Interesting. As a musician, organizer, and mostly former caller at this
point, I think it makes little sense to pay callers more. Sure, they might
work harder during the night itself, though that depends heavily on the
instrument and musician involved (it is a lot of work to play mostly melody
on fiddle tunes on sax for three hours, and I spend more time practicing
with a band for each gig than most callers spend on programming and
preparation for one evening). But in terms of what it takes to get to the
point of competently performing for an evening, it's not close. Musicians
use a piece of equipment that costs thousands of dollars and takes
thousands of hours of training and work to get to the point of being able
to play for a full evening. Callers don't. I know of no callers who spent
hours literally every day practicing calling for a decade, spent tens of
thousands of dollars on training for their craft, etc, but plenty of
musicians have done this.
I called my first full evening, which went ok, though not seamless, about
two years after the first time I tried calling at all. I'd been to a
couple callers' workshops, had practiced calling a little bit, under 40
hours total, and had probably spent some amount of money not exceeding $100
on calling materials. I played for my first contra dance after spending
over $100,000 and 10,000 hours learning the craft of my instrument
(including attending conservatory, practicing 10+ hours per week for at
least a decade before playing my first dance, etc). I'm not saying that
everybody's experience is the same on both, or that they should be compared
in exactly those terms. But looking at just how it's a little bit more
work for the caller during the dance itself and thinking that justifies
paying callers really ignores the vast majority of what musicians do to get
to that point, and seems to me to be grossly unfair.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 2:28 PM, Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu>wrote;wrote:
As a musician and a sometimes caller, I'm happy to
have callers paid
more. I think callers are working harder.
As an organizer I'd rather pay everyone the same; it seems more fair
and avoids ugly discussion about who deserves what.
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 10:33 AM, Merle Mceldowney
<merle.mceldowney(a)gmail.com> wrote:
In New York city we have always paid callers
more. A decision was made a
very long time ago - beforei knew what contra dancing was - that callers
should make more money. In New York city the callers made about thirty
percent more. We have raised the fees of musicians since then and not of
callers, but they still have not caught up. There are still people
around
who know the exact history and who made that
decision. I am sure if you
ask
any of the older musicians thay can give you the
reason in a way that is
less than friendly. Ask one of the older callers -and there description
as
to how this happened will be much nicer.
Merle
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Sue Robishaw <sue(a)manytracks.com>
wrote:
> Hi All,
> This is more curious than useful, but on this current discussion and
> on previous ones I notice (and have paid a lot of attention to since our
> new dance series is just in its first year) that usually callers and
> individual musicians get the same amount. Having done both (albeit for
> small dances) I find calling a LOT more work than playing and am
surprised
> by this (unless it's a lone melody
player). Do any dances give the
caller a
higher
share?
Sue Robishaw, U.P.M.
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
--
*Merle McEldowney*
*212-933-0290*
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
_______________________________________________
Organizers mailing list
Organizers(a)sharedweight.net
http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/organizers
--
David Casserly
(cell) 781 258-2761