[Callers] How to devise a program
Given the recent discussion about the role of the list, and the comment that it was originally intended for beginning callers, I have an absurdly newbie question to ask: how do you go about putting together a program for a full (or partial) evening of calling? I know this is a broad question, but I'm curious to hear everyone's approaches! (I can certainly specify the question if it's too much as is.) Cheers, Maia (Williamstown, MA / New York, NY)
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
As someone new to contras, I am quite interested in Maia's question. I would also love a suggestion of where to begin. I can call, and stay on phrase, but 20-30 dances that are available for public calling/dancing, accessible to newer dancers, and easy to walkthrough. Variety, without difficulty. The recent discussion has raised my anxiety as to what is legal to call w/o infringing on someone's property as well. Rich Sbardella Stafford, CT From: Maia McCormick To: Caller's discussion list Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2013 10:34 AM Subject: [Callers] How to devise a program Given the recent discussion about the role of the list, and the comment that it was originally intended for beginning callers, I have an absurdly newbie question to ask: how do you go about putting together a program for a full (or partial) evening of calling? I know this is a broad question, but I'm curious to hear everyone's approaches! (I can certainly specify the question if it's too much as is.) Cheers, Maia (Williamstown, MA / New York, NY) ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] How to Devise a Program
As a new caller, I've received lots of advice on this topic, and I want to make sure I've been doing it right. I generally try to have an arc of difficulty, starting with an easy dance, getting gradually harder, peaking around the 2nd or 3rd dance after the break, then ending with a simple dance as a cool-down. The actual difficulty you start and peak with is dependent on the skill level of your local dance. I also try to have a few extra options if I find the dancers on a particular evening are newbie-heavy or experience-heavy. In my programs, that generally means having an extra dance in the arc, then skipping either an easy dance early on (if there are not many newbies), or a harder dance later on (if there are lots of newbies). I also put all my dance cards next to each other and try to make sure that I don't put very similar dances consecutively, and that I have a good variety of figures throughout the evening. More experienced callers: feel free to tell me if this strategy is good or bad. Cheers, Ben (Houston, TX)
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Miaa asked: > how do you go about putting together a program for a full (or partial) evening of calling? Yes. This certainly is a broad question. For me it would require multiple approaches depending upon: - Is it a square dance, a contra dance, a "barn dance" a "family dance" or a "community dance" and what exactly do these terms mean to the organizers? - Is the event open to the public or is it a private party, a weekend dance camp session, a festival? - Who is the "Client" and what do they expect? - Is this an ongoing series "hosted" by a group of "regulars" who know one another? - If it is an ongoing series what is the local dance culture? Will they expect in terms of dance formations and variety? - What is the purpose of the event? - Will there be live musicians? If so, who is the band? The different approaches you see will depend a lot upon the answers to these--and other--questions. Depending upon the answers above some of us would not accept the gig because we don't have the skills or material to provide what the dancers and the organizers are looking for. Or because we are not interested in doing that particular kind of gig. You might get more useful answers if you narrowed your question to a particular "real" situation that callers can respond to. But that's just one way to approach it. I can't really respond without knowing at least some of the answers. I see a variety of different roles for the caller in a variety of different situations. Other callers may not see it this way. - Greg McKenzie West Coast, USA
