Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Winston, Alan P. via Callers]

On 7/10/2018 9:03 AM, John Sweeney via Callers wrote:


I agree with Colin that it is much more satisfying if you start the move
with your arm around the person you just swung and go forward together.


I see that Larry specified that the woman is drawn to the men's side, 
and for that shoulder-waist hold is great.


Nowadays I encounter choreographies where the gent is drawn to the 
ladies' side, and for that the gent's arm being at the lady's shoulder 
is a problem (because the just-swung lady is now trying to draw back the 
other ent and the just-swung gent's arm is in the way).  It's not a 
*big* problem, but it adds more friction to the move.


-- Alan

___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Does a 1/2 figure 8 and cast off exist in ECD? In Contra?

[Alan Winston via Callers]

Luke --

This isn't directly responsive to your actual question, but here's what 
it reminded me of:


In proper duple formation, the place where same-sex neighbors would 
stand in improper formation is diagonally opposite.  Most longways 
English dances are proper, so in English for these purposes, English 
"first corners" = contra "ladies", English second corners = contra gents.


In "News From Tripoli", first corners cast up or down the outside 
(pulling the shoulder back, a real cast)  while their same-side 
neighbors slide (just move sideways along the line) into the places 
they've vacated, then do a full figure eight and finish in their 
neighbors place.  (Now second corner people are standing in first corner 
places, and they repet the figure doing what the first corner people 
did; everybody's at home.)


In Barbarini's Tambourine (and Sally in Our Alley, which has the same A 
parts), first corners cast around neighbor on the side, half figure 
eight, and finish in each other's place.  Second corners cast around 
(it's their partner, but standing next to them on the side), half figure 
eight, finish in each other's place.


In some 1700s dances as reconstructed, in a duple minor proper 
formation, 1s half -figure eight to the right (gents down, ladies up) to 
go through the 2s next to them; those 1s encounter the opposite-role 1 
from the next set up (it's not quite a shadow interaction since while 
you do see the same person for a while, it stops happening when one of 
you goes out at the end of the set), so it's effectively long diagonals.


In a number of dances (Kelsterne Gardens may be the earliest, although 
some like to do it in Childgrove, which is an earlier dance) there are 
double figure eights, where one couple is is crossing through the middle 
while the other couple is going up or down the outside.  In fewer 
dances, there are double half figure eights; one couple goes through the 
middle, the other on the outside.  So you don't need the diagonal 
half-figure to not have to worry about them running into each other.


I would add to Michael's mention of Chevrons that a lot of people have 
trouble waiting one bar to start their part of the figure, and it does 
raise the difficulty level of the dance.


There's an "all cast one place" in "Wa is Me, Wa Mun I Do", which takes 
two bars of triple time music and a fair amount of room but is very 
pretty in context.  I think your "gents pull left should back and cast" 
has some of the logistical problems of an orbit (it's a quarter orbit) 
as far as using space, with increased chance of collision with gent from 
other set because of not facing the way you're going for the first 
half.  Slide across, orbit 1/4 while making a point of interlacing with 
other gent, or lots of room in the set.


-- Alan


On 7/10/18 5:18 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:

Hello all,

I've been thinking about half figure eights, and variations on them. 
Is anyone familiar (in ECD, contra, or other traditions), where 
instead of the 1s or 2s half figure eight, having the gents or ladies 
do the move from improper formation?


As soon as you have something like the ladies do a half figure eight 
from duple improper; they're either going to have to shift where they 
land, or the gents are going to have to get out of the way. It seems 
to me (during my insomnia, not with actual dancers in a house party) 
that you could have the gents cast off and over to a ladies place. i.e.:


/Ladies half figure eight, passing left shoulder in the middle to take 
neighbor gents' place

/
/Meanwhile, gents cast over left shoulder to take partner's place
/

Which takes
(head of hall)
W1 M1
m2 w2

to
(head of hall)
M1 W1
w2 m2

Which ends in the same place as everybody doing a half figure eight, 
but without 4 people trying to go through the middle at the same time. 
I think it can still happen in 8 beats of music, with nobody standing 
around.


