Richard said:
"My first dance with a courtesy turn may use it with a promenade,
depending on the crowd. Then move on to dances with a chain or R&L.
Once the turn is understood and well done, the others are easy."
And thus we come to why teaching moves with a courtesy turn is so much
easier in New England (where promenade and courtesy turn are both done in
the same position). Oh how much easier if we all did a "New England
promenade."
J
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:47 AM Richard Hart via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> I usually try to separate the courtesy turn from the chain. A courtesy
> turn is used in a number of moves, including R&L through, and a
> promenade. Practice that first with your partner. Man backs up and the
> woman gores forward, with arms around your partner's back. .Remember
> to stop facing the right direction, and as a caller remember to tell
> dancers which way to face. This can be done in a couple of minutes or
> so.
>
> My first dance with a courtesy turn may use it with a promenade,
> depending on the crowd. Then move on to dances with a chain or R&L.
> Once the turn is understood and well done, the others are easy.
>
> I agree with Erik (and Dudley!) The walkthrough and instruction should
> be short. They'd all rather be dancing, so don't introduce much new
> stuff in any single dance.
>
> And thanks for this discussion. I love seeing new dances to try and
> new possibilities to teach when there are a lot of beginners.
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers
> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I've been thinking about glossary dances, and building vocabulary for new
> > dancers. I'm curious what your favorite dance is for teaching a ladies
> chain
> > for a crowd of mostly new dancers? Or if you don't have a specific dance,
> > what do you look for in a dance to make the chain as accessible as
> possible?
> >
> > Just a chain over? Or a full chain over and back?
> > Chain to neighbor? Chain to partner?
> > What move best precedes the chain to set it up?
> > What move best follows the chain that still helps new dancers succeed?
> > Other factors you consider?
> >
> > I don't have a go-to favorite, but I'll walk through some of the things I
> > think about:
> >
> > I very seldom call a dance with a full chain. Experienced dancers don't
> > whoop and holler over them, and for new dancers, I'd worry the confusion
> > would snowball.
> >
> > Programatically, in a hall with a reasonable mix of new and experienced
> > dancers, I shoot for the first chain to be to neighbor so that the new
> > dancers can feel it with different experienced dancers; rather than new
> > dancers (who will partner up and clump, no matter how many helpful dance
> > angels you have) continually chaining to each other. If I were trying to
> > teach a chain to ALL new dancers... well, I doubt I'd teach a chain to
> > completely new dancers... but if I were, I'd probably go to partner.
> >
> > For moves, while I love the chain->left hand star transition; I'm not
> > convinced it's the best for teaching the chain. It often goes B2
> > chain->star, find new neighbor; and the new neighbor from a left hand
> star
> > is non-trivial for new dancers. Possibly a dance where the chain->star
> > wasn't followed by the progression would work, but it's such a great
> > progression when they're ready for it; I don't see many of those dances.
> > chain->star->left allemande maybe? I do like long lines either before or
> > after the chain as a set-up; but not on both ends. I'm not sure which
> side
> > of the chain the lines help more. The Trip to ___ dances that end with
> > chains and start with women walking in to long wavy lines flow well, but
> I
> > don't know that they're the best for teaching chains, since the long wavy
> > line is another new piece.
> >
> > Anyway, just some of my thoughts (started by the other thread about
> simple
> > glossary dances). I look forward to hearing what others on Shared Weight
> > have to say about the dances they use to teach chains (and I certainly
> won't
> > be offended if folks tangent off into gent's chains; just start a new
> thread
> > ;-)
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> >
> > --
> > Luke Donforth
> > Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
--
Jack Mitchell
Durham, NC
Hi, Harry Brauser is a dancer and former caller who has moved back to San Diego. He called me when he got here and I screwed up and erased his phone number from my phone before I had a chance to write it down. Does anyone have his phone number? He used to call in Maine and Boston.
Martha Wild
Hi Tavi,
I do teach the twirls in a Ladies' Chain, occasionally at a regular
dance, but more often in style and technique workshops at festivals.