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Hi Greg et al., Yeah, good point. I'm calling one of a regular (monthly) contra dance series in the Berkshires. It's open to all and has a beginners warm-up for any who are interested. Attendance runs maybe 14-26 (ish), including a fair number of people who have danced before but aren't super-experienced/"hotshot" dancers. There'll be a live band. The expectation will probably be mostly contras with a waltz at the end of either half--I doubt people would object to or necessarily expect other formations/types of dances. That help at all? Interested to hear what you have to say! Maia On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Greg McKenzie wrote: > Miaa asked: > > > how do you go about putting together a program for > > a full (or partial) evening of calling? > > > Yes. This certainly is a broad question. For me it would require multiple > approaches depending upon: > > - Is it a square dance, a contra dance, a "barn dance" a "family dance" or > a "community dance" and what exactly do these terms mean to the organizers? > > - Is the event open to the public or is it a private party, a weekend dance > camp session, a festival? > > - Who is the "Client" and what do they expect? > > - Is this an ongoing series "hosted" by a group of "regulars" who know one > another? > > - If it is an ongoing series what is the local dance culture? Will they > expect in terms of dance formations and variety? > > - What is the purpose of the event? > > - Will there be live musicians? If so, who is the band? > > The different approaches you see will depend a lot upon the answers to > these--and other--questions. Depending upon the answers above some of us > would not accept the gig because we don't have the skills or material to > provide what the dancers and the organizers are looking for. Or because we > are not interested in doing that particular kind of gig. > > You might get more useful answers if you narrowed your question to a > particular "real" situation that callers can respond to. But that's just > one way to approach it. I can't really respond without knowing at least > some of the answers. I see a variety of different roles for the caller in > a variety of different situations. Other callers may not see it this way. > > - Greg McKenzie > > West Coast, USA > ___ > Callers mailing list > call...@sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >
Re: [Callers] How to Devise a Program
On 9/15/2013 11:49 AM, Ben Hornstein wrote: As a new caller, I've received lots of advice on this topic, and I want to make sure I've been doing it right. I generally try to have an arc of difficulty, starting with an easy dance, getting gradually harder, peaking around the 2nd or 3rd dance after the break, then ending with a simple dance as a cool-down. The actual difficulty you start and peak with is dependent on the skill level of your local dance. I also try to have a few extra options if I find the dancers on a particular evening are newbie-heavy or experience-heavy. In my programs, that generally means having an extra dance in the arc, then skipping either an easy dance early on (if there are not many newbies), or a harder dance later on (if there are lots of newbies). I also put all my dance cards next to each other and try to make sure that I don't put very similar dances consecutively, and that I have a good variety of figures throughout the evening. More experienced callers: feel free to tell me if this strategy is good or bad. This sounds like a good plan to me. It is basically what has been discussed in calling workshops I have attended over the years. Everyone has a different way of doing things, but starting out with easier dances, progressing to more challenging and then returning to simpler dances is a good overall plan. Some callers suggest making each half of the evening follow this pattern. I usually tend to place the most challenging dance(s) after the break, but not the first dance after the break. Some people think the peak should be before the break. Your mileage may vary. I also like to put a mixer in as the 2nd or 3rd dance. My thought is that at this point most of the people who are coming are there, the dancers are warmed up, and it's a good time to get them mixed around a bit, especially if there are new dancers present. I also like to plan for a couple of squares and some non-typical formation dances, such as 4 face 4 or Sicilian circle dances, during the evening for variety. Jonathan - Jonathan Sivier Caller of Contra, English and Early American Dances jsivier AT illinois DOT edu Dance Page: http://www.sivier.me/dance_leader.html - Q: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? A: It depends on what dance you call!
