Zhou,
On the committing violence front--I once had a sociology professor who used
the word "violence" to describe just about everything (i.e., graffiti was
violence, a company persistently not fixing warrantied products was
violence, genocide was violence). He clearly needed a thesaurus, but it
was a thought-provoking perspective and pointed out that violence is not
specifically limited to physical acts--emotional and verbal acts can also
inflict real damage.
When I was a kid there was a mother in my scout troop who leveled
accusations of sexual harassment against two of the leaders and demanded
financial compensation; both of them were removed from their positions,
divorced by their wives, and one paid her an out-of-court settlement while
the other was forced to leave his job after she told his employer. When
she started to go after a third leader, someone checked with her prior
troop; they discovered it was a pattern, and that she was living off of a
prior settlement. "Committing violence" seems like what she did to the
families involved..
I'm not saying that Lindsay's case is the same--but it has similar
elements, and dance group policies generally prohibit violence. We usually
mean the physical kind, but when that word is coming to mind there's
probably a reason. If the lady in question is doing harm to other members
of the community, I'd want to be very careful about handling the matter.
Neal Schlein
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Lindsay Morris via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> Great point, thanks Lisa.
>
>
> On Thursday, September 10, 2015, Lisa Greenleaf via Callers <
> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone-
>>
>> I am cringing every time I read the word victim. VIctim implies
>> powerlessness, so why not use the word dancer and encourage
>> self-empowerment?
>>
>> Sometimes dancers approach me because I am an official organizer, and
>> other times friends of the person approach me because they know I might be
>> able to help. My first question around complaints is always, “Did you talk
>> with the person whose behavior bothered you?” And then I model an “I”
>> statement for them: “I don’t like that,” “I don’t feel comfortable dancing
>> with you because I don’t like to be twirled,” etc.
>>
>> Of course, most people find it difficult to talk directly to the person
>> disturbing them, but it’s still worth encouraging, especially if you show
>> them how to do it. You are teaching them a real-world skill that they can
>> use outside of the dance.
>>
>> When a dancer approaches me with a complaint, I don’t see them as a
>> victim who needs rescuing. For one thing, I don’t know the real situation
>> until I have heard both sides of the story. Yes, the situation may expand
>> to a larger problem, but even then I don’t change “dancer” (or more
>> specifically, the name of the person) to “victim.”
>>
>> Lisa
>>
>>
>> > On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Yoyo Zhou via Callers <
>> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > Taking you at face value: if you have a systemic problem, you need a
>> > policy. If you have a problem with one person, you need to come to
>> > terms with that person. I'm not sure if it's just the board, or if
>> > other dancers also have issues with her. But if you seek mediation,
>> > take notes on your interactions so you have evidence to back yourself
>> > up.
>> >
>> >
>> > Now, I think the last thing you need is a policy requiring victims to
>> > speak up. It's counterproductive to making a safe dance space. (Let's
>> > discuss that on the other thread.)
>> >
>> > Let's say I'm new to your dance and I have a bad experience with
>> > someone. What do I do? I might complain about it to my friends who
>> > convinced me to come. I might just avoid that person. I might just go
>> > home dissatisfied. One of the last things I might do is complain to
>> > the management (and I might view that woman as an extension thereof),
>> > because who knows if they'll just shrug it off and not take me
>> > seriously?
>> >
>> >
>> > Also, you wrote, "it seems to me that she's committing violence." No,
>> > I disagree. This totally cheapens the meaning of "violence". What
>> > words do you use for when punches are actually thrown? (It's happened
>> > at a dance here.)
>> >
>> > Yoyo Zhou
>> >
>> > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers
>> > <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>> >> Maybe. Maybe not. My point was that we should be very, very careful
>> about
>> >> making a definitive statement about something being "just an
>> accusation",
>> >> especially when in your example, there was a second problem - even if
>> it was
>> >> a year earlier.