Is that a sequence people have danced or used?

Here's a wrapping to put the whole thing in context.

Calliope's Cross
Improper contra by Luke Donforth
A1
Long lines forward and back
Ladies half figure eight, passing left shoulder in the middle to take 
neighbor gents' place

Meanwhile, gents cast over left shoulder to take partner's place
A2
Neighbor Right Shoulder Gyre and Swing
B1
Circle Left 3/4
Partner Swing
B2
Promenade across set with partner, courtesy turn
Ladies chain to neighbor

The name, and idea, comes from my older daughter (4), who wanted a 
"Calliope's Cross" dance for herself after hearing about "Tamlin's 
Cross" for her sister. Calliope like riding figure 8s on her bicycle.


I've deliberately kept this simple, instead of trying to get a gents 
figure 8 while ladies cast in for symmetry. I'm not sure how I'd teach 
that from the stage; and think I'd have to use a demo.


I look forward to hearing the experience of the group!
Thanks

--
Luke Donforth
luke.donfo...@gmail.com 

Re: [Callers] Does a 1/2 figure 8 and cast off exist in ECD? In Contra?

[Michael Dyck via Callers]

On 2018-07-10 11:46 AM, Luke Donforth wrote:


I'm not sure about prompting it as an all cast, since that implies the 
ladies facing back in after the move, and then casting out again. I was 
envisioning more of a swoop wide,


I was too! For me, that qualifies as a "cast".

See, e.g.
https://round.soc.srcf.net/dances/elements#Cast
which indicates that you don't have to turn up + out if you're already 
facing out or down. Or consider

https://round.soc.srcf.net/dances/elements#Cross%20and%20Cast
where it doesn't say to face back in between the 'cross' and the 'cast'.

Mind you, that's ECD. I'm not sure what (if anything) a non-ECD contra crowd 
would infer from the term "cast".


(It *could* work to have the ladies turn back in after the corner-crossing, 
but only if there's time, which there typically wouldn't be in a contra 
dance. Maybe an ECD to a slowish 3/4 tempo.)


Anyhow, the best wording will depend on what the dancers are used to, but my 
guess is that you'll get better results by breaking the figure into a corner 
trade + all move ccw rather than a half figure eight variant.


-Michael
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[John Sweeney via Callers]

Larry Jenning's words from Give-and-Take (just in case there is anyone out
there who doesn't have, or can't find their copy!):

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
GIVE-AND-TAKE: General definition adopted by some callers and composers: The
"swingers", a man and a woman facing across the set, meet, join free hands,
retreat to the designated side of the set, and prepare to swing. Unless
otherwise specified, the dancers retreat to the man's side. 

Original implementation: I visualized a very crisp, four-count
interpretation. The previous twosomes (not the new twosomes) end the
previous figure (perhaps a swing, a promenade, or a courtesy turn) in half
shoulder-waist position. The previous twosomes move forward at the start of
the phrase, and the swingers form new twosomes by joining free hands
(woman's right, man's left). The woman resists for a moment while they
establish firm but elastic connection, and they take only two more counts to
position themselves to swing a step cw around the entire set from where the
man started. This puts the set in SAWTOOTH FORMATION.

I was put on the defensive by a woman who let me know in no uncertain terms
that she was not about to be given or taken by any man. I felt much
relieved, therefore, to find "give-and-take", with the hyphens even, in the
dictionary: "the practice of compromise." Now that's my kind of attitude; I
even invite you to compromise with your swinger (and with me) by taking up
to as many as eight counts for your implementation.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

I agree with Colin that it is much more satisfying if you start the move
with your arm around the person you just swung and go forward together. 

    Happy dancing,  
   John 

John Sweeney, Dancer, England   j...@modernjive.com 01233 625 362 & 07802
940 574 
http://www.modernjive.com for Modern Jive Events & DVDs 
http://www.contrafusion.co.uk for Dancing in Kent   


___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Does a 1/2 figure 8 and cast off exist in ECD? In Contra?

[Luke Donforth via Callers]

As a couple of folks have pointed out (thank you), there's a typo there.
The ladies take their partner's place, not neighbors. Thank you for
catching that and sorry for the confusion.

