Import1

import1@lists2.sharedweight.net

2524 discussions

Re: [Callers] Two dances...are they already written?

by Kelseyannehartman＠gmail.com via Callers

Oops after the balance the ring you Spin to the right and that puts you with your partner on the side. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 3, 2016, at 6:44 PM, Jerome Grisanti <jerome.grisanti(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Kelsey, > > Neither sequence rings a bell, but others on this list have more encyclopedic collections and may answer more fully. > > I do wonder about Delish. It appears the B2 swing happens on the gent's side, and presumably so does the B1 swing. But B1 starts with partners across the set from one another, and the description just says balance the ring, partner swing. So does the gent bring his partner to his side? Without explicit direction, the swing might happen in the middle of the set, or indeed on the lady's side (excepting that neither would put dancers in place for the B2). Is there something I'm not picturing? > > Wandering Soul looks fun -- I may try it out at my next contra gig. > > --Jerome > > > Jerome Grisanti > 660-528-0858 > http://www.jeromegrisanti.com > > "Whatever you do, or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius and power and magic in it." --Johann Wolfgang von Goethe > >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 7:54 PM, Kelseyannehartman(a)gmail.com via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: >> Hi! Thank you to all who keep this email stream lively. I wrote these and got to check them out on Saturday (thanks San Francisco dancers) and wondered if they have already been written? >> >> The Wandering Soul was written for Stuart Kinney's tune of the same name: >> >> Delish by Kelsey Hartman >> Duple Improper >> A1: LLFB swing neighbor >> A2: R & l thru/courtesy turn then Promenade across >> B1: Balance ring and swing partner >> B2: Women Allemande R 1-1/2 >> Swing neighbor again >> >> Wandering Soul by Kelsey Hartman >> (Inspired by Stuart Kinney's tune of the same name) >> Duple Improper double progression >> In long wavy lines gents facing out: >> A1: Box circulate and partner swing >> A2: shift left and circle with next neighbors 3/4, swing neighbor >> B1: Full hey: ladies pass right to start >> B2: ladies Allemande R 1x back to neighbor >> Neighbor Allemande left 1-1/2 to long wavy lines (next neighbor in right) >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >

8 years, 3 months

[Callers] Two dances...are they already written?

by Kelseyannehartman＠gmail.com via Callers

Hi! Thank you to all who keep this email stream lively. I wrote these and got to check them out on Saturday (thanks San Francisco dancers) and wondered if they have already been written? The Wandering Soul was written for Stuart Kinney's tune of the same name: Delish by Kelsey Hartman Duple Improper A1: LLFB swing neighbor A2: R & l thru/courtesy turn then Promenade across B1: Balance ring and swing partner B2: Women Allemande R 1-1/2 Swing neighbor again Wandering Soul by Kelsey Hartman (Inspired by Stuart Kinney's tune of the same name) Duple Improper double progression In long wavy lines gents facing out: A1: Box circulate and partner swing A2: shift left and circle with next neighbors 3/4, swing neighbor B1: Full hey: ladies pass right to start B2: ladies Allemande R 1x back to neighbor Neighbor Allemande left 1-1/2 to long wavy lines (next neighbor in right) Sent from my iPhone

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] new (?) dance - with a shadow swing

by Bree Kalb via Callers

I'd like to add this to my collection. Have you named it? On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Luke Donforth via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Hello all, > > I know the list has had big debates about shadow swings in the past. If > you don't like 'em, you can pitch this. This dance was written for someone > who wanted a shadow swing, and is something I might call at a shadow-themed > festival session. As shadow swings go, I like the idea of swingus > interuptus going from shadow to partner. > > To my knowledge, it's a new composition. Haven't gotten to test it yet. > But I present it for comment and/or collection. > > Becket, cw > A1 > Circle L 3/4 > Neighbor Swing > A2 > Promenade across with neighbor > Left Diagonal Ladies chain (to shadow) > B1 > women start 1/2 hey straight across by Right shoulder > Women Do Si Do 1x > B2 > Shadow swing > Partner swing > (no slide required, circle with couple straight across) > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > > -- Bree Kalb, LCSW 301 W. Weaver St. Carrboro, NC 27510 Psychotherapy and Mindfulness Meditation Classes 919-932-6262 x216 www.thewellnessalliance.com https://www.facebook.com/carrborokorumindfulness