>> >>
>> >> On Sep 9, 2015 10:39 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers"
>> >> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Appreciate that. Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire"
>> issue
>> >>> applies here, though. It would if there were several different women
>> >>> complaining about one man...
>> >>>
>> >>> --------------------
>> >>> Lindsay Morris
>> >>> CEO, TSMworks
>> >>> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
>> >>> lindsay(a)tsmworks.com
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi Lindsay,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my
>> brevity
>> >>>> comes off as bruskness.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the
>> source.
>> >>>> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring
>> that we ask
>> >>>> open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
>> >>>> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7
>> members
>> >>>> of our board attend any dance.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if
>> you're
>> >>>> interested in more specifics.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as
>> "just an
>> >>>> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire.
>> For every
>> >>>> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak
>> up.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of
>> issues. The
>> >>>> biggest benefit is simple:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a
>> >>>> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary
>> drawn. But
>> >>>> wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost
>> dancers and
>> >>>> the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Best regards,
>> >>>> Ron Blechner
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers"
>> >>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions on dealing with problem dancers,
>> and
>> >>>>> the CDU Policy are thoughtful and useful documents.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> We have a different problem here.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as
>> >>>>> creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on
>> behalf of
>> >>>>> their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Many others don't see these men as creepy or inappropriate.
>> Recently
>> >>>>> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was
>> a year
>> >>>>> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction. The man
>> in
>> >>>>> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy
>> about
>> >>>>> some nameless thing he'd done.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed
>> should
>> >>>>> talk to her about it. We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
>> >>>>> "naughty-dancer" problems.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his
>> wife has
>> >>>>> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may
>> already
>> >>>>> have. So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the
>> face, it
>> >>>>> seems to me that she's committing violence.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> How should we handle this?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim
>> has to
>> >>>>> speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple
>> miscommunication
>> >>>>> issues).
>> >>>>> We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know
>> who
>> >>>>> to talk to.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's
>> issues
>> >>>>> from poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ____
>> >>>>> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and
>> complaining, so
>> >>>>> advocacy may be a good thing. But that's a different discussion.
>> In these
>> >>>>> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an
>> >>>>> accusation with little to back it up.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> 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
>>
>> Lisa
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>>
>
>
> --
> --------------------
> Lindsay Morris
> CEO, TSMworks
> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
> lindsay(a)tsmworks.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
Hi Everyone-
I am cringing every time I read the word victim. VIctim implies powerlessness, so why not use the word dancer and encourage self-empowerment?
Sometimes dancers approach me because I am an official organizer, and other times friends of the person approach me because they know I might be able to help. My first question around complaints is always, “Did you talk with the person whose behavior bothered you?” And then I model an “I” statement for them: “I don’t like that,” “I don’t feel comfortable dancing with you because I don’t like to be twirled,” etc.
Of course, most people find it difficult to talk directly to the person disturbing them, but it’s still worth encouraging, especially if you show them how to do it. You are teaching them a real-world skill that they can use outside of the dance.
When a dancer approaches me with a complaint, I don’t see them as a victim who needs rescuing. For one thing, I don’t know the real situation until I have heard both sides of the story. Yes, the situation may expand to a larger problem, but even then I don’t change “dancer” (or more specifically, the name of the person) to “victim.”
Lisa
> On Sep 9, 2015, at 8:02 PM, Yoyo Zhou via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> Taking you at face value: if you have a systemic problem, you need a
> policy. If you have a problem with one person, you need to come to
> terms with that person. I'm not sure if it's just the board, or if
> other dancers also have issues with her. But if you seek mediation,
> take notes on your interactions so you have evidence to back yourself
> up.
>
>
> Now, I think the last thing you need is a policy requiring victims to
> speak up. It's counterproductive to making a safe dance space. (Let's
> discuss that on the other thread.)
>
> Let's say I'm new to your dance and I have a bad experience with
> someone. What do I do? I might complain about it to my friends who
> convinced me to come. I might just avoid that person. I might just go
> home dissatisfied. One of the last things I might do is complain to
> the management (and I might view that woman as an extension thereof),
> because who knows if they'll just shrug it off and not take me
> seriously?
