Good morning Erik and all: here's the "original" *Weeks on the Road" The folk process version starts at A2. Often the "balance in a ring" is omitted in B2, probably because folks don't listen to the walkthrough and just balance and swing partner and that's what callers write down.. I don't know, I really like balancing in a ring after the twirl.. bill WEEKS ON THE ROAD A Becket(*) formation contra by Bill Olson. Single Progression to left A1 Balance in a ring and swing partner (face across and to left) (16) A2 Ladies chain on Left diagonal (8) 1/2 hey for four across (with new couple) (8) B1 Balance and swing (the one you chained to) (face across) (16) B2 Circle L 3/4 (8) Balance the ring (4) Calif. twirl (4) Notes: This is one of those "leave your partner, build up anxiety and finally be reunited with your partner" dances. I had never seen this done in the Becket formation where you California twirled at the end to finally meet your partner. I like the circle balance to partner swing. The hey across in A2 must be done with big loops, especially the man starting out or he will arrive early for the balance and swing. This will get compensated for as the dance progresses. This swing is with the NEXT neighbor, not a shadow, however the shadow person does show up each time in the hey and the circle L. As usual the couple waiting out counts as a couple on the left diagonal and the woman waiting out will chain away from her partner. This couple waiting out (with "new" woman) should square off at the end of the set after the chain to await the California twirl. I often have the band play an extra B part at the end of the final time through and call a final partner balance and swing. This dance was written "on the road" on the way to a Freeport dance Jan 11, 1997. This was a couple days after Pam Weeks had returned from a recording trip out in NY state and had spent some time (not weeks though) on the road. In the dance the women go away but eventually come back home... *Gene Hubert pointed out to me that this is actually a "Backwards Becket" dance. That is to say each time the dance sequence starts, partners are on the side with men to the womens' right! Gene also pointed out that it doesn't really matter 'cause after the swing partners are in true Becket formation. But for the purist, it's Backwards Becket, line up improper and just have the women switch places to start.
> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:26:22 -0700 > From: e...@erikhoffman.com > To: call...@sharedweight.net > Subject: Re: [Callers] backwards becket (was end effects) > > Regarding forwards, backwards, proper, improper, and modern names... > > First there was Proper, all men on one side, all women on the other. > Then Hands Four, or Hands Six and the Minor Set > Then there was Improper, where the ones cross over: now the man has > his partner in his left hand, woman has her partner in her right hand. > Then there was Becket, where the woman is still to the right of her > partner, man to his left > > And Becket dances went both ways, most commonly couples progress to the > left, but some -- 15 or 20 percent? -- to the right. Some of us work to > set dancers up with a direction of progression by encouraging them to > get into Becket formation by doing a quarter circle in the direction of > progression, but (I think) it really doesn't matter: get in Becket > formation and start the walk through. Occasionally there'll be a dancer > who "knows how these things are supposed to work" and try to "progress > the right way," but usually, it just doesn't make a big difference. > > Then some of us made up dances where the Twos had to change sides, > starting in circles where the Man's partner is to his left, the woman's > to her right. I made up a dance like this in the 90s called "Waiting > for the Passport," and called this formation "Reverse Improper." Some > people have dubbed this "Indecent." For some reason, that name has > never appealed to me, but, perhaps, it's becoming the standard, so I > better learn to love it... > > Now there is the "Backwards Becket." And having not called any dances > in this formation, I trust it's: > Man to the right of his partner, Woman to the left of her partner, > but can still progress left or right? Do I understand this correctly? > > I'd love it if someone sent me the "Weeks on the Road" dance in both its > original and its folk processed versions. > > Waiting for the Passport > REVERSE Improper (or, in Improper position, REVERSE progression) > Erik Hoffman > > Start in a wave, Neighbor in Left Hand, Men in Center: > > A1 Balance the wave, Men pull by (with Right); Swing Partner > A2 Men Allemande Left 1½; Half Hey, start passing Neighbor's Rt shoulder > B1 BAL & Sw Nbr > B2 Pass Thru to an Ocean Wave (4) Balance (4); Current Neighbor > Allemand Right ¾ (4) (to progress) > (now momentarily in long wave at the side, meeting New Neighbor) > Allemande New Neighbor Right ¾ (4) to put the Men in the center > of a (new) wave (across) to start again > > --- Initial position: twos cross over (!!), then Allemande Left Neighbor > until the Mn are in the center of a wave. We start from here. > > --- Initial position: or think of it as a reverse progression. If the > ones cross over, have everyone allemande their neighbor by the left > until the men can form the wave. This will cause the ones to now > progress up the set while the twos progress down... > > ~erik hoffman > oakland, ca > > > > On 9/19/2013 1:02 PM, tavi merrill wrote: > > A quick thought on "backwards becket", which is the starting formation of > > one of my dances as well - i tend to think of it as "becket indecent" > > since that regularizes the term with other formation terms, implying lady > > on the gent's left. The basic list of course - proper, improper, indecent, > > improper-progressed, becket, becket-right (or CCW)... and then our friendly > > distant outlier, the backwards becket. > > > > I'd theorize one reason Bill's dance "Weeks on the Road" folk-processed to > > start in normal becket is that "backwards becket" isn't a widely recognized > > formation. > > > > I run into the issue that - because becket-CCW dances are much less common > > than becket-CW (though more common now thanks to some great dances from > > Cary Ravitz and Heather Carmichael to name a couple) dancers zone out as > > soon as i say "circle one place to the..." [AUTOPILOT kicks in, dancers > > assume left]. Have found a variety of strategies to combat this, such as > > circling them to the left three places, or spelling R-i-g-h-t so there's no > > chance they, by some trick of perception, hear "left". > > > > Bringing these points up because a) i believe that formations, like certain > > moves, suffer from lack of use when general unfamiliarity on the dancers' > > part creates situations where dancers go on autopilot and b) while callers > > share common and frequently-used strategies for setting up / teaching / > > introducing the more standard moves and formations, there's a less uniform > > vocabulary and/or lack of shared strategies for the outliers... > > > > just a thought, from someone who likes anti-becket (oh, crap, there's > > ANOTHER way of saying becket-right) and reversed (or "mirrored") courtesy > > turns (see what i'm saying about vocabulary?) and such... which are in no > > wise more difficult than their normative counterparts, but confuse dancers > > who don't encounter them often. > > _______________________________________________ > > Callers mailing list > > call...@sharedweight.net > > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Callers mailing list > call...@sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