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] new (?) dance - with a shadow swing

by Luke Donforth via Callers

I agree that promenade across takes up more room than a R&L. Given the space, I'd take the promenade here because of the extra turn required to go on the left diagonal for the chain to shadow. I think the promenade has better connection, so folks can work together more. If it was crowded, it could be switched to a R&L. I wouldn't want to do a swing->swing transition in a very crowded hall though. But I could imagine a density where I'd still run the dance but want to use a R&L instead of a promenade. On Sat, Oct 1, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Rich Dempsey via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > I like the way you can hand off from shadow to partner. That feels > exciting. > > What is the aesthetic consideration that leads you to choose a promenade > across? > > My personal experience is that the line tends to tighten up, and it's hard > to get across without bumping you neighbors. I think a R&L through doesn't > have this problem, possibly because we're not traveling together. > Sometimes, I convert it to a traveling swing in an especially tight line > because at the moment of lining up with the larger line, my partner and I > are oriented perpendicularly to it, which takes up less space up and down > the hall. Not sure you could teach that. It requires precision. > > Rich > > On Sep 20, 2016 1:49 PM, "Luke Donforth via Callers" < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> I know the list has had big debates about shadow swings in the past. If >> you don't like 'em, you can pitch this. This dance was written for someone >> who wanted a shadow swing, and is something I might call at a shadow-themed >> festival session. As shadow swings go, I like the idea of swingus >> interuptus going from shadow to partner. >> >> To my knowledge, it's a new composition. Haven't gotten to test it yet. >> But I present it for comment and/or collection. >> >> Becket, cw >> A1 >> Circle L 3/4 >> Neighbor Swing >> A2 >> Promenade across with neighbor >> Left Diagonal Ladies chain (to shadow) >> B1 >> women start 1/2 hey straight across by Right shoulder >> Women Do Si Do 1x >> B2 >> Shadow swing >> Partner swing >> (no slide required, circle with couple straight across) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- Luke Donforth Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] new (?) dance - with a shadow swing

by Rich Dempsey via Callers

I like the way you can hand off from shadow to partner. That feels exciting. What is the aesthetic consideration that leads you to choose a promenade across? My personal experience is that the line tends to tighten up, and it's hard to get across without bumping you neighbors. I think a R&L through doesn't have this problem, possibly because we're not traveling together. Sometimes, I convert it to a traveling swing in an especially tight line because at the moment of lining up with the larger line, my partner and I are oriented perpendicularly to it, which takes up less space up and down the hall. Not sure you could teach that. It requires precision. Rich On Sep 20, 2016 1:49 PM, "Luke Donforth via Callers" < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Hello all, > > I know the list has had big debates about shadow swings in the past. If > you don't like 'em, you can pitch this. This dance was written for someone > who wanted a shadow swing, and is something I might call at a shadow-themed > festival session. As shadow swings go, I like the idea of swingus > interuptus going from shadow to partner. > > To my knowledge, it's a new composition. Haven't gotten to test it yet. > But I present it for comment and/or collection. > > Becket, cw > A1 > Circle L 3/4 > Neighbor Swing > A2 > Promenade across with neighbor > Left Diagonal Ladies chain (to shadow) > B1 > women start 1/2 hey straight across by Right shoulder > Women Do Si Do 1x > B2 > Shadow swing > Partner swing > (no slide required, circle with couple straight across) > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