>
>
> Also, you wrote, "it seems to me that she's committing violence." No,
> I disagree. This totally cheapens the meaning of "violence". What
> words do you use for when punches are actually thrown? (It's happened
> at a dance here.)
>
> Yoyo Zhou
>
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:42 AM, Ron Blechner via Callers
> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>> Maybe. Maybe not. My point was that we should be very, very careful about
>> making a definitive statement about something being "just an accusation",
>> especially when in your example, there was a second problem - even if it was
>> a year earlier.
>>
>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:39 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers"
>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Appreciate that. Don't think the "where there's smoke there's fire" issue
>>> applies here, though. It would if there were several different women
>>> complaining about one man...
>>>
>>> --------------------
>>> Lindsay Morris
>>> CEO, TSMworks
>>> Tel. 1-859-539-9900
>>> lindsay(a)tsmworks.com
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ron Blechner <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Lindsay,
>>>>
>>>> I realize this is a tricky topic, so apologies in advance if my brevity
>>>> comes off as bruskness.
>>>>
>>>> These two suggestions work for Amherst Contra.
>>>>
>>>> As a proxy complaint comes in, a board member would seek out the source.
>>>> Anonymous complaints are permitted, and a high level of ensuring that we ask
>>>> open-ended questions, and not leading questions.
>>>>
>>>> We also wear board member buttons at dances and make regular
>>>> announcements about us being available for any reason. Usually 4-7 members
>>>> of our board attend any dance.
>>>>
>>>> You might speak privately to Will Loving, our lead organizer, if you're
>>>> interested in more specifics.
>>>>
>>>> I would also caution about making such definitive statements as "just an
>>>> accusation". In my experience, where there's smoke, there's fire. For every
>>>> accusation, there's five people who are too uncomfortable to speak up.
>>>>
>>>> That said, I have seen the success of proactive addressing of issues. The
>>>> biggest benefit is simple:
>>>>
>>>> Address it early when it's small, and not a huge deal. Maybe it's a
>>>> simple misunderstanding. Maybe the person needed a clear boundary drawn. But
>>>> wait until there's a pile of complaints, and you've already lost dancers and
>>>> the resolution will need to be more severe for the offender.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Ron Blechner
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 9, 2015 10:08 AM, "Lindsay Morris via Callers"
>>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Chris Weiler's Positive Solutions on dealing with problem dancers, and
>>>>> the CDU Policy are thoughtful and useful documents.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have a different problem here.
>>>>>
>>>>> One woman often complains to board members about men she sees as
>>>>> creepers or sexual predators. She reports their misbehavior on behalf of
>>>>> their victims. The victims don't initiate these reports.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Many others don't see these men as creepy or inappropriate. Recently
>>>>> one of the "victims" clarified that her discomfort with the man was a year
>>>>> ago and she'd long ago dealt with it to her satisfaction. The man in
>>>>> question had heard only rumors that some nameless woman was unhappy about
>>>>> some nameless thing he'd done.
>>>>>
>>>>> This woman also publicly asked that young women who feel harassed should
>>>>> talk to her about it. We feel that's the Board's job, not hers.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems that this woman is fishing for - or even inventing -
>>>>> "naughty-dancer" problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> When a married man gets accused of being a sexual predator, his wife has
>>>>> to wonder if it's true. This adds to any marital tensions they may already
>>>>> have. So, while this woman is not actually punching anybody in the face, it
>>>>> seems to me that she's committing violence.
>>>>>
>>>>> How should we handle this?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we need a "No proxy complaints" policy - i.e., the victim has to
>>>>> speak up (and then our process will usually fix simple miscommunication
>>>>> issues).
>>>>> We need to clearly identify board members, so genuine victims know who
>>>>> to talk to.
>>>>>
>>>>> But does anybody have other ideas about preventing one person's issues
>>>>> from poisoning the atmosphere of a mostly friendly dance?
