1 Jun
2015
1 Jun
'15
11:22 p.m.
Proper Dance, gender free yet not too simple
A1 Neighbor allemande left 1 1/2
1st corners allemande right 1 1/2
A2 Scoop your partner as you go by, star promenade then butterfly
2nd corners swing in the center, then separate
B1 Partner balance and swing
B2 Take hands in a ring, balance and petranella
Couple 2 swing in the center, end facing up
Dances can have variety and challenges without gender reference. In this
dance, as long as you make clear in the teaching that after the neighbor
allemande left 1 1/2 if you are facing in, you are a 1st corner so you
allemande right, if facing out you are a 2nd corner, get ready to be
scooped you can end the swings any way you want.
Ron, you are certainly right that not all dances can be easily taught in
this manner, but in no way are all of these type of dances simple. I
struggled with translating a "choose your noun" for ladies or gents because
that is how I learned and think about the dance roles. The translation
process adds a layer of complexity for me. I am just offering a different
approach that works for me.
Thanks
Jim
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers <
callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
RE: Dave:
Clockwise / counterclockwise - too wordy, and some people have trouble
with this regardless.
Hey: What about on the left diagonal? Along the set?
I also really don't like the blaming of the dance if it's not 100%
intuitive. Plenty of dances flow great but have a counter-intuitive
element. Restricting dances to those without counter-intuitive moves
is basically saying, "Sorry, if we want to be genderfree, we need to
put a cap on how difficult a dance is. Sorry genderfree dancers, you
aren't allowed to dance too advanced." That's a big problem.
Rollaways can *not* be handled from left to right - who does the
rolling is not indicated at all!
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Dave Casserly
<david.j.casserly(a)gmail.com> wrote:
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761 _______________________________________________
Callers mailing list
Callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
Also with regard to Ron's questions, numbers
2 and 3 (who-leads-whom and
who-walks-forward) can be handled by using the terms "clockwise" and
"counterclockwise." As to 4 (who passes whom for a hey), I agree with
Bob
that if the dance is good, it should be obvious,
but even if not, "pass
left
shoulders in the middle for a hey for four"
can only be interpreted one
way,
so that fixes the issue of referring to roles.
Roll-aways can be handled
with "roll away from the left to the right" or "roll away from the right
to
the left."
I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it is actually quite doable to
call
a
dance without referring to roles at all, even
without resorting to first
or
second corners.
Perry asked for an example of a dance with global terminology used.
Here's
one (just picking a common, typical dance):
Square Affair, by Becky Hill
A1 Long Lines, 1st corners chain (or just say "chain" if you're dealing
with
experienced dancers and don't want to use the
corners terminology)
A2 Balance and pull by partner, pull by neighbor, balance and pull by
partner, pull by neighbor
B1 New neighbors balance and swing
B2 Circle 3/4, partner swing
Perry, you also mentioned that you are trying to figure out how global
terminology would work for proper dances. I have always called proper
dances using global terminology without even thinking about it. For
Chorus
Jig, for instance, why would you ever need to use
the term "gent" or
"lady"?
Down the outside, back, down the middle, back and
neighbor
around-the-waist
turn, 1s turn contra corners, 1s balance and
swing. Nothing that any
particular role does that the other role isn't doing at the same time.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Bob Morgan via Callers
<callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
> With regard to Ron's questions
>
> 1. Would be easily covered by 1st or 2nd corners walk forward to a wave
>
> 2. Again can be done with reference to corners
>
> 3. Not so familiar with these.
>
> 4. You usually only need an obvious first pass person so not an issue I
> think
>
> 5. If you're facing out you turn, if you're facing across you walk is
how
> I call it anyway
>
> Bob
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Ron Blechner via Callers
> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>> Andrea, how would you handle the following:
>>
>> 1. Lines of one role/position to the center to a wavy line, as in Trip
to
>> Lambertville, et all?
>>
>> 2. Indication of who walks forward / backs up in a gypsy star?
>>
>> 3. Indication of who-leads-who, such as in Ramsay Chase, Pedal Pushers,
>> Jurassic Redheads, etc.
>>
>> 4. Indication of who is passing while calling a hey.
>>
>> 5. Indication of who crosses, who turns in a box circulate?
>>
>> 6. Indication any other role/position specific move that I haven't
>> mentioned? Turn over right shoulder, as in Fairport Harbour? Rollaways?
>>
>> None of these fall under the "most unusual figures" as you stated.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>> On Jun 1, 2015 11:59 AM, "Andrea Nettleton via Callers"
>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> In previous discussions here, on FB, and privately with organizers at
>>> Hampshire over the last two years, I have discussed the possible use
of
>>> global terminology for gender free
contra. I would contend that if
used,
>>> everyone would become more aware of
the structure of dances. Only
the most
>>> unusual figures/sequences would be
unable to be called. The addition
of
>>> first and second corner positions to
the arsenal makes it possible
for same
>>> role dancers to also be called upon
to dance together without
reference to
>>> gender. Second corners chain, or
first corners allemande L 1 1/2 for
>>> example. It would have to be agreed that this refers to those
standing in
>>> those positions at that moment. In
ECD we use first and second
corners to
>>> refer to the people, first and second
diagonals for the positions.
But
>>> since we use diagonal to refer to
those across and over one set, this
seems
>>> unhelpful. Simply corner positions
works better. I'm glad some
folks are
>>> trying it out at last. I had hoped
for an opportunity myself before
now.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>> Sent from my iOnlypretendtomultitask
>>>
>>> On Jun 1, 2015, at 8:37 AM, Jim Hemphill via Callers
>>> <callers(a)lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> The recent discussions on this topic inspired me to try an experiment
in
>>> gender free calling. Last night I
called the contra dance in St.
Louis
>>> using gender free calling without
telling anyone. The experiment
was a
>>> great success. I received lots of
positive feedback on the evenings
dance.
>>> At the break and after the dance I
made a point to ask several
dancers, some
>>> were callers as well, if they noticed
anything different or unusual
about
>>> the dances or how I taught them.
One person noticed that there were
more
>>> dances that included a swing in the
center for couple 2 than usual.
No one
>>> I talked to noticed that the calls
and teaching were gender free.
>>>
>>> It took some extra time to construct a fun, diverse 3 hour program,
but
>>> it is certainly possible.
Re-labeling the dancers is not the only
way to
>>> call gender free.
>>>
>>> If you are interested in the program I used or the larger collection
of
> gender free dances I chose the program from, send
me an email,
> arcadian35(a)gmail.com.
>
> Thanks,
> Jim Hemphill
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
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
3492
days inactive
3492
days old
import1@lists2.sharedweight.net
0 comments
1 participants
participants (1)
-
Jim Hemphill via Callers