Michael, I'll track down some videos of dances with chevrons, thanks for
the aside.

I'm not sure about prompting it as an all cast, since that implies the
ladies facing back in after the move, and then casting out again. I was
envisioning more of a swoop wide, instead of breaking it into two moves.
Eventually I'll get some dancers to house-party it, and I'll see how they
both feel though.



On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Michael Dyck via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> On 2018-07-10 08:18 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I've been thinking about half figure eights, and variations on them. Is
>> anyone familiar (in ECD, contra, or other traditions), where instead of the
>> 1s or 2s half figure eight, having the gents or ladies do the move from
>> improper formation?
>>
>
> Normally, for a half figure eight (HFE), the 4 dancers start at roughly
> the corners of a square, and the dancers from one 'side' start by crossing
> through the dancers on the opposite 'side', e.g.
> twos HFE up (through the ones)
> or
> (from a proper set) men HFE across (through the women)
>
> Your variation is to have the moving dancers start from *diagonal* corners.
>
> For dancers familiar with HFE, I think the first reaction might be: you've
> got your calls mixed up, the women aren't in the correct positions to do an
> HFE. Once you convince them that this is intended, the next question might
> be: should the women move as if for an HFE *across* or an HFE *along*?
>
>
> As soon as you have something like the ladies do a half figure eight from
>> duple improper; they're either going to have to shift where they land, or
>> the gents are going to have to get out of the way. It seems to me (during
>> my insomnia, not with actual dancers in a house party) that you could have
>> the gents cast off and over to a ladies place. i.e.:
>>
>> /Ladies half figure eight, passing left shoulder in the middle to take
>> neighbor gents' place/
>>
>
> (Presumably you mean their *partner* gent's place. They *could* go to the
> neighbor gent's place, but then you'd want them passing *right* in the
> middle, and the gents casting over *right* shoulder to *neighbor*'s place,
> to avoid collisions.)
>
> /Meanwhile, gents cast over left shoulder to take partner's place/
>>
>
> This sounds like a nice figure, but my recommendation is: don't use the
> phrase "half figure eight". Instead, you could say something like:
>
> Ladies trade places, passing left shoulder,
> then *all* cast one place counterclockwise around the set.
>
> This has the gents wait a few beats before starting their cast, which your
> original didn't, but I think it's better to have all the casts
> synchronized. In an ECD setting, if you wanted to get fancy, you could have
> the gents do an on-the-spot figure while the women cross, like a set or
> turn single.
>
> 
> Your figure reminds me of the figure "chevron" (which is mainly ECD but is
> infiltrating contra), the main difference being that in a chevron, the
> diagonal-crossers walk straight backwards into their final place rather
> than casting there. There are also variations re whether they back along or
> across, and whether the others cast in the same direction as the backing-up
> or the opposite direction. E.g.,
>   Victor Skowronski's "Companions" has:
> diagonals back *across* + others cast *same* direction.
>   Fried de Metz Herman's "Mylecharane" has:
> diagonals back *along* + others cast *opposite* direction.
> I'm not sure there's a dance with back *along* + cast *same*, which would
> be the combination closest to your figure.
> 
>
> -Michael
> ___
> List Name:  Callers mailing list
> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>



-- 
Luke Donforth
luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Colin Hume via Callers]

On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 10:23:02 -0400, Maia McCormick via Callers wrote:
> Re: g -- that's totally fair, and an experience I've had on the floor as 
> well, but oh man when it's done right it's
> lovely! Maybe worth spending some time teaching the right way to do it from 
> the mic?

In my experience, a lot of callers teach Give and Take wrongly.  They do it 
with long lines going forward, whereas you
should be going forward with one person in a shoulder-waist hold.  That makes 
it much more satisfying - in addition to
the resistance, of course.