>>>>>
>>>>> ____
>>>>> * I know, victims often have a hard time stepping up and complaining, so
>>>>> advocacy may be a good thing. But that's a different discussion. In these
>>>>> situations, there's no victim; there's no predator; there's just an
>>>>> accusation with little to back it up.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
Lisa
Virtual Relief by Byron Rickers is a Beckett with a long lines and ladies
roll/long lines and men roll progression. If the non-roller moves, they
are out of position. Lovely dance, which I use regularly.
Neal
On Sep 9, 2015 7:16 PM, "Maia McCormick via Callers" <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> Recently there was some discussion of the difference between a "rollaway
> with a half-sashay" and a plain ol' rollaway. Jim Saxe presented the dance Roll
> Away <http://contradances.blogspot.com/2012/03/roll-away.html> as an
> example of a contra with a rollaway without a half-sashay. Can anyone else
> name/post choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I suppose... not
> looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a rollaway
> *without* a half-sashay?
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
I believe it's called If You Were Dead. I called it in England
recently and out of all the dances I called, that was the most
popular. I understand it was the first one she's written!!!!!
T
On Sep 9, 2015, at 10:20 PM, Perry Shafran via Callers wrote:
> I happen to know of one by Rachel Fifer, Gaye Fifer's daughter. I
> don't recall the title offhand but I can check later on. But the
> roll away is not along the line but in a ring. You balance, and
> gents roll away a neighbor from their left hand to their right
> hand, but the gents stay in place.
>
> Perry
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>
> From:"Maia McCormick via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> Date:Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:16 PM
> Subject:[Callers] Rollaway sans sashay?
>
> Recently there was some discussion of the difference between a
> "rollaway with a half-sashay" and a plain ol' rollaway. Jim Saxe
> presented the dance Roll Away as an example of a contra with a
> rollaway without a half-sashay. Can anyone else name/post
> choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I suppose... not
> looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a rollaway
> without a half-sashay?
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Hello everyone,
Seth and Chris here, the lists founders and (currently) silent members.
The discussions from yesterday and today have generated a lot of traffic
and a lot of emotions. So I'd like to take this opportunity to remind
us all why we are here.
Chris and I started this list to SUPPORT each other and other callers.
Please remember that when writing and responding here. Everyone should
be treated with kindness.
When you write an email, please consider this before you press send: If
you were face to face, would you say the same thing? Does what you are
writing add to the SUPPORT of the community?
And finally, remember that humor and sarcasm are not easily communicated
through email. Please leave sarcasm and jokes out, as the other people
reading your email may not know if you are being serious or not.
Thank you,
Seth & Chris
Wow. ISTM [It Seems To Me] that this is far more responsibility for controlling social interpersonal interactions than the programmer and/or caller at the mic should have to worry about, even though we do worry about such things.
Sorry I don’t have opportunity to participate on this email list more often. That Pesky Day Job [PDJ] and all…
Short response: Don’t point out shadow partner interaction; the dancers need to be adult about it, no one listens to the Caller anyway, let alone anything said while they’re still lining up.
Longer response:
I really REALLY don’t think that there should be any announcement calling attention to the fact that the next dance has interaction with someone other than your chosen partner. What, are we supposed to say “This is a duple improper single progression with a shadow who is the same active or inactive role one place below [or above] where you line up”?
Or should we say “Thank this partner, and ask another partner for the next dance. As you line up, if there is someone at the dance here tonight with whom you don’t want to dance, please make sure that they are in a different longways set than you, or that if they are in the same long set as you that they are not in an adjacent hands-four from you either up or down as you line up for the dance.”
Are we dance choreographers supposed to create dance sequences that don’t have any “serious” interaction with the shadow partner, just in case the dancers happen to line up such that someone on the floor has an “Ex” as a shadow partner? Or someone who hasn’t showered recently enough?
We already have the problem of MUC rejection of any dance that doesn’t include both partner swing and neighbor swing; this seems to be an injection of a problem of a potential swing with a neighbor some dancers might not want to swing with, yet such swings are still required.
