using gender free calling without telling anyone. The experiment > was a > >>>> great success. I received lots of positive feedback on the evenings > dance. > >>>> At the break and after the dance I made a point to ask several > dancers, some > >>>> were callers as well, if they noticed anything different or unusual > about > >>>> the dances or how I taught them. One person noticed that there were > more > >>>> dances that included a swing in the center for couple 2 than usual. > No one > >>>> I talked to noticed that the calls and teaching were gender free. > >>>> > >>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program, > but > >>>> it is certainly possible. Re-labeling the dancers is not the only > way to > >>>> call gender free. > >>>> > >>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection > of > >>>> gender free dances I chose the program from, send me an email, > >>>> arcadian35(a)gmail.com. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Jim Hemphill > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Callers mailing list > >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Callers mailing list > >>>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > >>>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Callers mailing list > >>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > >>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Callers mailing list > >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > David Casserly > > (cell) 781 258-2761 > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >

9 years, 6 months

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

Import1 June 2015