Colin Hume
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Rich Sbardella via Callers]

Hello Maia,
I do a short teach of the give & take more often than not, and most G in
my collection are with partners.
Interesting point about partners.  Linda Leslie once advised me to use a
neighbor rollaway as my first rollaway of the evening, She noted how
unsatisfying it is  to have to roll a partner away repeatedly, who just
never gets it.
Peace,
Rich


On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:23 AM, Maia McCormick  wrote:

> Re: g -- that's totally fair, and an experience I've had on the floor as
> well, but oh man when it's done right it's lovely! Maybe worth spending
> some time teaching the right way to do it from the mic? (This is something
> I might do myself the next time I call one, come to think of it.) Another
> option: select for dances with a g *with partner* (rather than with
> neighbor) so couples can adjust to each other refine their resistance,
> playfulness, etc. rather than starting from square zero with a new N every
> time. Might make for a more satisfying experience. Just a thought.
>
> Cheers,
> Maia
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Luke,
>> You made some great points, and offer some good choices.
>> My experience as a dancer is the Give & Take is rarely satisfying.
>> Seldom is there any resistance, or playfulness, as intended by Jennings.
>> I try not to call more than one G in an evening.
>> Peace, Rich
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Luke Donforth 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Lots of great dances already suggested.
>>>
>>> Talking about the bigger picture programming thing, I hear wanting to
>>> change the feel and not have circles in every dance. While Give and Take
>>> might feel like a cheat to you, it will feel different for the dancers, and
>>> it's probably not egregious.
>>>
>>> You can also add a fair bit of texture with just different results from
>>> the circle. A swing ->circle & swing transition is going to feel different
>>> than a circle into a chain, or a circle left to a circle right, etc. I
>>> think two no-circle dances in a half is a good thing to shoot for, but also
>>> showing the various ways the circle can be used.
>>>
>>> A lot of 4x4 dances don't use circles, so if your crowds are up for (and
>>> large enough) for those, they can get you there and add other program
>>> texture.
>>>
>>> As for specific dances that haven't been mentioned yet, here are some
>>> with 10+ calls from my box:
>>> Marion's Delight by Carol Kopp
>>> A turn for the better by Bill Pope
>>> Friday Night Fever by Tony Parks
>>> Rocket City Romp by Cis Hinkle
>>> iFlirt by Luke Donforth
>>> 2nd Course by Luke Donforth
>>> A Sure Thing by Chris Page (has Circle Right)
>>> Treasure of the Sierra Madre by James Hutson (no N swing)
>>> Amherst and Wooster by Chris Weiler (no N swing)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
>>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>>
 Helo Folks,

 This group has been so quiet lately.  The group has been so important
 for me as I developed my Contra calling repertoire and skills, so I thought
 I'd initiate a conversation.

 As I sit here programming a dance I realize that I do not have many
 dances without circles.  Many that I do have, do not have a Neighbor Swing,
 or have a Give & Take to cheat it out.  Those factors limit where and when
 I can use them.

 I generally like to program two no circle dances in each half, and also
 a NO neighbor Swing dance in at least one half if not both halves of an
 evening.  Any thoughts on this?

 Does anyone want to share some modern contras that have no Circles and
 no Give & Takes, but include a partner and neighbor swing.

 Here are a few I have used.

 Just for NEFFA, Linda Leslie
 Rollin' and Tumblin'. Cis Hinkle
 Rocket City Romp, Cis Hinkle
 Travels with Rick and Kim, Shari Miller Johnson
 Friday Night Fever, Tony Parkes

 Thanks,
 Rich Sbardella
 Stafford, CT



 ___
 List Name:  Callers mailing list
 List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
 Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Luke Donforth
>>> luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> List Name:  Callers mailing list
>> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>
>>
>
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Does a 1/2 figure 8 and cast off exist in ECD? In Contra?

[Michael Dyck via Callers]

On 2018-07-10 08:18 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:

Hello all,

I've been thinking about half figure eights, and variations on them. Is 
anyone familiar (in ECD, contra, or other traditions), where instead of the 
1s or 2s half figure eight, having the gents or ladies do the move from 
improper formation?


