One of the lessons I learned in a Bruce Hamilton workshop was that the
caller's attitude is a tool and it must be kept sharp. He mentioned the
example of Bob Dalsemer always projecting a strong sense of well-being,
everything is going just fine.
I realized that while my stage presence often did this, too often I also
projected the tension of my worries about the dance -- whether I would be
able to teach something, whether the dancers would "get" it, whether I
could fix a problem if it developed.
So I became more intentional, identifying callers who projected well-being
and trying to copy some of those things they did. I realized it is about
awareness, and about decision-making, and about preparation (knowing the
dances, knowing the music, the band, the crowd...).
Fast forward to yesterday. I was calling an English dance, the music was
going, the room was quiet except for the band (glorious!) and the movement
of the dancers, when a baby -- the several-months-old grandchild of one of
our dancers, began babbling. Not crying, just making noises over the music.
And the part of me that saw it as an interruption was itself interrupted by
the part of me that said, "hey, he's in the right key." So I said that. And
maybe it was only for me, but it made everything OK.
Thank you Bruce and the many others who teach this lesson.
--Jerome
Jerome Grisanti
660-528-0858
http://www.jeromegrisanti.com
“Dance like no one is watching...
Because they are not...
They are checking their phone.
Alan wrote:"A caller can make any dance difficult, and a caller can put across an intrinsically more difficult dance with clarity, confidence, and precise prompting. So some of that suitability of dance to crowd has to deal with the state of the caller. This makes it hard to write down a rating on a card that's going to have meaning when you use it."
Alan: I completely agree. Occasionally, I've found myself bumbling through a walk-through for what seems like an especially boggling dance, only to have the caller announce the dance's familiar title (and on one occasion, the title of a dance I had called without trouble the night before).
Another aspect to consider is the dance flavor of the local community. Depending on the main "crossover dance" (if any) of the majority, the same move can easily be taught to one group while completely flummoxing another. Communities that more frequently dance squares are much more comfortable with pull-bys, for example, while communities with many English Country dancers are less phased by mad robins, heys, etc. I've noticed this more and more as I've started calling dances further away from my home turf, and have begun asking organizers about other popular styles of dance within their community to try to get a sense of this beforehand.
The music is also a major factor in determining difficulty. Is the phrasing hard to hear? Does the phrasing match the dance? Mismatched choreography and music can subtly but profoundly increase the challenge level of a dance. Conversely, an excellent match can make a quirk of a "stretch dance" easier to remember. Matching seems to be especially helpful on dances with isolated balances on the 5th beat (Balance the Hey, for example) instead of the 1st (any dance with a balance and swing). More broadly, selecting dances that the band can't match well seems like an easy recipe for trouble. At one of my early gigs, I couldn't figure out why all of the slinky dances I tried seemed to be giving experienced dancers problems. During the break, someone pointed out that my band had two modes: "bouncy" and "barnburner." The elegant dances I tried to call didn't fit the strengths of the band, and I modified my program for the second half.
-Lindsey DonoTacoma, WA
From: Jerome Grisanti via Callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
To: callers <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net>
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2015 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Callers] Difficulty rankings?
Erik and Alan make good points.
I also think it's worth the exercise to try to rank dances, and individual figures, by difficulty as a way of thinking about what makes a dance hard or easy.
For example:
Which is easier to teach (or to learn): chain, hey, right & left through?
That analysis is worthwhile, even if sorting your cards by such rankings is problematic.
--Jerome
Jerome Grisanti
660-528-0858
http://www.jeromegrisanti.com
“Dance like no one is watching... Because they are not... They are checking their phone.
_______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
Erik and Alan make good points.
I also think it's worth the exercise to try to rank dances, and individual
figures, by difficulty as a way of thinking about what makes a dance hard
or easy.
For example:
Which is easier to teach (or to learn): chain, hey, right & left through?
That analysis is worthwhile, even if sorting your cards by such rankings is
problematic.
--Jerome
Jerome Grisanti
660-528-0858
http://www.jeromegrisanti.com
“Dance like no one is watching...
Because they are not...
They are checking their phone.
Maia --
While you can assign a level of difficulty of dances in isolation, it
doesn't really tell you the whole story. Whatever intrinsic difficulty
the dance possesses interacts with what the floor can do right now and
what the caller can put across. A dance that's easy right after the
break might have been fatally difficult as an opener.
A floor of relatively fit dancers with some level of experience and no
hearing impairment can do things easily that others can't do at all.
A caller can make any dance difficult, and a caller can put across an
intrinsically more difficult dance with clarity, confidence, and precise
prompting. So some of that suitability of dance to crowd has to deal
with the state of the caller. This makes it hard to write down a rating
on a card that's going to have meaning when you use it.