8 years, 3 months

[Callers] Fwd: Boys and Girls

by Donna Hunt via Callers

Not sure if this reply from Betsy Gotta went through on the list. I'm reprinting it here for her. Read below Donna -----Original Message----- From: Betsy Gotta <ugottadance(a)optonline.net> To: 'Donna Hunt' <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com>; jeremy.m.child <jeremy.m.child(a)gmail.com> Cc: Callers <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Thu, Sep 29, 2016 6:28 pm Subject: RE: [Callers] Boys and Girls Hi All, Donna shared the information string with me, since I am one of the callers for Independence Squares, the club in Phila that she mentioned. In addition to calling and teaching for Independence Squares in Phila, I also call and teach for the gay/lesbian square dance club in New York City. Both groups accept gender specific terms and use the method of identifying dancers by raising a hand and saying “Boy/Girl” when the choreography makes it important for the dancers to know with whom they need to work. Personally, when calling, I have a sense of who often dances which part and that helps me keep track of where the dancers of different roles are positioned. Another help is for me to call “Boys or Girls u-turn back (turn around) which allows me to see where they are. I have the freedom to do this because I am calling MWSD with flexible choreography. As a long time caller, I have always preferred the terms Gent and Lady, because to me they are roles that people adopt more than men/women and boy/girl. Lead/Follow is not useful in MWSD because the term “Lead” means the dancer in front, and not person dancing the “man’s” role. Betsy Gotta From: Donna Hunt [mailto:dhuntdancer@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 11:42 AM To: jeremy.m.child(a)gmail.com Cc: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net Subject: Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls When there's a role specific move called ie, "Boys trade from a wave" the dancers in that role say "Boy" (or "Girl" if it's "girl" specific). The dancers only say it loud enough for their set to hear, the dancers don't yell it loud enough for the callers to hear. The callers usually make a note of who the couples are prior to starting the tip so they have a record of who is in which position. If they are teaching and need clarification they will ask the "boys" or "girls" to identify with a raised hand. Our dancers don't try to identify who they are supposed to be dancing with, they dance to the definition of the call and dance with whomever is coming at them. Sometimes during class this becomes very interesting especially if someone boldly moves in the wrong direction and does a move with the wrong person. Occasionally dancers become confused and can be heard muttering, "Oh, yeah I'm supposed to be a (insert role here)." Our group has dancers and classes from Mainstream up to C2. Check it out: http://www.independencesquares.org/ Donna Hunt -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Child <jeremy.m.child(a)gmail.com> To: Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> Cc: callers <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Wed, Sep 28, 2016 2:35 am Subject: Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls Thanks Donna. How do the dancers know who's dancing boy and who girl? Sometimes they need to, or do the callers avoid any calls requiring this knowledge (e.g. boys trade from a wave)? Jeremy On 28 September 2016 at 01:58, Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> wrote: Here in Philadelphia the MSW group (Independence Squares) is an LGBT and straight group and we dance to the calls of girl/boy and are free to dance whichever role we wish without any identifying "sashes". Our callers are fantastic at remembering who the couples/boys/girls are during any square. Donna Hunt -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Child via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> To: Callers <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Tue, Sep 27, 2016 2:47 pm Subject: [Callers] Boys and Girls Hi This is for the MWSD callers amongst you. There has been much discussion on this group about the terms used for the two roles in contra dance. I do not propose to resurrect that here, I mention it to emphasise that many feel the terms used to be important, and that we should be moving away from any gender connotation in them. MWSD uses Ladies, Gents, Men, Women, Girls, Boys - all highly gendered. Is it time we changed these? If so, how? In theory with Callerlab it will be easier, but I suspect they would strongly resist such a change, since the "maleness" and "femaleness" of the roles (e.g. skirt work) is such a fundamental part of what MWSD is. Thoughts? (Apologies to those to whom this is all gibberish) Jeremy Child www.barndancecaller.net www.genderfreedance.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls

by Neal Schlein via Callers

Lessons are a different ball of wax, especially if you are teaching both roles to everyone. Sashes seem reasonable there. I'm talking about dancers at the competent level and above at a normal dance. The speed and complexity of squares makes visual signifiers too slow and unhelpful; facing someone of the same gender could be correct, so all you can really be responsible for is your own position. As for calling to groups that role swap mid-square: that was my question, too, when I was warned about a group. The caller just grinned and wished me good luck. I've picked out a few solutions, some better than others. 1. Know if it is likely in advance. 2. Ask one set to be nice and dance pilot. 3. Only use modules for that group. 4. Pre-choreograph everything (common in southern AZ) 5. Watch at least two, or even three, sets for agreement if anything ever looks odd. (A good idea anyway in case your pilot square breaks) 6. Keep it simple. 7. Call so fast they don't have time to fool around. (Can backfire!) 8. Embrace and encourage it during a particular square. 9. Watch a square that isn't smiling/is mostly older or serious. 10. See #1. Don't worry about it and just keep calling. If there is an actual problem, they'll tell you. Beginners don't do it--it's the folks who know enough to be dangerous. Neal On Sep 29, 2016 4:33 AM, "Jeremy Child" <jeremy.m.child(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Nick: Some good stuff in those links - thank you. > Donna: I love the idea of identifying your role by saying "boy" or > "girl". Thanks for the link to your web pages. I did try to look at your > FB group but got a "this content isn't available right now" error message. > Neal: I'm intrigued by the "not wearing bands/physical identifiers", and > more so by mid-tip role swapping. How does the caller cope? If xe is > purely using modules then there's no problem, but how does xe cope if xe is > sight calling? OK xe could memorise 4 positions rather than just two > couples, but if the dancers are role swapping xe may not be able to tell > what FASR the square is in. > In my MWSD classes I insist that the "boys" wear a sash and the "girls" > don't - irrespective of actual gender. This is partly to make it easier to > see when the square has gone asymmetric, and partly to eliminate the idea > that "boy is the natural role of a man, so if a woman dances it she must be > marked out in some way (and vice versa)". > Jeremy > > On 28 September 2016 at 18:54, Neal Schlein via Callers < > callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > >> My experience is basically the same as Donna's, although I'd say the >> gent/lady statement is less of a "convention" than a matter of simple >> practicality. It usually gets said early in a dance or when actually >> necessary. >> >> In a square there is also no real need for ties/bands/vests/sashes for a >> simple reason: the set is fully aware of itself. Everyone can see all of >> the couples upon squaring up; we help each other remember who does what >> anyway. In a really scrambled set everyone figures it's a minor miracle if >> something doesn't break down regardless, and that's doubly true in clubs >> where people actively swap roles during the dance. If it happens, you just >> regroup and try again. >> >> The frequent "Aack! I'm a ____!" when allemande left or star thru are >> called is pretty funny, especially since it often comes from very >> experienced dancers...who then proceed to go the wrong way with supreme >> confidence. (Callers are even more susceptible, since our line is, "Aack! >> I'm a DANCER!!!") >> >> Neal >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Callers mailing list >> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net >> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >> >> >

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls

by Jeremy Child via Callers

Nick: Some good stuff in those links - thank you. Donna: I love the idea of identifying your role by saying "boy" or "girl". Thanks for the link to your web pages. I did try to look at your FB group but got a "this content isn't available right now" error message. Neal: I'm intrigued by the "not wearing bands/physical identifiers", and more so by mid-tip role swapping. How does the caller cope? If xe is purely using modules then there's no problem, but how does xe cope if xe is sight calling? OK xe could memorise 4 positions rather than just two couples, but if the dancers are role swapping xe may not be able to tell what FASR the square is in. In my MWSD classes I insist that the "boys" wear a sash and the "girls" don't - irrespective of actual gender. This is partly to make it easier to see when the square has gone asymmetric, and partly to eliminate the idea that "boy is the natural role of a man, so if a woman dances it she must be marked out in some way (and vice versa)". Jeremy On 28 September 2016 at 18:54, Neal Schlein via Callers < callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > My experience is basically the same as Donna's, although I'd say the > gent/lady statement is less of a "convention" than a matter of simple > practicality. It usually gets said early in a dance or when actually > necessary. > > In a square there is also no real need for ties/bands/vests/sashes for a > simple reason: the set is fully aware of itself. Everyone can see all of > the couples upon squaring up; we help each other remember who does what > anyway. In a really scrambled set everyone figures it's a minor miracle if > something doesn't break down regardless, and that's doubly true in clubs > where people actively swap roles during the dance. If it happens, you just > regroup and try again. > > The frequent "Aack! I'm a ____!" when allemande left or star thru are > called is pretty funny, especially since it often comes from very > experienced dancers...who then proceed to go the wrong way with supreme > confidence. (Callers are even more susceptible, since our line is, "Aack! > I'm a DANCER!!!") > > Neal > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net > >