I’m confused…
<SoapBox>
Yes, I understand the many reasons for not having serious shadow interactions, but I am proud that every local dance community where I’ve been a member, from NH/Boston to CA/SF, has understood that interpersonal conflicts will happen, and yet social interactions are required. They understand how to make everyone work together. Family schisms are inevitable. Personal hygiene issues may arise.
I hope that everyone eventually can live the philosophy on Jeremiah’s T-shirt: “Dance With Who’s Comin’ Atcha!"
Even long-time couples break up. It’s painful to the people involved and also to everyone surrounding. We’re all Community here. Our Community is larger and more long-lived than the simple “nuclear family” of two parents and 2.3 children. That means we get to “enjoy” many various kinds of family ties, both genetic and non-genetic. The Community connection carries us all through this specific break-up episode. The Dance entertains us and it heals us and it strengthens The Community.
I say this with a VERY PERSONAL involvement in this community support.
Yes, we DO see what’s going on. Yes, we DO love both of you, even if you’ve split apart, and even if there is a court restraining order about you both showing up at our dance on the same night (that’s a different discussion, and yes, it does happen).
If there’s a personal hygiene problem, sometimes it simply can not be helped. I myself could change shirts whenever the band changes tunes and it still would not be often enough. In such a case, please enjoy fresh pheromones; fresh sweat can be enjoyable sweat. If it’s stale sweat, then by all means tell the person that a shower with soap would make him/her a more enjoyable dance partner. That’s a quiet face-to-face conversation.
BUT please dance for several seconds, smile, and move on.
All that aside, any swing can be changed to an allemande right once or twice (to taste), or an elbow swing, or a do-si-do, or a gypsy (with varying amounts of eye contact, again to taste). Experienced dancers, especially a split dancer couple who encounter each other in line, will do whatever they feel comfortable with. What a GREAT opportunity to swap roles with your partner, given a little look-ahead! (“Oh! that’s my Ex ahead; let’s swap!” or just take hands with the palm-up signal that you’re taking the “Gent” role next time) Painless and fun.
Never mind that experienced dancers often rewrite the dance to change a non-swing dance move into a swing, even in the middle of a hey; it’s just as easy to go the other direction, to reduce interaction. That’s what dancers do. Just Be In The Right Place At The Right Time.
We always say that a neighbor interaction is “just one time through the tune, just 30 seconds”. Well, a shadow interaction is generally at most one 8-count thing; 4 seconds repeated every once in a while as wonderful music plays. Maybe double that for some dances, so then about 8 seconds out of every half minute or so.
It seems to me that we as social animals should be able to deal with that.
Certainly we do this in our daily lives on the street/office/garage/whatever. We can be civil and even develop the ability to enjoy a 10-second interaction with an ex we encounter in a public event.
One of the things I love about contra dance is that it gives us all an opportunity to “be” the persona we live the rest of the time, or “be” someone else during The Dance. We’re wearing a costume while we’re dancing, even if it’s not obvious. Many of our dancers have an on-the-floor personality which is quite different from the personality they exhibit the rest of the time (such as while talking and enjoying refreshments at the break during the evening dance). Certainly I wear a different persona on the dance floor than when I am at the break, and I’m someone else if I’m calling, and someone else if I’m the dance organizer.
THEN there’s the issue of identifying which of the various people “near” you as you line up might be your shadow/TrailBuddy. In a Becket dance it’s likely to be your neighbor to the side in line, or could be next beyond them, or the neighbor to the other side, or maybe the next beyond them. I TRULY advise against spending too much effort in identifying the “Corner/TrailBuddy” in advance, as the dancers are lined up. In a duple improper, your shadow could be ahead, could be behind. It depends on the choreography. And it changes if someone drops out, or if someone joins in after the walkthrough.
That’s not the place to spend your precious seconds at the mic as a caller. Get them moving and listening to the music.