So what makes a dance easy, intrinsically?
- strong flow
- Low piece count
- few or no fractions (some people can't hear, don't process, or won't
do the "and a half" part of 1 and 1/2;
this is recoverable if the next thing is partner swing but bad news
if you need to do something else right
away)
- no action outside the minor set
- clear progression
- symmetry (because if the roles are the same there's less confusion
at the ends)
- recovery point(s); moment of poise
- sticking with your partner
- straightforward end effects
- familiar figures or figures that you can get without drill
When I'm calling for a dance society dance where I have a strong
expectation that there'll be enough people for satisfactory longways
contras through the whole evening and there'll be more experienced
people than beginners and I know the strengths of the band, I make up a
program with what I think is increasing intrinsic difficulty, figure
variety, etc, maybe building up to a medley with all figures in it
handled earlier in the evening if the organizers like medleys, cruising
down to a satisfying low-piece-count strong-flow dance as a finish. (If
it's an old-timey band that doesn't phrase strongly - some do - I try to
avoid dances that need tight timing; mushy Petronellas are annoying.)
But if it's something where I can't get a good read beforehand on
attendance, I have a file of easier contras and a file of harder contras
on my tablet computers and while this dance is running I'm flicking
through the file and picking the next dance based on my current read of
the floor, what figures they know already, what I now think the band can
do, etc.
(You could just have twenty dances memorized and have all the bases
covered, but I like to have a bunch of different choices for the same
niches so that I stay out of the rut of only calling the same twenty
dances in front of the same people, since people dance gypsy all over
Northern California and you'll see the same ones 150 miles apart.)
As you can guess, I don't have a quantified difficulty scale for
dances. I might mark "good opener", and I throw them into the "easier"
or "harder" piles. I don't find it worth doing more than that because
so much of the perceived difficulty is contextual rathe than intrinsic.
-- Alan
On 4/19/15 10:53 AM, Maia McCormick via Callers wrote:
> As I overhaul my contra deck and realize that my difficulty ranking
> system is super incoherent, and most of my dance rankings are from way
> before I had any idea what actually makes a dance easy or hard, I've
> been thinking of scrapping this difficulty ranking system and just
> starting over. So I was wondering: if you rank your dances by
> difficulty, what is your system, what are your benchmarks for various
> difficulty levels, what sorts of things do you consider when
> determining the difficulty of a dance? If you//DON'T rank your dances,
> why not?
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
As I overhaul my contra deck and realize that my difficulty ranking system
is super incoherent, and most of my dance rankings are from way before I
had any idea what actually makes a dance easy or hard, I've been thinking
of scrapping this difficulty ranking system and just starting over. So I
was wondering: if you rank your dances by difficulty, what is your system,
what are your benchmarks for various difficulty levels, what sorts of
things do you consider when determining the difficulty of a dance? If you DON'T
rank your dances, why not?
Cheers,
Maia
Or swat the flea instead of box the gnat. Then there wouldn't be a hand
switch into the allemande.
-Dave
On 4/16/2015 6:08 PM, Roger Hayes via Callers wrote:
> Hmmm. How about, rather than ring balance:
> neighbor balance, box the gnat,
> switch to left hands, allemand 1 1/2
>
> This might have some educational benefit, as I imagine it's going to
> be painfully awkward unless you give decent weight.
>
> - R
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Kalia Kliban via Callers
> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:callers@lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
>
> I'm not entirely clear on what's happening in B2 1-4. One
> possible stumbling point, though, is that pass-throughs are almost
> always by the right shoulder, so you'll need to come up with a
> really strong way to teach that it's left (LEFT, no, the _other_
> left).
>
> Kalia
>
> On 4/16/2015 3:32 PM, Ric Goldman via Callers wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> In the midst of a discussion with some dancers during the
> break at a
> recent gig, this dance sequence came up.Has anyone seen its like?
>
> Allemandery, My Dear Watson – improper
>
> A11-4(New) Nbrs alle R 1-1/2
>
> 5-8Gents alle L 1-1/2 (end in front of and facing Ptnr)
>
> A21-4½ hey (PR, WL, NR, GL)
>
> 5-8Ptnr swing
>
> B11-4Women alle R 1-1/2
>
> 5-8Nbrs swing
>
> B21-4Balance ring; pass by Nbr (pass thru backwards)
> L-shoulder and turn
> back L to…
>
> 5-8(Old) Nbrs alle L 1-1/2 (to next cpl)
>
> Thanx, Ric Goldman
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
> <mailto:Callers@lists.sharedweight.net>
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net <mailto:Callers@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
Hi folks,
In the midst of a discussion with some dancers during the break at a recent
gig, this dance sequence came up. Has anyone seen its like?
