Re: [Callers] Politically Correct?
While it's true that language is often not the problem, it's less relevant to the discussion of what words to use as a caller than you might think. Scenario A: If we have to keep finding new ways to describe square dancing because it's viewed as an activity only danced by weird old white people, then square dancing is the problem and changing the name isn't going to help. Scenario B: If the problem is that an activity like square dancing has borrowed terminology that has become dated over time, then it can avoid becoming scenario A by updating its terminology to match the moving target of society or in some cases it can discard that terminology in favor of something that is less likely to attract baggage. As regards the original question for this post, how we refer to people is going to be a moving target. If you want to avoid offending people, you should probably find a term that is considered respectful in the current era in which you are living. If you don't care about offending people, then the question is moot. As regards other terminology concerns, if you find that you have a dance term that refers to specific people or groups (gypsies, contras, etc.) you can, in fact, avoid the problem (possibly forever) by moving the term to something less likely to get wrapped up in the identities of groups or cultures. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35349619 On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Donald Perley via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > When history shows a number of new terms introduced over the years, > and each, after a while, picks up the taint of being derogatory, you > eventually figure out that > the word itself isn't the real problem. > > Using the tainted water analogy, if the person serving your water has > typhoid, asking for a new glass from the same waiter won't help much. > > ___ List Name: Callers mailing list List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
Re: [Callers] More substitute terms for the g-word
" Could someone please explain to me why the word gyp*** is considered a racial slur. I note that the body that represents gyp***s in the USA calls itself the Gypsy Council USA and in the UK it is the Gypsy Council. This is the term they have chosen to represent their ethnicity and they seem to be proud of it. Who are we to disagree?" Much like our community (and governments, and other groups composed of more than one person) there is neither clear support for nor clear derision for the term. If you ask people who might be described as Gypsies, and actually listen to the responses, you'll hear a range of answers. Some people like the term and are offended that anyone would want to change it. Some are ok calling themselves that, but want ownership of the term. Some people think it's fine as a dance term but are offended by people who call themselves Dance Gypsies. Some are totally fine with the term as relates to Dance Gypsies, but don't like it as a dance term. Some would have the term be abolished completely and not be used by anyone to refer to anything. Considering it's a debate that is unlikely to be answered in my lifetime, I've decided to stop using the term and to let them sort out what it means in other contexts. Other people are free to answer the question as they see fit. The term I've been using is Face-to-Face. It has a lot of the advantages that Right-Shoulder-Round does, but is slightly more economical as regards syllables and maintains an emphasis on looking at the other person. ___ List Name: Callers mailing list List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
Re: [Callers] Dance logs and record-keeping
I keep a personal log on notecards. I put the date of the event and the venue and any other information that might be helpful for me when going back. Then I write out my intended program (in case I drop my ordered cards). If I make a change to the program, I'll update the card with any additions, rearrangements or deletions. I'll also put short notes about how 'good' that program is: "Too many ladies chain into RH Star" or "This dance is confusing early in the evening" or "Too few neighbor swings" or whatever will help me when planning for the future. On the back of the card I put the band name, names of members, their instruments and other notes for announcement time so I can make sure the band gets introduced and the sound person gets introduced and I make sure that whoever's in charge of getting the hall taken care of has recognition and help. Someone suggested it would be a lot of work and little benefit and hard to share. In our modern, connected world. A shared platform like google docs or google sheets or any blogging platform would allow the callers and organizers of the dance to document it in a shared space, publicly accessible or not. Because it's a thing I already track, the extra work for me is almost none. If it's not a thing you already care about, it adds some work, but really not that much. --Ryan ___ List Name: Callers mailing list List Address: Callers@lists.sharedweight.net Archives: https://www.mail-archive.com/callers@lists.sharedweight.net/
Re: [Callers] Beneficial Tradition