If anyone wants some pointers on how to teach good twirl technique
then please see my article at http://modernjive.com/history/tension.html
Although this is written for a different dance style, when you get
to a point where there is (albeit briefly) some lead and follow, as in a
twirl, then most of this article is directly applicable to the twirls and
flourishes that we do in contra dancing.
Because the dance style that this article was written for has a male
lead, it uses the words "man" and "lady", but you can substitute anything
you like to indicate who is the twirler and who is the twirlee.
I hope you find it useful.
Happy dancing,
John
John Sweeney, Dancer, England john(a)modernjive.com 01233 625 362
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent
Per Richard's excellent point about separating the courtesy turn from the
chain, an approach i too use, i want to address the related questions of
- lack of attention to chains beyond the beginner level, resulting in
- bad/injurious flourishing, partly due to
- gendered dynamics in the standard (New England-style) promenade turn
- the rarity of gents' LH chains
- a call for choreographers to help address all the above
We callers spend plenty of time dissecting how to teach the ladies'
chain... and almost never address a corollary issue dancers repeatedly
bring up in online forums, largely leaving flourishing as a foregone
conclusion. We spend precious little stage time delivering the sort of
style points that can help dancers flourish safely, courteously, and with
consent.
I would argue one reason we don't address that enough is that we are either
approaching the courtesy turn from a bare-bones beginner angle, or as a
foregone conclusion wherein advanced dancers require no additional
teaching. A few callers do teach how to signal and interpret signals
indicating a desire for or granting consent for flourishes, and i tip my
hat to them. But to the issue many (female) dancers raise: too many male
dancers don't ask, and either fail to recognize or fail to respect cues
around flourishing.
Why? Probably because many male dancers much less regularly end up on the
twirling (as opposed to facilitating) side of flourishes. Dancers are going
to flourish whether or not we teach them how to do it well. But we can help
alleviate rampant bad and/or injurious flourishing if we choose. How? By
more frequently adding style points in intermediate settings, and by giving
dancers an opportunity to experience the other side of the equation.
[Now, many of us agree that contra is not a lead/follow dance form, and
some go so far as to suggest that in the traditional promenade and courtesy
turn, dancers move as a unit that lacks any lead/follow dynamic. I disagree
there: placement of the gent's hand behind the lady's back puts the gent in
a position to propel the lady. No interpretation of this dynamic is
accurate without considering the historical context our dance form emerges
from, in which a gendered imbalance is unmistakably present. Consider the
gendered language of singing squares recorded by Ralph Sweet. I say this
not to criticize Sweet, or any caller who uses such language (eg "put her
on the right" or "chain the ladies," the latter an expression i once
unquestioningly used in my own calling), merely to point out that
traditionally, the gents' role has been considered the more "active" one,
and that this gendered sense of agency is reinforced by the ubiquitous
and overwhelmingly lopsided promenade and courtesy turn. Contra dance has
historically been a gendered form; to deny this is to perpetuate male
privilege - the source of bad/injurious flourishing - by denying its
presence in the form. In that many contemporary dancers choose to play both
roles on the floor, and in that there is a broad consensus among callers
that lead/follow terminology is not appropriate to describe an ideal
expression of our dance's contemporary practice, a shift is occurring.
Nonetheless this is an active shift. To pretend that contra has always
lacked a lead/follow dynamic is ignorant of even recent history.]
Despite the hours we spend workshopping the ladies' chain, we spend
virtually no time collectively addressing how to teach gents' (left-handed)
chains. As a consequence, male dancers miss out on opportunities to twirl;
understanding of the importance of cues and flourish best-practices (as
opposed to cranking ladies around) remains spotty; and some great dances*
rarely get called. As with right-handed chains, getting to a flourish
requires first mastering the directional flow of the reversed courtesy turn
(right with right in front, left hands behind, lady backs up and the gent
goes forward). But whether it's boiling the reversed courtesy turn down to
an allemande right or writing gents' RH chain dances, it seems precious few
callers care enough to bother with teaching and using the LH chain. We have
it, for frell's sake, let's USE it. Dancers CAN and WILL gain familiarity
if we do, but such progress can occur only if a critical mass of callers
are on the same page.