Allemandery, My Dear Watson improper
A1 1-4 (New) Nbrs alle R 1-1/2
5-8 Gents alle L 1-1/2 (end in front of and facing
Ptnr)
A2 1-4 ½ hey (PR, WL, NR, GL)
5-8 Ptnr swing
B1 1-4 Women alle R 1-1/2
5-8 Nbrs swing
B2 1-4 Balance ring; pass by Nbr (pass thru backwards)
L-shoulder and turn back L to
5-8 (Old) Nbrs alle L 1-1/2 (to next cpl)
Thanx, Ric Goldman
Hi Kalia,
As written, at the beginning of B2, folks come out of the nbr swing - 1s
below, 2s above. The balance ring gives folks a chance to reorient (1s
facing up, 2s facing down). The pass-by L (and turn L around to face the
"normal" direction) flows into the subsequent allemande L 1-1/2. Another
possible alternative for the pass-by might be a L-shoulder gypsy, which
might flow into the nbr allemande L more easily (a "gypsy/allemande
meltdown"?)
However, going the other way with a normal pass-thru and turn to the R
brings the L hands around to connect (perhaps with a clap) for the
allemande:
B2 1-4 Balance the ring; pass thru (and turn back R into)
5-8 Nbrs allemande L 1-1/2 (to new cpl...)
This avoids the counter intuitive pass-by, and while not as smooth a flow,
might be an exciting contact point for the dancers. Definitely worth
considering :-)
Thanx, Ric Goldman
-----Original Message-----
From: Callers [mailto:callers-bounces@lists.sharedweight.net] On Behalf Of
Kalia Kliban via Callers
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 3:52 PM
To: Caller's discussion list
Subject: Re: [Callers] Anyone seen this sequence?
I'm not entirely clear on what's happening in B2 1-4. One possible
stumbling point, though, is that pass-throughs are almost always by the
right shoulder, so you'll need to come up with a really strong way to teach
that it's left (LEFT, no, the _other_ left).
Kalia
On 4/16/2015 3:32 PM, Ric Goldman via Callers wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> In the midst of a discussion with some dancers during the break at a
> recent gig, this dance sequence came up.Has anyone seen its like?
>
> Allemandery, My Dear Watson improper
>
> A11-4(New) Nbrs alle R 1-1/2
>
> 5-8Gents alle L 1-1/2 (end in front of and facing Ptnr)
>
> A21-4½ hey (PR, WL, NR, GL)
>
> 5-8Ptnr swing
>
> B11-4Women alle R 1-1/2
>
> 5-8Nbrs swing
>
> B21-4Balance ring; pass by Nbr (pass thru backwards) L-shoulder and
> turn back L to
>
> 5-8(Old) Nbrs alle L 1-1/2 (to next cpl)
>
> Thanx, Ric Goldman
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
OK, I've got a few dances here (actually more than a few but I'll start with a few) that I don't have attribution for. I'd appreciate any help, thanks!
Number 1
4 face 4
A1 Forward and back
Swing corner
A2 Heads right and left through
Sides right and left through
B1 Men star left
Do-si-do the one you swung once and a bit more to see partner
B2 Balance and swing partner
Number 2
Duple Improper
A1 Allemande right neighbor 1 1/2
With NEXT neighbor, left shoulder do-si-do once
A2 Swing original neighbor
Lines forward and back (note, this is how I took it down but in practice I would probably rather Balance and swing original here)
B1 Circle left 3/4
Swing partner
B2 Women chain
FULL and zesty square through
Number 3
Duple improper
A1 Wave balance with the MEN in the middle (left to partner, men right), men do Rory O'More move past each other to partner
Swing partner
A2 Women chain
Women pull by the right and allemande left neighbor 1X to form a wave with the women in the middle
B1 Wave balance, women Rory past each other to neighbor
Swing neighbor
B2 Pass through across the set to an ocean wave and balance (women in the middle)
Step forward and with new neighbor facing you, allemande left 1 1/2 to form a wave with the men in the middle
Number 4
Duple improper
A1 Lines forward and back
Swing neighbor
A2 4 in line down the set, turn as couples
come back up
B1 Circle left
Swing partner
B2 Men allemande left 1 1/2
Star promenade, butterfly whirl
That'll do for now. Thanks in advance!
I'm really sorry,
This was thoughtless of me. I'll finish my taxes, and then use my brain to
track him down. It will not be hard.
Sorry for the inconvenience. Back to Shared Weight's regular programming;
talking about dances & calling and stuff.
Amy
On Apr 15, 2015 12:00 PM, "Amy Larkin" <amylarkin(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Would you kindly get in touch regarding NEFFA?
> Thank you,
> Amy for Heyday
>
