Re: [Callers] Ralph Page Style
by Winston, Alan P. via Callers
On 10/17/2016 3:26 PM, Neal Schlein via Callers wrote:
>
> Thanks for pointing that out! I was aware of the fact but didn't
> think of it here.
>
> The older New England swings also would have been 2-hand swings, which
> lend themselves to a different choreographic flow--for example,
> swinging and casting down the outside. Not a very nice transition
> from a ballroom swing, but perfectly lovely from a 2-hand turn and
> showcasing the English heritage.
I call and dance English (and Regency, so I have a specialty in dances
of the Chorus Jig time period) as well as contra, and you're right about
it not being ballroom swings (which seem to come in around 1900), and
likely two-hand turns (although the instruction "swing corners" in
Regency-era dance manuals seems to mean hand turns at least part of the
time, and comes out to be contra corners).
But I really don't mind the transition into casting off from a ballroom
swing in a proper dance. You shouldn't twirl out of it, but you can
just face up at the end of the spring and peel off (away from the pointy
end); it's pretty smooth.
For comparison, the typical reconstruction of the English "Trip to
Tunbridge" (originally using 3 out of 4 of the same standard figures
Chorus Jig uses) finishes with a progression that has the old 2s turning
two hands in first place, ready to cast off, while the old 1s cast to
the bottom of the three couple set. I don't really like the
two-hand-turn into down-the-outside transition any better than the
swing-face-up into down the outside transition.
-- Alan
