Tom wrote: > Greg, you've been writing about integrating new dancers by getting the > experienced dancers to dance with them and even teach them the figures. > For a long time I've thought that this was a bit weird- how could this > ever work? >
Historically, contras were passed on to first-time participants by the regular dancers at open, public social events (often called contra dances) under the direction and coordination of a caller. That’s how it was when I first started dancing contras some 30 years ago. I learned at least 70% from the regular dancers. The regulars have always been an essential part of this process and the primary way newcomers learned the needed dance skills. It has always been a team effort led by the caller. I am advocating that we continue that tradition. I also think we could improve our events by using this collaborative approach possibly even more than it has been used historically. When I call I try to restrict my verbal teaching to some essentials of safety and the comfort of the dancers. I prompt the dance and allow the regulars to silently model the figures and moves. I am working to reduce my own words to allow the regulars to be the primary leaders in the hall. Tom also wrote: > Then my brain finally kicked in and I realized that we live in two very > different worlds. Although it's been some time since I called in > California, I remember that the dancers there were kind, gentle and very > relaxed. They were quite a contrast to some of the dancers back east. > Maybe your method works well because of the kinds of people who live in > your area. Over the years I've seen some hostility and resentment towards > new dancers in my small part of the world. Even when I am told specifics I try to avoid making assumptions about local area "dance cultures." Yes, there are certainly differences. But when I call in another area I do not change my approach very much. People everywhere share most of the same core needs and values. Tom then wrote: > In one dance community, the dancers were so hostile to the new dancers > that someone started a separate dance series for the sole purpose of having > a beginner friendly dance. And before the center line was abolished at > Glen Echo, a very large percentage of experienced dancers had absolutely no > interest in dancing with beginners. > In my area we've always had a beginning lesson and the caller always > teaches the figures. It's worked there for decades. It's the tradition. > If it ain't broke why fix it? I'm thinking that to get the experienced > dancers to teach the figures might be detrimental in some dance communities. > If people are "hostile to the new dancers" then maybe the "traditions", or something else in the area, is in fact, "broken." The optional newcomer’s orientation is often, in my estimation, more a part of the problem than it is a solution. But that’s another thread. Tom finished by writing: > This is a complicated issue and involves more than language. There's also > understanding people and their values, beliefs etc. etc. > > I can't remember exactly what your background is but I'm very interested > in learning more about language and it's use. Is there a good website or > book that you could recommend? > Thank you for asking this. George Lakoff has written several books about, metaphors, "cognitive framing" and linguistics. His explanations of how our brains actually work help to explain a lot of human behavior. Language is, in fact, a key component of human behavior. The linguistic center of our brain is where we "think about" our world and interpret it. In effect, "if you can't say it--you can't think it." So words, and the cognitive frames that they evoke, are the key to how we see "reality." If you doubt that leaders can influence your behavior with their words and behaviors you might gain a lot by studying Lakoff. He is working to build a new vocabulary about social change based upon how our brains actually work. Anyone who spends more than two hours in an evening speaking to a hall over a mike should understand that they are—through their actions and words—changing the physical structure of the brains of those in the room. This is an unavoidable fact. The only question is whether or not we, as callers, take responsibility for our influence. For example: I see two common frames active in the brains of contra dance callers. The first one I call the "selfish dancer frame." In this frame dancers, generally, are seen as fundamentally selfish creatures who will act to maximize their own enjoyment* even if they know that their actions will reduce the enjoyment of other dancers*. Another frame I call the "wonderful dance community frame." When this frame is active in the caller’s brain she tends to see the dancers as generally cooperative and interested in seeing everyone succeed and everyone have a good time. Which frame is "correct?" Both. Two callers—each with the opposing frame active—will see the same dance hall in different ways. Same people, same behaviors, but a different interpretation. What's more, we all have both frames available in our brains and use them at different times. The frame active in the brain of the caller is obvious to everyone in the room. Your view of the dancers will “leak out” through your non-verbal behavior, the implications of your word choices, and by what you do *not*say. Even more amazing: We can switch frames through willful action. It's not easy but we can switch which frame we activate even during a single evening! This is the language of cognitive science. But this is brain science. It isn't rocket science. And individuals have been influencing the behavior of those around them since long before Lakoff. Basically people tend to behave the way other people *expect *them to behave. (The frames we activate in our brains will project to others what we expect of them.) You don’t have to understand Lakoff to “get” the idea that callers act as leaders and set a tone. I try to keep this in mind as I conduct myself at the mike. I try to be aware of how I see the dancers and what my own expectations of them are. When I expect them to dance well and to help newcomers I know that this “frame” is projected through my non-verbal behaviors, the implied meanings of my words, and by what I do NOT say. Regardless of your political or religious beliefs I think most of us would agree that the world needs more leadership right now—at all levels. Dance instructors have historically been a significant source of learning about the social graces and how to conduct ourselves in a civil and courteous manner In called set dances—such as contras—the dance form itself demands that people help one another to “get” the dance and to make it work. This is particularly true of open, public contra dances where there are lots of newcomers and the dancers dance with everyone else at some point during the evening. Helping one another is inherent in the dance form. These dances are a perfect model for how people can work together to address some of the historic challenges in our world today. Yes. Dance callers are in a key position to help us build a just, free, kind, and sustainable society. I propose that we, as callers, accept our historical role as teachers and role models to set a tone at our events where people treat each other with gentleness, kindness, and respect. When that “works” it looks like a “wonderful dance community,” and it is a joyful and magical thing worth celebrating. Callers are necessary to make this happen. But the dancers, and the musicians, are the ones who should get the credit. There are a lot of ways callers can work to encourage gentleness, kindness, and respect on the dance floor…and I would love to discuss all of them. Apologies, for example, are a powerful communication tool for callers. I try to apologize at least once every time I call. My apologies for this extended rant. -Greg McKenzie (No "a" in my name.)
