Re: Callers who gab on too for far too long ....

Wow! What a bunch of excellent points Dale Wilson makes in his recent message! The message also touches on multiple topics that might each be the subject of a productive discussion thread. On Jan 4, 2017, at 2:29 PM, Dale Wilson wrote: [Quoting Chris Brady] [to which Dale replies] I'm curious how others on this list go about preparing to teach a dance--especially when it involves some figure or transition that's likely to be new to most of the dancers. For example, do you ever (or often or never) try practicing your *teaching* out loud in private. I confess that I find it difficult to motivate myself to do that, though I find it easy to put on a recording of dance music and practice *calling* (e.g., to make sure I can get the words out in time when a dance has a sequence of short actions.) I share Dale's skepticism about the pizza slice analogy, even though I've heard it used and recommended by a couple callers whose teaching skill I generally hold in high esteem. It seems to me that people who *already understand* what path they travel travel in a ricochet hey will go "Oh, yeah. It's like a pizza slice!" but the people most in need of help from the caller (the ones who lock on to the idea that "ricochet" must mean to go back along the path they just came on, or the occasional dancers who want to "ricochet" to the far side of the set) will have no idea what "pizza slice" the caller is talking about. And how do we judge the effectiveness of teaching techniques? If a caller uses the pizza slice analogy--or any other teaching technique--"successfully" with a group where 90% of the dancers already know how to do a ricochet hey, the success may be due entirely to the dancers who know how guiding the ones who don't and not to the teaching technique. Even worse is "swing the lady below", which speaks only to the active gents and asks three dancers in each foursome to infer what to do. The multiplicity of roles in squares makes it even easier (than with contras) for callers inadvertently to speak to only some of the dancers. To give just one example, the assertion "You have your original corner beside you [in your line of four]" might be true for head gents and side lades but not for the other four dancers. Or "*What just happened* was that the ladies chained to their partners. If you haven't done it already ..." I wonder how others on this list judge when (if ever) to pause and allow ad-hoc teaching on the floor to happen and when to "reassert the fact that you are the caller". As a caller, do you regard ad-hoc teaching on the floor as anathema and consider it an act of extreme rudeness on the part of the self-appointed assistant callers towards you and towards the many dancers who are waiting for the walk-through to continue? As a dancer, have you ever felt that you could save a nearby dancers from quite a bit of confusion if the caller on the stage would only offer a brief opportunity? [Once, during the walk-through of a dance that I was sitting out, I heard a newish dancer ask aloud--not shouting to the caller, but audible to me in my nearby chair--"What's a box the gnat?" As it happened, it took a while after the walk-through ended before the band was ready to start playing, and I used the opportunity show him (with me taking the lady's part and making it clear both that move resulted in us trading places and that we ended up facing each other). He thanked me and, I believe, went on to enjoy the dance more than he would have without my intervention. Of course I realize that there are also cases where ad-hoc "teaching" on the floor has less fortuitous outcomes.] --Jim