Normally, for a half figure eight (HFE), the 4 dancers start at roughly the 
corners of a square, and the dancers from one 'side' start by crossing 
through the dancers on the opposite 'side', e.g.

twos HFE up (through the ones)
or
(from a proper set) men HFE across (through the women)

Your variation is to have the moving dancers start from *diagonal* corners.

For dancers familiar with HFE, I think the first reaction might be: you've 
got your calls mixed up, the women aren't in the correct positions to do an 
HFE. Once you convince them that this is intended, the next question might 
be: should the women move as if for an HFE *across* or an HFE *along*?



As soon as you have something like the ladies do a half figure eight from 
duple improper; they're either going to have to shift where they land, or 
the gents are going to have to get out of the way. It seems to me (during my 
insomnia, not with actual dancers in a house party) that you could have the 
gents cast off and over to a ladies place. i.e.:


/Ladies half figure eight, passing left shoulder in the middle to take 
neighbor gents' place/


(Presumably you mean their *partner* gent's place. They *could* go to the 
neighbor gent's place, but then you'd want them passing *right* in the 
middle, and the gents casting over *right* shoulder to *neighbor*'s place, 
to avoid collisions.)



/Meanwhile, gents cast over left shoulder to take partner's place/


This sounds like a nice figure, but my recommendation is: don't use the 
phrase "half figure eight". Instead, you could say something like:


Ladies trade places, passing left shoulder,
then *all* cast one place counterclockwise around the set.

This has the gents wait a few beats before starting their cast, which your 
original didn't, but I think it's better to have all the casts synchronized. 
In an ECD setting, if you wanted to get fancy, you could have the gents do 
an on-the-spot figure while the women cross, like a set or turn single.



Your figure reminds me of the figure "chevron" (which is mainly ECD but is 
infiltrating contra), the main difference being that in a chevron, the 
diagonal-crossers walk straight backwards into their final place rather than 
casting there. There are also variations re whether they back along or 
across, and whether the others cast in the same direction as the backing-up 
or the opposite direction. E.g.,

  Victor Skowronski's "Companions" has:
diagonals back *across* + others cast *same* direction.
  Fried de Metz Herman's "Mylecharane" has:
diagonals back *along* + others cast *opposite* direction.
I'm not sure there's a dance with back *along* + cast *same*, which would be 
the combination closest to your figure.



-Michael
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Maia McCormick via Callers]

Re: g -- that's totally fair, and an experience I've had on the floor as
well, but oh man when it's done right it's lovely! Maybe worth spending
some time teaching the right way to do it from the mic? (This is something
I might do myself the next time I call one, come to think of it.) Another
option: select for dances with a g *with partner* (rather than with
neighbor) so couples can adjust to each other refine their resistance,
playfulness, etc. rather than starting from square zero with a new N every
time. Might make for a more satisfying experience. Just a thought.