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls

by Donna Hunt via Callers

When there's a role specific move called ie, "Boys trade from a wave" the dancers in that role say "Boy" (or "Girl" if it's "girl" specific). The dancers only say it loud enough for their set to hear, the dancers don't yell it loud enough for the callers to hear. The callers usually make a note of who the couples are prior to starting the tip so they have a record of who is in which position. If they are teaching and need clarification they will ask the "boys" or "girls" to identify with a raised hand. Our dancers don't try to identify who they are supposed to be dancing with, they dance to the definition of the call and dance with whomever is coming at them. Sometimes during class this becomes very interesting especially if someone boldly moves in the wrong direction and does a move with the wrong person. Occasionally dancers become confused and can be heard muttering, "Oh, yeah I'm supposed to be a (insert role here)." Our group has dancers and classes from Mainstream up to C2. Check it out: http://www.independencesquares.org/ Donna Hunt -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Child <jeremy.m.child(a)gmail.com> To: Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> Cc: callers <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Wed, Sep 28, 2016 2:35 am Subject: Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls Thanks Donna. How do the dancers know who's dancing boy and who girl? Sometimes they need to, or do the callers avoid any calls requiring this knowledge (e.g. boys trade from a wave)? Jeremy On 28 September 2016 at 01:58, Donna Hunt <dhuntdancer(a)aol.com> wrote: Here in Philadelphia the MSW group (Independence Squares) is an LGBT and straight group and we dance to the calls of girl/boy and are free to dance whichever role we wish without any identifying "sashes". Our callers are fantastic at remembering who the couples/boys/girls are during any square. Donna Hunt -----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Child via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> To: Callers <Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> Sent: Tue, Sep 27, 2016 2:47 pm Subject: [Callers] Boys and Girls Hi This is for the MWSD callers amongst you. There has been much discussion on this group about the terms used for the two roles in contra dance. I do not propose to resurrect that here, I mention it to emphasise that many feel the terms used to be important, and that we should be moving away from any gender connotation in them. MWSD uses Ladies, Gents, Men, Women, Girls, Boys - all highly gendered. Is it time we changed these? If so, how? In theory with Callerlab it will be easier, but I suspect they would strongly resist such a change, since the "maleness" and "femaleness" of the roles (e.g. skirt work) is such a fundamental part of what MWSD is. Thoughts? (Apologies to those to whom this is all gibberish) Jeremy Child www.barndancecaller.net www.genderfreedance.net _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

8 years, 3 months

Re: [Callers] Boys and Girls

by Nick Cuccia via Callers

On 09/27/2016 11:35 PM, Jeremy Child via Callers wrote: > Thanks Donna. > How do the dancers know who's dancing boy and who girl? Sometimes > they need to, or do the callers avoid any calls requiring this > knowledge (e.g. boys trade from a wave)? > Jeremy The convention that I've encountered on the handful of occasions that I've danced with IAGSDC (International Association of Gay Square Dance Clubs) clubs in California, Oregon, and Nevada, and at the IAGSDC Convention in San Francisco a couple of years ago, is for the person dancing that particular role to announce "boy!" or "girl!" when doing a gender-identified call. It, and other examples of gay square "fluff", can be found at: <http://www.rosetownramblers.com/Documents/How_To_Fluff.pdf> But going back to your original question about using non-gendered language for MWSD... IAGSDC has an interesting writeup on its use of "boys" and "girls", including some experiments in terms of using alternate nomenclature and physical signifiers that have been done over the years. It's worth a read, and makes some reference to some of the experiments in eliminating gender identifiers in the contra, ECD, and SCD communities. <http://www.iagsdchistory.org/historywiki/index.php?title=Gender_Roles> --Nick

8 years, 3 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

Import1