Why does this matter? Because if indeed we believe our tradition to be one
in which both roles are equally active, we shouldn't have ladies being
twirled against their wishes. Addressing that would be simpler if we agree
to stop shortchanging the one move in our choreography that truly
challenges the historical gender dynamic.
Want to innovate in choreography? What about featuring promenades in
reversed hold, or left-and-right through?! Though they exist, rarity
renders them the province of advanced dance sessions. Yet every second we
spend teaching standard promenade hold turns is something dancers could
easily generalize to isomers, if the isomers were on a more equal footing.
Because they share a common backbone in the reversed hold (a la Rich's
point about the standard RH chain) increased frequency of such isomers
would raise dancers' familiarity with the reversed hold, reducing our need
to teach it, or isomeric moves, as "unusual," while adding variety to
evenings of dance. Should folks indeed be writing them, I am eager to
collect such sequences.
It struck me a few months ago that, while i have some fantastic dances in
my collection involving the gents' LH chain, i knew of none involving a
gents LH chain over and back. So here y'all go. This isn't a beginner
dance. It's intended for remedial education. Should you use this, I am
eager to hear how it is received.
"You've Got To Be Carefully Taught (To Twirl)"
becket R
A1. Partner balance & swing
A2. Gents pass L half hey, ladies pushback; Neighbor swing
B1. Gents LH chain over & back
B2. RH star to meet NEW neighbors in a wave (GR, NL); waves balance, spin
right
*great gents LH chain dances: "Swain the Hey" by Chris Page, "The Broken
Mirror" by Bill Olson, "Rollaway Sue" by Bob Isaacs, "The Curmudgeon Who
Ruined Contradance" by Eileen Thorsos, "Generation Gap" by Thankful
Cromartie, and the obvious reverse-engineered variation on "Secret Weapon"
by Lisa Greenleaf
Please note: The preceding theory arguments are premised on a notion that
to survive, traditional forms evolve. Some elements of the form - the
ubiquity of a historically gendered dynamic that drives problematic dance
behaviors - could stand to be lost in this process. I believe that a truly
equal dance dynamic would preserve the best elements and tendencies of the
form and increase the safety, joy, and appeal of community dance.
Practically speaking, we'd be doing all the same moves, just without the
lopsidedness, by widely adopting both isomers.
In curmudgeonliness,
Tavi
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 11:47:10 -0400
> From: Richard Hart via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: "Callers(a)Lists.Sharedweight.net" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Favorite dance to teach a ladies chain?
> Message-ID:
> <CAB16f6Ceg6PTXKQrWL60ko8=+hOVC_JD6zaQ3+9TxBVXfN8AgQ(a)mail.gm
> ail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I usually try to separate the courtesy turn from the chain. A courtesy
> turn is used in a number of moves, including R&L through, and a
> promenade. Practice that first with your partner. Man backs up and the
> woman gores forward, with arms around your partner's back. .Remember
> to stop facing the right direction, and as a caller remember to tell
> dancers which way to face. This can be done in a couple of minutes or
> so.
>
> My first dance with a courtesy turn may use it with a promenade,
> depending on the crowd. Then move on to dances with a chain or R&L.
> Once the turn is understood and well done, the others are easy.
>
> I agree with Erik (and Dudley!) The walkthrough and instruction should
> be short. They'd all rather be dancing, so don't introduce much new
> stuff in any single dance.
>
> And thanks for this discussion. I love seeing new dances to try and
> new possibilities to teach when there are a lot of beginners.
I usually try to separate the courtesy turn from the chain. A courtesy
turn is used in a number of moves, including R&L through, and a
promenade. Practice that first with your partner. Man backs up and the
woman gores forward, with arms around your partner's back. .Remember
to stop facing the right direction, and as a caller remember to tell
dancers which way to face. This can be done in a couple of minutes or
so.
My first dance with a courtesy turn may use it with a promenade,
depending on the crowd. Then move on to dances with a chain or R&L.
