On the subject of integrating newcomers Jeff wrote:
Yes. I like mixers for this. At a dance such as the thursday concord
ma one where a partner-swing-less dance is almost never called (I
recall one once, in 2006) and will elicit much grumbling, you can
still get away with a circle mixer early in the evening. People will
grumble, but if there are a lot of newcomers that night they'll
understand.
It is interesting that mixers seem to be tolerated by some more than
contras with no partner swing. This may be because mixers are
seen--somewhat begrudgingly and, incorrectly I would argue--as a bow
to the needs of newcomers.
Mixers are, it should be noted, also free of partner swings. In a
partner-swing-free contra, on the other hand, you may nevertheless be
able to promenade, chain, or gypsy with your partner throughout the
entire dance slot. In general I would much prefer a contra with no
partner swing over a mixer. At regular open public contra dances I
no longer call mixers. There are several reasons for this:
First, I find that mixers are too often a heavy-handed way to force
the regular dancers to integrate newcomers. This can set a negative
tone that is transferred to the newcomers themselves, creating an
attitude that newcomers should be "tolerated." The "grumbling" Jeff
mentions above is not easy to miss. It seems obvious that many
newcomers will be aware of this attitude and it will interfere with
their motivation, and possibly their inclination, to integrate into
the dance community.
Second, I feel that mixers can actually discourage many regulars from
partnering with newcomers. This happens when mixers are not
announced in advance. Consider the situation when a more experienced
dancer takes the initiative to approach a newcomer and partner with
them only to learn that the dance will be a mixer. This can be
discouraging to those who put out the effort to partner with a
newcomer. If you want to call a mixer please announce it clearly and
well in advance of the partnering process.
Third, the decision to call a mixer can send several implied messages
to the regular dancers that have a negative influence. These include:
- The caller assumes that most of the regulars are not partnering
with newcomers.
- The caller assumes that most of the regulars do not enjoy
dancing with newcomers.
- The caller does not have confidence in the regulars to welcome
and to partner with new dancers on their own.
All three of these implied messages could be easily assumed by anyone
who hears the "grumbling" cited above when a mixer is announced. In
fact the implied messages are probably accurate most of the time.
Words and actions have consequences, and people will instinctively
look for the implied message rather than the explicit one. This is
how human communication works. Consider the implied messages if the
caller assumes the opposite. What if the caller assumes:
- All of the newcomers are already partnered with more experienced dancers.
- All of the regulars enjoy welcoming and partnering with newcomers.
- The caller can count on the regulars to take the lead in
welcoming and partnering with newcomers.
If the caller assumes all of the above, the caller will speak and
behave differently. For one thing the caller might be less likely to
call a mixer. The implied messages will be very different ones.
Enough for now.
- Greg