Cheers,
Maia

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:58 AM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Thanks Luke,
> You made some great points, and offer some good choices.
> My experience as a dancer is the Give & Take is rarely satisfying.  Seldom
> is there any resistance, or playfulness, as intended by Jennings.
> I try not to call more than one G in an evening.
> Peace, Rich
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Luke Donforth 
> wrote:
>
>> Lots of great dances already suggested.
>>
>> Talking about the bigger picture programming thing, I hear wanting to
>> change the feel and not have circles in every dance. While Give and Take
>> might feel like a cheat to you, it will feel different for the dancers, and
>> it's probably not egregious.
>>
>> You can also add a fair bit of texture with just different results from
>> the circle. A swing ->circle & swing transition is going to feel different
>> than a circle into a chain, or a circle left to a circle right, etc. I
>> think two no-circle dances in a half is a good thing to shoot for, but also
>> showing the various ways the circle can be used.
>>
>> A lot of 4x4 dances don't use circles, so if your crowds are up for (and
>> large enough) for those, they can get you there and add other program
>> texture.
>>
>> As for specific dances that haven't been mentioned yet, here are some
>> with 10+ calls from my box:
>> Marion's Delight by Carol Kopp
>> A turn for the better by Bill Pope
>> Friday Night Fever by Tony Parks
>> Rocket City Romp by Cis Hinkle
>> iFlirt by Luke Donforth
>> 2nd Course by Luke Donforth
>> A Sure Thing by Chris Page (has Circle Right)
>> Treasure of the Sierra Madre by James Hutson (no N swing)
>> Amherst and Wooster by Chris Weiler (no N swing)
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
>> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Helo Folks,
>>>
>>> This group has been so quiet lately.  The group has been so important
>>> for me as I developed my Contra calling repertoire and skills, so I thought
>>> I'd initiate a conversation.
>>>
>>> As I sit here programming a dance I realize that I do not have many
>>> dances without circles.  Many that I do have, do not have a Neighbor Swing,
>>> or have a Give & Take to cheat it out.  Those factors limit where and when
>>> I can use them.
>>>
>>> I generally like to program two no circle dances in each half, and also
>>> a NO neighbor Swing dance in at least one half if not both halves of an
>>> evening.  Any thoughts on this?
>>>
>>> Does anyone want to share some modern contras that have no Circles and
>>> no Give & Takes, but include a partner and neighbor swing.
>>>
>>> Here are a few I have used.
>>>
>>> Just for NEFFA, Linda Leslie
>>> Rollin' and Tumblin'. Cis Hinkle
>>> Rocket City Romp, Cis Hinkle
>>> Travels with Rick and Kim, Shari Miller Johnson
>>> Friday Night Fever, Tony Parkes
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Rich Sbardella
>>> Stafford, CT
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> List Name:  Callers mailing list
>>> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>>> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Luke Donforth
>> luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
>>
>
>
> ___
> List Name:  Callers mailing list
> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>
>
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Rich Sbardella via Callers]

Thanks Luke,
You made some great points, and offer some good choices.
My experience as a dancer is the Give & Take is rarely satisfying.  Seldom
is there any resistance, or playfulness, as intended by Jennings.
I try not to call more than one G in an evening.
Peace, Rich

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:00 AM, Luke Donforth  wrote:

> Lots of great dances already suggested.
>
> Talking about the bigger picture programming thing, I hear wanting to
> change the feel and not have circles in every dance. While Give and Take
> might feel like a cheat to you, it will feel different for the dancers, and
> it's probably not egregious.
>
> You can also add a fair bit of texture with just different results from
> the circle. A swing ->circle & swing transition is going to feel different
> than a circle into a chain, or a circle left to a circle right, etc. I
> think two no-circle dances in a half is a good thing to shoot for, but also
> showing the various ways the circle can be used.
>
> A lot of 4x4 dances don't use circles, so if your crowds are up for (and
> large enough) for those, they can get you there and add other program
> texture.
>
> As for specific dances that haven't been mentioned yet, here are some with
> 10+ calls from my box:
> Marion's Delight by Carol Kopp
> A turn for the better by Bill Pope
> Friday Night Fever by Tony Parks
> Rocket City Romp by Cis Hinkle
> iFlirt by Luke Donforth
> 2nd Course by Luke Donforth
> A Sure Thing by Chris Page (has Circle Right)
> Treasure of the Sierra Madre by James Hutson (no N swing)
> Amherst and Wooster by Chris Weiler (no N swing)
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
> callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:
>
>> Helo Folks,
>>
>> This group has been so quiet lately.  The group has been so important for
>> me as I developed my Contra calling repertoire and skills, so I thought I'd
>> initiate a conversation.
>>
>> As I sit here programming a dance I realize that I do not have many
>> dances without circles.  Many that I do have, do not have a Neighbor Swing,
>> or have a Give & Take to cheat it out.  Those factors limit where and when
>> I can use them.
>>
>> I generally like to program two no circle dances in each half, and also a
>> NO neighbor Swing dance in at least one half if not both halves of an
>> evening.  Any thoughts on this?
>>
>> Does anyone want to share some modern contras that have no Circles and no
>> Give & Takes, but include a partner and neighbor swing.
>>
>> Here are a few I have used.
>>
>> Just for NEFFA, Linda Leslie
>> Rollin' and Tumblin'. Cis Hinkle
>> Rocket City Romp, Cis Hinkle
>> Travels with Rick and Kim, Shari Miller Johnson
>> Friday Night Fever, Tony Parkes
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rich Sbardella
>> Stafford, CT
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> List Name:  Callers mailing list
>> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
>> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Luke Donforth
> luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
>
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

