[Callers] Another approach to Gender Free calling

[Erik Hoffman via Callers]

I've been skimming the Another Approach thread, as I haven't had time to 
really process it, though I look forward to examining the ideas, 
internalizing concepts, and using it.

But, on the point of having different ways to say things, YES!

When I'm dancing, I never try to teach in the walk through. I might ask 
the caller a question. And I hate it when a caller says something like 
(as happened recently), "end the hey and stand back to back with your 
partner.... No, back to back.... No, on the other side, and stand back 
to back..." and on and on, not really seeing how people were 
misinterpreting this, doing exactly what she said, but now how she 
wanted them to do it. Another unnamed caller used to say, after 
describing something in a very ambiguous manner -- in a way I could 
interpret in a variety of ways, did in fact, and I was incorrect -- and 
then would say, in effect, "Dancers, you're just not listening to me!"

I always look, both during the walk through and during the dance, and 
try to see what is confusing to dancers, and adjust my instruction to 
their need in a general way.

Devices I use:
     Room Geography! Does one wall have windows, the other not? Turn 
your back on the band, or face the band. Etc.
     Partner: Face your Partner or Neighbor
     And all the conventional ones: Right, Left, Up, Down, Middle, Outside
Even with these "standard" ones, I try to think, "if someone doesn't 
understand "outside," how else can I say it? It might be, "step outside 
the set, that is, take a step away from your partner."

Always, look for different ways to say moves, and hone in on the one 
that will help those in need.

~erik hoffman
     oakland, ca

On 6/3/2015 10:34 AM, Jacob Nancy Bloom via Callers wrote:
> You raise a good point.  It took a long time for someone to impress 
> upon me that, although I have no problem with positional calling, many 
> people do.  Different people have different strengths.
>
> When calling for a group of beginners, I've found that things go more 
> smoothly if I know several ways to describe an action, and use them 
> all.  "Look for the next, look away from the couple you've been 
> dancing with, for a new person."  Some people will understand that 
> they are dancing with one couple after another and turn the right way 
> when I say "Look for the next", some are orienting themselves relative 
> to the other couple and find "look away from the other couple" 
> clearer, and some do not have a strong positional sense but will look 
> around for a new person to dance with.  Different calls work best for 
> different dancers.
>
> Jacob
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Aahz Maruch via Callers 
> <callers at lists.sharedweight.net 
> <mailto:callers at lists.sharedweight.net>> wrote:
>
>     On Wed, Jun 03, 2015, Jim Hemphill via Callers wrote:
>     >
>     > I realize that it is much easier on callers to just substitute a
>     label  for
>     > ladies and gents on their calling cards.  It shifts the burden
>     onto the
>     > dancers who haven't grown up in a genderless dance environment
>     as their
>     > brains translate the label into a term they are used to. 
>      Positional
>     > teaching and calling is more challenging for the caller.  Not
>     every dance
>     > will lend itself to this technique but I bet with a little
>     thought most
>     > would.
>
>     Positional calling is also considerably more difficult for at
>     least some
>     dancers.  My perception is that changing the "gender" label is pretty
>     easy for most dancers -- at least, I've never seen many people
>     struggling
>     with it, and I do see people struggling with contra corners (which
>     is the
>     most common use-case in standard contra dancing).
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/attachments/20150603/28c27d8c/attachment.htm>