In southern-style square dancing, there are several variations on a figure which is often called “dosido” for two couples, and they are nothing like what Luke is imagining. They go by names like Georgia Rangtang, Georgy-Alabam, Do-si, Dosido and (I think) in MWSD a version of it is called Do Paso. That’s not to say that the figure you are describing isn’t a good one for your dance; it’s just another reason to avoid calling it a dosido.
Richard
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Richard Hopkins
Tallahassee FL
850-544-7614
hopkinsrs(a)comcast.net
> On Dec 1, 2015, at 4:01 PM, via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> Send Callers mailing list submissions to
> callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> callers-request(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> callers-owner(a)lists.sharedweight.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance (Aahz via Callers)
> 2. Re: Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance (Aahz via Callers)
> 3. 4 person do-si-do? (Luke Donforth via Callers)
> 4. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Tom Hinds via Callers)
> 5. Re: Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> (Aahz Maruch via Callers)
> 6. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Aahz Maruch via Callers)
> 7. Re: Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> (Bill Olson via Callers)
> 8. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Hilton Baxter via Callers)
> 9. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Rich Sbardella via Callers)
> 10. Re: 4 person do-si-do? (Don Veino via Callers)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 14:27:22 -0800
> From: Aahz via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> Message-ID: <20151130222722.GA23748(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Howdy,
>
> I've been asked to run a barn dance Saturday Jan 16, 9pm-11pm, but I'm
> busy. The dance will be part of the Western Regional Outdoor Leadership
> Conference:
>
> http://outdoored.stanford.edu/center/wrolc-2016/
>
> If you don't know where Stanford is, you're probably coming from too far
> away to make sense. ;-)
>
> There will be 100+ college students. The theme for this year's
> conference is "diversity", and they would prefer a caller who can fit the
> theme in addition to having experience with one-night-stand environments.
>
> I've offered to be a filter so that they don't need to deal with the
> responses, so please respond privately to me if you're interested and
> available. I've already explained that booking will be somewhat
> difficult both because of the relatively short notice and because it's
> Ralph Page weekend.
>
> I probably will also be sending out an e-mail blast to people I have
> addresses for, apologies if you get this twice. They have already
> contacted other callers so you may actually get three copies...
> --
> Square/Contra Caller http://caller.aahz.ws/
> <*> <*> <*>
> "Those who hear not the music think the dancers mad."
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 16:10:45 -0800
> From: Aahz via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller needed: 1/16 Stanford barn dance
> Message-ID: <20151201001045.GA4132(a)panix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015, Aahz via Callers wrote:
>>
>> I've been asked to run a barn dance Saturday Jan 16, 9pm-11pm, but I'm
>> busy. The dance will be part of the Western Regional Outdoor Leadership
>> Conference:
>>
>> http://outdoored.stanford.edu/center/wrolc-2016/
>>
>> If you don't know where Stanford is, you're probably coming from too far
>> away to make sense. ;-)
>
> Someone pointed out that I should at least have mentioned that this is
> California.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 05:45:27 -0500
> From: Luke Donforth via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> To: "Callers(a)Lists.Sharedweight.net" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
> Subject: [Callers] 4 person do-si-do?
> Message-ID:
> <CAFrKOZbyzOSGTT2YwMjcghwcmXnQi+ek0J-=ekz0QKJgGLi7Ng(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
> Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
> things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
>
> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
>
> Doubled-si-do
> Four Facing Four
>
> A1 -----------
> (4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
> (12) Neighbor swing
> A2 -----------
> (8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
> (8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
> B1 -----------
> (8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
> (8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
> B2 -----------
> (16) Partner balance and swing
> End facing line of direction
>
> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
> chain.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>
>
Thanks all for the feedback. I appreciate having this list to kick ideas
around.
While it would be possible for the do-si-dos to happen in two groups of 2;
in my opinion that would make this a particularly non-interacting 4x4; as
the only whole group of 8 interaction at that point is the circle half way;
and thus not worth getting into 4x4 formation for just that.
As for my comment about the ladies after the chain.
After the give&take - swing, the lines are:
w3 m1 w4 m2
m3 w1 m4 w2
When the women chain to the partner, if they went straight up and down,
they're ending up back at:
w1 m1 w2 m2
m3 w3 m4 w4
after being courtesy turned through 180 degrees.
Except the next move is happening in the center, so as w2 and w3 are being
courtesy turned, they'll be facing into the center after maybe 140 degrees
of rotation; whereas w1 and w4 have to turn about 220 degrees to face into
center.
As for language, I think I may have muddied the issue; so thank you for
demonstrating all the ways that my instructions could be interpreted.
Always a learning experience. A handless star/promenade inside/4 person
gypsy is not quite what I had in mind, although they're all basically the
same path on the floor and certainly what I described. I'd envisioned folks
getting to do-si-do with as little or as much twirling as the wanted; but
as folks pointed out, the DSD twirl is the opposite direction of the big
picture rotation.
If I can get dancers to test it, I might describe it as "all four women,
do-si-do your opposite woman while dodging the other two"
Given that's how I'm thinking of it; the fact that my description involves
"dodging" might be a sign it's not such a great idea. The promenade inside
or star options might be more timing resilient; although I like the idea of
letting folks safely twirl when they want.
I'll keep turning it over in my head, and try to get guinea pigs to dance
it (there's something that would go viral on youtube...)
Thanks for being a community to talk about dancing with :-)
Luke
With respect to Tom's prior comment about dancers substituting the simplest
interpretation sometimes, I think this dance could have that apply.