[Callers] Does a 1/2 figure 8 and cast off exist in ECD? In Contra?

[Luke Donforth via Callers]

Hello all,

I've been thinking about half figure eights, and variations on them. Is
anyone familiar (in ECD, contra, or other traditions), where instead of the
1s or 2s half figure eight, having the gents or ladies do the move from
improper formation?

As soon as you have something like the ladies do a half figure eight from
duple improper; they're either going to have to shift where they land, or
the gents are going to have to get out of the way. It seems to me (during
my insomnia, not with actual dancers in a house party) that you could have
the gents cast off and over to a ladies place. i.e.:


*Ladies half figure eight, passing left shoulder in the middle to take
neighbor gents' place*

*Meanwhile, gents cast over left shoulder to take partner's place*

Which takes
(head of hall)
W1 M1
m2 w2

to
(head of hall)
M1 W1
w2 m2

Which ends in the same place as everybody doing a half figure eight, but
without 4 people trying to go through the middle at the same time. I think
it can still happen in 8 beats of music, with nobody standing around.

Is that a sequence people have danced or used?

Here's a wrapping to put the whole thing in context.

Calliope's Cross
Improper contra by Luke Donforth
A1
Long lines forward and back
Ladies half figure eight, passing left shoulder in the middle to take
neighbor gents' place
Meanwhile, gents cast over left shoulder to take partner's place
A2
Neighbor Right Shoulder Gyre and Swing
B1
Circle Left 3/4
Partner Swing
B2
Promenade across set with partner, courtesy turn
Ladies chain to neighbor

The name, and idea, comes from my older daughter (4), who wanted a
"Calliope's Cross" dance for herself after hearing about "Tamlin's Cross"
for her sister. Calliope like riding figure 8s on her bicycle.

I've deliberately kept this simple, instead of trying to get a gents figure
8 while ladies cast in for symmetry. I'm not sure how I'd teach that from
the stage; and think I'd have to use a demo.

I look forward to hearing the experience of the group!
Thanks

-- 
Luke Donforth
luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Luke Donforth via Callers]

Lots of great dances already suggested.

Talking about the bigger picture programming thing, I hear wanting to
change the feel and not have circles in every dance. While Give and Take
might feel like a cheat to you, it will feel different for the dancers, and
it's probably not egregious.

You can also add a fair bit of texture with just different results from the
circle. A swing ->circle & swing transition is going to feel different than
a circle into a chain, or a circle left to a circle right, etc. I think two
no-circle dances in a half is a good thing to shoot for, but also showing
the various ways the circle can be used.

A lot of 4x4 dances don't use circles, so if your crowds are up for (and
large enough) for those, they can get you there and add other program
texture.

As for specific dances that haven't been mentioned yet, here are some with
10+ calls from my box:
Marion's Delight by Carol Kopp
A turn for the better by Bill Pope
Friday Night Fever by Tony Parks
Rocket City Romp by Cis Hinkle
iFlirt by Luke Donforth
2nd Course by Luke Donforth
A Sure Thing by Chris Page (has Circle Right)
Treasure of the Sierra Madre by James Hutson (no N swing)
Amherst and Wooster by Chris Weiler (no N swing)


