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) :
*For me*, this all comes down to dancer, music, motion
can be wonderful in a contra. I've never found it in a square.
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.