Once the turn is understood and well done, the others are easy.
I agree with Erik (and Dudley!) The walkthrough and instruction should
be short. They'd all rather be dancing, so don't introduce much new
stuff in any single dance.
And thanks for this discussion. I love seeing new dances to try and
new possibilities to teach when there are a lot of beginners.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've been thinking about glossary dances, and building vocabulary for new
> dancers. I'm curious what your favorite dance is for teaching a ladies chain
> for a crowd of mostly new dancers? Or if you don't have a specific dance,
> what do you look for in a dance to make the chain as accessible as possible?
>
> Just a chain over? Or a full chain over and back?
> Chain to neighbor? Chain to partner?
> What move best precedes the chain to set it up?
> What move best follows the chain that still helps new dancers succeed?
> Other factors you consider?
>
> I don't have a go-to favorite, but I'll walk through some of the things I
> think about:
>
> I very seldom call a dance with a full chain. Experienced dancers don't
> whoop and holler over them, and for new dancers, I'd worry the confusion
> would snowball.
>
> Programatically, in a hall with a reasonable mix of new and experienced
> dancers, I shoot for the first chain to be to neighbor so that the new
> dancers can feel it with different experienced dancers; rather than new
> dancers (who will partner up and clump, no matter how many helpful dance
> angels you have) continually chaining to each other. If I were trying to
> teach a chain to ALL new dancers... well, I doubt I'd teach a chain to
> completely new dancers... but if I were, I'd probably go to partner.
>
> For moves, while I love the chain->left hand star transition; I'm not
> convinced it's the best for teaching the chain. It often goes B2
> chain->star, find new neighbor; and the new neighbor from a left hand star
> is non-trivial for new dancers. Possibly a dance where the chain->star
> wasn't followed by the progression would work, but it's such a great
> progression when they're ready for it; I don't see many of those dances.
> chain->star->left allemande maybe? I do like long lines either before or
> after the chain as a set-up; but not on both ends. I'm not sure which side
> of the chain the lines help more. The Trip to ___ dances that end with
> chains and start with women walking in to long wavy lines flow well, but I
> don't know that they're the best for teaching chains, since the long wavy
> line is another new piece.
>
> Anyway, just some of my thoughts (started by the other thread about simple
> glossary dances). I look forward to hearing what others on Shared Weight
> have to say about the dances they use to teach chains (and I certainly won't
> be offended if folks tangent off into gent's chains; just start a new thread
> ;-)
>
> Take care,
>
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
Hey, I’m an experienced dancer, and I actually like the continuous flow of a “full” ladies chain. And having done it from the man’s side, it’s kind of fun there, too, to sidestep and then swoop the women’s role around or if the dance and partner permit, twirling them under. It’s a flowy move, I tend not to whoop in flowy dances (and I don’t see that so much from others either). Whooping goes well in the balancy dances. But it’s the match of the music with the dance that really gets me.
Martha
> On Aug 22, 2016, at 8:18 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I've been thinking about glossary dances, and building vocabulary for new dancers. I'm curious what your favorite dance is for teaching a ladies chain for a crowd of mostly new dancers? Or if you don't have a specific dance, what do you look for in a dance to make the chain as accessible as possible?
>
> Just a chain over? Or a full chain over and back?
> Chain to neighbor? Chain to partner?
> What move best precedes the chain to set it up?
> What move best follows the chain that still helps new dancers succeed?
> Other factors you consider?
>
> I don't have a go-to favorite, but I'll walk through some of the things I think about:
>
> I very seldom call a dance with a full chain. Experienced dancers don't whoop and holler over them, and for new dancers, I'd worry the confusion would snowball.
>
> Programatically, in a hall with a reasonable mix of new and experienced dancers, I shoot for the first chain to be to neighbor so that the new dancers can feel it with different experienced dancers; rather than new dancers (who will partner up and clump, no matter how many helpful dance angels you have) continually chaining to each other. If I were trying to teach a chain to ALL new dancers... well, I doubt I'd teach a chain to completely new dancers... but if I were, I'd probably go to partner.