On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Helo Folks,
>
> This group has been so quiet lately.  The group has been so important for
> me as I developed my Contra calling repertoire and skills, so I thought I'd
> initiate a conversation.
>
> As I sit here programming a dance I realize that I do not have many dances
> without circles.  Many that I do have, do not have a Neighbor Swing, or
> have a Give & Take to cheat it out.  Those factors limit where and when I
> can use them.
>
> I generally like to program two no circle dances in each half, and also a
> NO neighbor Swing dance in at least one half if not both halves of an
> evening.  Any thoughts on this?
>
> Does anyone want to share some modern contras that have no Circles and no
> Give & Takes, but include a partner and neighbor swing.
>
> Here are a few I have used.
>
> Just for NEFFA, Linda Leslie
> Rollin' and Tumblin'. Cis Hinkle
> Rocket City Romp, Cis Hinkle
> Travels with Rick and Kim, Shari Miller Johnson
> Friday Night Fever, Tony Parkes
>
> Thanks,
> Rich Sbardella
> Stafford, CT
>
>
>
> ___
> List Name:  Callers mailing list
> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>
>


-- 
Luke Donforth
luke.donfo...@gmail.com 
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/

Re: [Callers] Circles, Crazy Circles

[Don Veino via Callers]

Others not mentioned yet...

Pedal Pushers, Bob Dalsemer (is SF Prom. considered a cheat too?)
Molly Pitcher, Melanie Axel-Lute
Get Me Going , Lisa Greenleaf (believe you have this?)
Tranquility, Linda Leslie (" ")
MN-NY Happy Returns, Carol Ormand

Plus there's a bunch of mine - a sampling of proven/published longways:

Force of Nature – DI or Becket – Don Veino 20180620
Fun, easy intermediate dance
http://veino.com/blog/?p=2060

The Right In Tension (a.k.a. Synchro de Mayo) – Becket – Don Veino 20180430
Couple of interesting/unique twists in a down the hall dance
http://veino.com/blog/?p=2030

(Home Again, Home Again) Jiggity Jig – DI – Don Veino 20180430
Easy way to introduce RH High, Left Low turn to swap
http://veino.com/blog/?p=2117

Dosi Dude – DI – Don Veino 20171006
Easy big energy dance
http://veino.com/blog/?p=1959

(Riding in the) Zoomy Car – DI – Don Veino 20170717
Another unique take on a down the hall
http://veino.com/blog/?p=1792

Double Crossed Again! [V2] – DI – Don Veino 20140721
Double cross-trails dance
http://veino.com/blog/?p=1469

Charlie’s Free Flowing Elixir – DI – Don Veino 20160827
Fun, bouncy respin on a Charlie Harvey dance - sort of an alternate to Cis
Hinkle's Rocket City Romp
http://veino.com/blog/?p=1443

I ♥ Unicorns – DI – Don Veino 20170203
Mirror Mad Robin & Fig 8s in a DTH dance
http://veino.com/blog/?p=1317

-Don


On Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 8:16 PM, Rich Sbardella via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> Helo Folks,
>
> This group has been so quiet lately.  The group has been so important for
> me as I developed my Contra calling repertoire and skills, so I thought I'd
> initiate a conversation.
>
> As I sit here programming a dance I realize that I do not have many dances
> without circles.  Many that I do have, do not have a Neighbor Swing, or
> have a Give & Take to cheat it out.  Those factors limit where and when I
> can use them.
>
> I generally like to program two no circle dances in each half, and also a
> NO neighbor Swing dance in at least one half if not both halves of an
> evening.  Any thoughts on this?
>
> Does anyone want to share some modern contras that have no Circles and no
> Give & Takes, but include a partner and neighbor swing.
>
> Here are a few I have used.
>
> Just for NEFFA, Linda Leslie
> Rollin' and Tumblin'. Cis Hinkle
> Rocket City Romp, Cis Hinkle
> Travels with Rick and Kim, Shari Miller Johnson
> Friday Night Fever, Tony Parkes
>
> Thanks,
> Rich Sbardella
> Stafford, CT
>
>
>
> ___
> List Name:  Callers mailing list
> List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
>
>
___
List Name:  Callers mailing list
List Address:  Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
Archives:  https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/