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
With the proviso that I don't generally plan a complete program ahead of time I have a set of 3-4 dances that are almost always my first dance. Generally they're very low piece count dances, very forgiving, and with a limited number of moves. Most of those first dances don't even have a chain or a R&L thru -- allemandes, swings, circles and long lines. One of them starts and ends in short waves. After I've seen how they do with that, I will move on to other dances, adding in a move or two at a time. I do try to make the first time I use a chain a chain over and back, or a chain to your neighbor so that they can have a chance to do it with a bunch of different people. Generally, I will teach a Hey in the 3rd dance -- almost always a full hey coming back to a partner balance and swing. (Butter by Gene Hubert or delphiniums and dasies by Tonya Rattenburg (know I've misspelled that). Sometimes I'll do a mixer as the 3rd or 4th dance. From there on out, I am slowly adding new moves, building on what we've done already, and trying to alternate between smooth and balancy dances (also trying to keep a variety of "storylines" -- circular dances vs down the hall vs waves vs unusual progressions or multiple neighbors. Before the evening starts, I will have picked out dances that I would like to work into the program (many more dances than I could actually do), and if I have one that I really want to make sure I get in, I will start building the foundation for that...making sure that I work most of the components into other dances. I generally aim for the peak of complexity to be shortly after the break, but to continue to keep the energy level up until the end of the evening (even though it is with simpler dances). So that's a sketchy version of what is generally going through my mind as I'm putting an evening together, Your mileage may vary. You may want to plan things ahead more than I do. If you can come up with an outline or framework to hang your dances on, I think it will make the actual programming easier. Jack On 9/15/2013 2:35 PM, Maia McCormick wrote: Hi Greg et al., Yeah, good point. I'm calling one of a regular (monthly) contra dance series in the Berkshires. It's open to all and has a beginners warm-up for any who are interested. Attendance runs maybe 14-26 (ish), including a fair number of people who have danced before but aren't super-experienced/"hotshot" dancers. There'll be a live band. The expectation will probably be mostly contras with a waltz at the end of either half--I doubt people would object to or necessarily expect other formations/types of dances. That help at all? Interested to hear what you have to say! Maia On Sun, Sep 15, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Greg McKenzie wrote: Miaa asked: how do you go about putting together a program for a full (or partial) evening of calling? Yes. This certainly is a broad question. For me it would require multiple approaches depending upon: - Is it a square dance, a contra dance, a "barn dance" a "family dance" or a "community dance" and what exactly do these terms mean to the organizers? - Is the event open to the public or is it a private party, a weekend dance camp session, a festival? - Who is the "Client" and what do they expect? - Is this an ongoing series "hosted" by a group of "regulars" who know one another? - If it is an ongoing series what is the local dance culture? Will they expect in terms of dance formations and variety? - What is the purpose of the event? - Will there be live musicians? If so, who is the band? The different approaches you see will depend a lot upon the answers to these--and other--questions. Depending upon the answers above some of us would not accept the gig because we don't have the skills or material to provide what the dancers and the organizers are looking for. Or because we are not interested in doing that particular kind of gig. You might get more useful answers if you narrowed your question to a particular "real" situation that callers can respond to. But that's just one way to approach it. I can't really respond without knowing at least some of the answers. I see a variety of different roles for the caller in a variety of different situations. Other callers may not see it this way. - Greg McKenzie West Coast, USA ___ 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
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Hi Maia, A number of folks have responded with some good advice, and I think Jack's is particularly insightful. Yes, there are some general principles, and some techniques are pretty tried-and-true. But I would like to come at this from a slightly different approach . . . To learn a lot about programming, once you have a few calling evenings under you belt and an array of at least 20-30 dance cards so you are familiar with some dance choreography and dances of different styles, here is my suggestion: go to other dances that are called by good callers. And that is a judgement call (sic) -- I'm talking about callers you know are superb and have very good skills -- people whose behind-the-scenes judgements you would respect. Go to their dances and talk to them about how they program that evening. Get to visiting with them prior to the beginning of the dance (maybe by phone so they know who you are). Then, just prior to the dance, maybe during setup, take a few minutes and ask the caller to go over the intended program (assuming he/she has a program). Do this dance-by-dance. Then dance through the evening as a dancer. But in addition to being a dancer, watch the crowd and the musicians and the caller with a caller's eye. See what you see. Have fun, but observe how the crowd is reacting/dancing/experiencing each dance. (BTW, I am not talking about dance weekends -- those programs and dancers don't represent typical dance gigs). Then, after the gig is over, at the end of the evening before you leave (if possible), go back to the