Re: [Callers] More on Programming

On 6/25/2015 8:25 PM, Cary Ravitz via Callers wrote (regarding some of the reasons why he finds squares less fulfilling than contras) : It's not just dancers and musicians in the hall, though. There's another person up there on stage, and what squares provide that contras really don't is a very live and fluid connection between the caller and the dancers. With the average contra, the caller prompts until they can get out of the way. The goal seems to be a sort of invisibility. But with squares, there's a very direct connection between the dancers and the caller, and it can be exhilarating. I experienced this recently dancing a fast square to Lisa Greenleaf's impeccably-timed calling, and there were points in there when she was calling sequences of moves so fast that we didn't have time to think. It was immediate response, like the calls went straight to the feet and hands and left the brains free to enjoy the ride. It was unlike any contra. Not better. Different. Excellent. And yes, it wasn't as much about the music. But it was very much about putting complete trust in the caller to get us to the right place at the right time. Not all callers can do that, of course, and a bad square is (IMO) less fun than a bad contra, but they can be REALLY good. Kalia