>
> For moves, while I love the chain->left hand star transition; I'm not convinced it's the best for teaching the chain. It often goes B2 chain->star, find new neighbor; and the new neighbor from a left hand star is non-trivial for new dancers. Possibly a dance where the chain->star wasn't followed by the progression would work, but it's such a great progression when they're ready for it; I don't see many of those dances. chain->star->left allemande maybe? I do like long lines either before or after the chain as a set-up; but not on both ends. I'm not sure which side of the chain the lines help more. The Trip to ___ dances that end with chains and start with women walking in to long wavy lines flow well, but I don't know that they're the best for teaching chains, since the long wavy line is another new piece.
>
> Anyway, just some of my thoughts (started by the other thread about simple glossary dances). I look forward to hearing what others on Shared Weight have to say about the dances they use to teach chains (and I certainly won't be offended if folks tangent off into gent's chains; just start a new thread ;-)
>
> Take care,
>
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <mailto:Luke.Donev@gmail.com>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
The latest version of my Dance Organiser program (which runs on Windows, including a Windows tablet) has extra features which may
appeal to contra callers. Now you can see a grid of which figures appear in which dances of your event, and you can change things
to give more variety of figures. I realised the necessity of this while calling in the States in June!
Download a trial copy from http://colinhume.com/download.htm and experiment with some of my existing program(me)s.
Apologies to those of you who subscribe to two or three lists and will see this two or three times.
Colin Hume
For the one in question, I've been told:
Together At Last by Beau Farmer
Is basically the same, but the progression is the star to next neighbor,
don't return to previous neighbor.
Related question:
Would it be awful for gents to allemande instead with the next gent on the
slight left, and ladies to join the hey, and have a progression there?
-R
On Aug 29, 2016 1:24 PM, "Ron Blechner" <contraron(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to give the choreographer credit:
>
> Becket contra:
> A1. Ladies Chain (to N) (8)
> Star L 1x (8)
> A2. Gypsy/Face-to-face/Spiral R Next N 1x (6)
> N1 Sw (10)
> B1. Gents Alle L 1.5 (8)
> 1/2 Hey (PR, LL, NR, GL) (8)
> B2. P Gypsy + Swing (16)
>
> I have been poking at the idea of coming out of a star L, having a
> next-neighbor/shadow peek, and then returning to swing the person you
> starred with. (Thanks to the dance "Here's to the Ladies" for getting my
> gears going.)
>
> A more complex, partner heavy dance that I'm poking at:
>
> Becket contra
> A1. w/P pass thru across, turn left, single file to next (6)
> w/n2s Star L 1+1/4 (10) (til on side w/N, gents home side)
> A2. N3 Gypsy/F2F/Spiral Right 1x (6)
> N2 Swing (10)
> B1. Mad Robin (8) (CW, gents in front, same N2s)
> 1/2 Hey (8/ (GL, PR, LL, NR)
> B2. G pass L (2)
> PS (14)
>
> In dance,
> Ron Blechner
>
I'd like to give the choreographer credit:
Becket contra:
A1. Ladies Chain (to N) (8)
Star L 1x (8)
A2. Gypsy/Face-to-face/Spiral R Next N 1x (6)
N1 Sw (10)
B1. Gents Alle L 1.5 (8)
1/2 Hey (PR, LL, NR, GL) (8)
B2. P Gypsy + Swing (16)
I have been poking at the idea of coming out of a star L, having a
next-neighbor/shadow peek, and then returning to swing the person you
starred with. (Thanks to the dance "Here's to the Ladies" for getting my
gears going.)
A more complex, partner heavy dance that I'm poking at:
Becket contra
A1. w/P pass thru across, turn left, single file to next (6)
w/n2s Star L 1+1/4 (10) (til on side w/N, gents home side)
A2. N3 Gypsy/F2F/Spiral Right 1x (6)
N2 Swing (10)
B1. Mad Robin (8) (CW, gents in front, same N2s)
1/2 Hey (8/ (GL, PR, LL, NR)
B2. G pass L (2)
PS (14)
In dance,
Ron Blechner