The rule for the end-effects on this one is surprisingly simple: "If nobody gives you their hand, don't go anywhere." The messiness usually comes from people feeling like they should be going somewhere, similar to what happens with a diagonal chain or right & left through. This is just different enough that people don't think to stay put if there's nobody there. The end result is that as you're going off the end and back in that: pull-by-left: everyone moves pull-by-right: gent stays put pull-by-left: pull by with partner pull-by-right: lady stays put If you have an odd number of couples, there will be a couple out at the end which gives you a slightly different sequence, but in principle it's the same. On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Kalia Kliban via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Hi all, > > I recently called Beneficial Tradition for the first time and noticed a > consistent hitch in the dance at the top of the set. It was probably > happening at the bottom too. > > I was doing the variant with no wave balance in the A1, just Women > allemande L 1x and P swing. Though the transition from the pull-bys in the > B2 to that L allemande worked well inside the line, it was always funky at > the ends. I'm speculating that that's because folks coming out of the > pull-by pattern into empty space at the end were tending to head in a > consistent incorrect direction. > > Those of you who have called this dance a lot, have you noticed the same > issue? How do you teach the B2-A1 transition to minimize the confusion and > end effects? > > Kalia > > ps Happy New Year, everyone! > ___ > 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] Becket Formation
As Mac pointed out, becket dances can be more complex/confusing. Removing a need to separate you from your partner at the end of the dance, allows for some choreographic flexibility. All the same, most beckets are not notably more complex/confusing than most improper contras. My guesses are: 1 - this couple had a bad experience that they associate with 'becket formation' rather than whatever confounding factors go into making a dance experience pleasant or unpleasant 2 - was this a contra event (all duple-minors all the time) or a more varied program? Maybe the couple doesn't like contras much? 3 - Maybe they are confusing it with some other formation (sicilian, 4 face 4, squares, triplets, etc.) --Ryan Smith
Re: [Callers] Dance length/dances per evening
There's a band I work with on a pretty regular basis that usually follows my lead, but will occasionally ask "For this set, can we choose when to go out?" I trust them not to run it too long, and letting them choose when they go out gives them a lot of control over the musical experience, which ultimately seems to work well for the dancing experience. I'll sometimes signal a band when they're not ready to go out yet, and I'm usually willing to be negotiated up from 3 more times to 5. More than that, and we're starting to wear out the dancers. I think it's worth mentioning that if you know from the outset that you are going to want to run a dance longer or shorter than your average, for whatever reason, that if you communicate that to the band in advance it will help make sure that you're not cutting them off just as they wind up or leaving them sitting on a tune that they really didn't mean to play that long. I know some bands that like to be signaled when you get to the middle of the dance, and will even ask to be signaled a little early for certain sets of tunes. Part of the reason for using a stopwatch (vs. a timer) is that it doesn't tell you how much longer to run the dance. It just tells you how long you have run the dance, making it easy to be responsive to the music and the dance and the dancers and the weather and all the other environmental factors that come into play. On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:58 PM, Donald Perley via Callers < callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote: > Just a guess.. they have arrangements for each set and feel miffed if > they get cut short without getting through each variation. > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Amy Wimmer via Callers > wrote: > > > > > I have an oddity coming up: a band for which I am calling has asked to > > take the lead on when to end the dances. I figure one evening of that > > can't hurt, if it keeps the band happy. I will take notes. The leader > > of this band has control issues and knows what's best for everyone. > ___ > Callers mailing list > Callers@lists.sharedweight.net > http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net >
Re: [Callers] Dance length/dances per evening
"If you decide on a number of times through and actually count, you can stick to that pretty well, but if you decide a running time, it is much more difficult to stay on track of the time and warn the band three times before you want to end, etc." I couldn't disagree more. I have always used a stopwatch to keep track of how long I'm running the dance, and since one time through the dance is close enough to 30 seconds as to make it not matter, I signal the band 3 more times at whichever B2 is closest to one and a half minutes (usually 6.5 minutes since we started) from my target time (usually 8 minutes). I don't count times through or use marker couples or anything like that because I don't need the distractions. If I were counting, I would definitely have a moment where some couple needed my help and I'd be figuring out what calls would best put them back on the right track and forget whether I was on 5 or 7, and then I'd probably end up running the dance too long thinking I was on 16 times through, when it was really 20. If counting works for you, that's great. For people like me, having a target length is much simpler.