Up through the A2 Ladies Chain you are in lines of four facing
configuration (as opposed to square). If the Dosidos happen in two groups
of 2 (parallel traditional Dosidos) up and down then that formation is
maintained, timing is proven and the Circle entry still has the same
inertia.
-Don
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
> Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
> things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
>
> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
>
> Doubled-si-do
> Four Facing Four
>
> A1 -----------
> (4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
> (12) Neighbor swing
> A2 -----------
> (8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
> (8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
> B1 -----------
> (8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
> (8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
> B2 -----------
> (16) Partner balance and swing
> End facing line of direction
>
> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
> chain.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
Luke,
In modern square dance a left hand star without hands is simply called
promenade inside. By definition a right hand star w/o hands would be a
reverse promenade inside. Both would take 8 beats/steps to accomplish in a
square, and probably close to eight beats in a mescolanza.
I do not quite understand your comment about the women, as they will all
have to adjust there walk around to accomodate for the last women into the
"handless star" or promenade.
Unless I am misunderstanding your concept, this does not resemble a dosido
in any fashion, and I believe using that term might muddy the use of Dosido
and As Couples Dosido.
Rich Sbardella
Stafford, CT
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
> It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
> Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
> things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
>
> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
>
> Doubled-si-do
> Four Facing Four
>
> A1 -----------
> (4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
> (12) Neighbor swing
> A2 -----------
> (8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
> (8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
> B1 -----------
> (8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
> (8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
> B2 -----------
> (16) Partner balance and swing
> End facing line of direction
>
> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
> chain.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thank you
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
>
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
>
> Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
> dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
> do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
In the normal duple improper formation, a four-person do-si-do is called
zigzag, there are lots of dances with that. But that's not what you're
doing here.
> In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
> not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
> less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
> chain.
>From my POV, that's a four-person gypsy. Or maybe the square dance
equivalent would be promenade inside the ring. The key element of
do-si-do is facing the same direction during the movement (modulo the
contra variant of a spinning do-si-do or square dancing's highland fling)
and ending up facing the same direction at the end.
I recently saw a square dance caller struggle with explaining Walk Around
the Corner (which is square dancing's equivalent of gypsy) and See Saw,
failing to mention either of the "easy" ways of getting across the
concept:
* keep your shoulder toward the person you're walking around
* exactly the same thing as an armless allemande
Anyway, there are probably several ways to call what you want, but I
think that do-si-do ain't one of them. ;-)
--
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/
<*> <*> <*>
Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
Howdy,
I've been asked to run a barn dance Saturday Jan 16, 9pm-11pm, but I'm
busy. The dance will be part of the Western Regional Outdoor Leadership
Conference:
http://outdoored.stanford.edu/center/wrolc-2016/
If you don't know where Stanford is, you're probably coming from too far
away to make sense. ;-)
There will be 100+ college students. The theme for this year's
conference is "diversity", and they would prefer a caller who can fit the
theme in addition to having experience with one-night-stand environments.
I've offered to be a filter so that they don't need to deal with the
responses, so please respond privately to me if you're interested and
available. I've already explained that booking will be somewhat
difficult both because of the relatively short notice and because it's
Ralph Page weekend.
I probably will also be sending out an e-mail blast to people I have
addresses for, apologies if you get this twice. They have already
contacted other callers so you may actually get three copies...
--
Square/Contra Caller http://caller.aahz.ws/
<*> <*> <*>
"Those who hear not the music think the dancers mad."
Luke,
There have been times when I've tried new ideas and the dancers
figured out an easier way. Or said differently they saw through the
complexity and thought it was not worth the effort. I'm not saying
this is true for your dance but it's something to be prepared for.
In terms of timing I'd guess that the 4 person do-si-do is going to
take more than 8 beats.
Tom
It's 5 am, and I find myself awake and writing dances; specifically 4x4s.
Unfortunately, I don't have 8 dancers waiting on my insomnia to test
things, so I figured I'd send them to shared weight...
Possibly this is a choreographic question already answered in square
dancing, but I'm not familiar with the outcome. How well does a four person
do-si-do work? I'm thinking of something along the lines of:
Doubled-si-do
Four Facing Four
A1 -----------
(4) Give and Gents take (up and down)
(12) Neighbor swing
A2 -----------
(8) Women's Chain back to partner (up and down), turn to face in
(8) All four Women Do-si-do 1x
B1 -----------
(8) All four Men Do-si-do 1x
(8) All eight Circle Left 1/2x
B2 -----------
(16) Partner balance and swing
End facing line of direction
In my head, the four person do-si-do is a right hand star sans hands; but
not sure how well it'll fly; especially since the right diagonal women have
less far to turn to face in than the left diagonal women coming out of the
chain.
Thoughts?
Thank you
--
Luke Donforth
Luke.Donforth(a)gmail.com <Luke.Donev(a)gmail.com>
Me too!
Bob Livingston
From: Ron Blechner via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
To: jean francis <catherineaura(a)yahoo.com>
Cc: Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2015 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Callers] woodrow wilson
Kind of missing the connection.On Nov 26, 2015 4:02 PM, "jean francis via Callers" <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
absolutely excellent article; thanks Michael. I was, in a past life, a "Woodrow Wilson fellow" at Princeton and never knew this but I surely agree with the articles conclusion (and its relevance to the gypsy discussion)
_______________________________________________
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
absolutely excellent article; thanks Michael. I was, in a past life, a "Woodrow Wilson fellow" at Princeton and never knew this but I surely agree with the articles conclusion (and its relevance to the gypsy discussion)