</SoapBox>
We already have the problem of MUC [Modern Urban Contra] rejection of any dance that doesn’t include both partner swing and neighbor swing; this seems to be an injection of a problem of a potential swing with a neighbor some dancers might not want to swing with, yet such swings are still required.
I’m confused...
-Eric
On Sep 8, 2015, at 8:06 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> First, a disclaimer: Some people on this listserv thing shadow swings are problematic. Some don't see any issue with them. This is NOT the conversation I want to have in this thread; I ask that you respond to the question I'm asking and do not debate my premise--at least not in this particular thread. This should help keep this thread on track and hopefully reduce excess noise and go-nowhere discussions on this listserv. Thanks!
>
> Anyway, the actual question I wanted to ask (whew!)--
>
> There do exist some really fabulous shadow-swing dances that I would love to be able to call, as long as I could do so without putting anyone in an uncomfortable position. Do folks have ideas for ways to mitigate the potential harms of shadow swing dances? I was considering, at the beginning of the dance, having dancers identify their shadow and mentioning, "this will be a shadow swing dance, so if you need to make any changes, do so now" (or something like that)--haven't gotten the wording down-pat, but the idea is giving dancers advance warning of a shadow swing so they can move (thereby changing their shadow) if they need to. Any thoughts on this method? Suggestions of others?
>
> Cheers.
> Maia
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
Concerning dances with shadow swings, Chris Page has noted, "I know Carol Ormand writes and calls them." Because of her advanced scientific training, Carol is undoubtedly certified to handle hazardous material.
For most of the day and evening I've been praying to the Dance Deity about the issue of shadow swings, knowing, all levity aside, that a wrong decision could end me in jail for a week or so (like a certain Kim Davis from Kentucky).
At about 11pm I received a vision from the Dance Deity. Visions are of course difficult to translate into words, but I'll do my best here. According to D.D., any caller attempting a shadow swing dance should (i) meditate for an hour (or as long as needed) to get the the Deity's permission, and, if granted, (ii) get Secret Service clearance and the appropriate CDSS permit. One these two conditions are satisfied, the caller should initially teach the dance with an alternative for the shadow swing. Then, during a second walk-through, the caller should casually and emphatically mention that dancers might want to instead swing with their shadow.
Michael Fuerst 802 N Broadway Urbana IL 61801 217 239 5844
I happen to know of one by Rachel Fifer, Gaye Fifer's daughter. I don't recall the title offhand but I can check later on. But the roll away is not along the line but in a ring. You balance, and gents roll away a neighbor from their left hand to their right hand, but the gents stay in place.
Perry
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
From:"Maia McCormick via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
Date:Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:16 PM
Subject:[Callers] Rollaway sans sashay?
Recently there was some discussion of the difference between a "rollaway with a half-sashay" and a plain ol' rollaway. Jim Saxe presented the dance Roll Away as an example of a contra with a rollaway without a half-sashay. Can anyone else name/post choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I suppose... not looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a rollaway without a half-sashay?
Cheers,
Maia
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
The dance I was alluding to in the other thread was Lisa Greenleaf's
"Secret Weapon" which, like a couple of my own compositions, uses a roll to
accomplish a ladies swap across a diagonal after a Ring Balance. If the
gents Half Sashay, they end up on the wrong side of the set for the next
moves. Yes, you could simply substitute a disconnected "Ladies Swap and
face back in" here but you'd lose some good stuff:
1. the ability for the partner to assist (two minds to remember the
move, improved timing/timeliness)
2. fun connected dancing via good weight.
I called Secret Weapon this past Monday at the Scout House, making sure to
tell the Gents their job was to stay put and NOT sashay. That direct
instruction in the walk through worked great, I didn't have to remind them
while calling the dance.
-Don
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Maia McCormick via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> [...snip...]
>
> Can anyone else name/post choreography for any CONTRAS (or 4-face-4s, I
> suppose... not looking for squares at the moment, though) that include a
> rollaway *without* a half-sashay?
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