caller and visit again. This is the review session. Ask him/her to review what actually happened, dance by dance. Particularly which dances/moments the caller felt worked well and which dances/moments did not, and why, and any changes that were made from the original plan, and why. Not be in any way judgmental -- just try to learn from that caller the hows and whys of the evening. And I am not talking about or suggesting that you copy that program or go through their dance cards. No, that is not the purpose of this visit. You would be talking to them to seek an understanding of their judgement calls and insights into their art. Do this a few times -- with a couple of different good callers. Each will have their own style and approach, and many may be very different from what you'll read on an Internet listserv. There are great subtleties here. It's all a matter of judgement, and rules are made to be broken. All good artists -- and good callers are artists -- know this and do it all the time. Good luck. Woody On 9/15/2013 10:34 AM, Maia McCormick wrote: Given the recent discussion about the role of the list, and the comment that it was originally intended for beginning callers, I have an absurdly newbie question to ask: how do you go about putting together a program for a full (or partial) evening of calling? I know this is a broad question, but I'm curious to hear everyone's approaches! (I can certainly specify the question if it's too much as is.) Cheers, Maia (Williamstown, MA / New York, NY) -- <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> Woody Lane Caller, Percussive Dancer Roseburg, Oregon http://www.woodylanecaller.com voice: 541-440-1926 cell: 541-556-0054 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On 9/15/2013 7:34 AM, Maia McCormick wrote: Given the recent discussion about the role of the list, and the comment that it was originally intended for beginning callers, I have an absurdly newbie question to ask: how do you go about putting together a program for a full (or partial) evening of calling? I know this is a broad question, but I'm curious to hear everyone's approaches! (I can certainly specify the question if it's too much as is.) Maybe more info than you want... I try to get an idea of the level of the group first. If I've called for them before, I look at my previous programs. I may also ask other callers who've worked there recently about their experience, or talk to the dance manager or programmer. Once I have an idea of what to expect, I'll start going through my cards and pulling out dances that I think would be a good fit for the group and seem like they'd be fun to call. I'm not thinking about program order at this point, but just pulling out what I call "rough picks," the pool of dances from which I'll assemble a program. I'm paying attention to the expected level of the group and also to what I've called recently (trying to avoid too much duplication from recent programs). Once I have the rough picks pulled from the card file, I sort them into dances that start with "neighbor do something (balance, dosido, or gypsy) and swing" and everything else. It feels to me that starting more than a couple of dances in a row with N bal & sw gets repetitive. While programming my most recent dance, I stuck a paper clip onto the edges of the cards when a dance included a hey, and also I have a notation at the top of the card to let me know when a dance does not have a circle L 3/4, and when it's missing either a N or P swing. These indicators are helpful when I'm scanning my rough picks looking for a dance with particular characteristics. A searchable database would be even better, but I'm not there yet. With all the cards laid out on the table, the N bal&sw dances on one side and the other ones on the other side, I usually start by trying to identify good candidates for openers and closers. The first two dances are usually pretty simple and low-piece-count, since I'm assuming the new folks will be doing their best just to stay oriented and I want to help them relax and enjoy the dancing. If the group is really new, the first dance acts as a "mine sweeper", showing me what the group could use reinforcement on. By the third dance I often throw in a hey (and I just read Jack's post so I know I'm not the only one to do this), usually one where the hey has a really clean and obvious entrance and exit (Carousel is a dance I like for this, or Flirtation Reel). I'll often introduce Becket formation around this time as well, and by 5th dance or so will start to add a few more elements (CA twirl, box the gnat, things at that level). I usually try to end the first half with something on the rip-snorty end of the range, but not too hard, often preceded by something a little smoother. Second half gets more complex, generally with the hardest dance or two of the evening the 2nd and/or 3rd ones in. I'm more willing to challenge the crowd in the second half, but like to end with something not too thinky and with lots of energy. I'm still dithering about what makes a dance a good closer. For example, how important is it that the dance naturally end with a partner swing if everything else about the dance is great? I've gone both ways. Other callers out there, what features do you think make a dance a good closer? Ben's summary of the overall complexity curve of the evening was just about the same way I see it, as was his mention of having some branching in the proposed program, some ways to tailor it to newer or more experienced groups. I often program a slot with a "hard/medium/easy" group of dances that share similar characteristics but offer different levels of challenge so that I can easily switch gears without needing to rearrange what comes after. Jonathan's comment reminds me that I always forget to use mixers. They can be huge fun, especially early in the evening, and I'm still working my way up to calling 4x4s. As Jack does, I try to vary the structure of the dances, not clumping too many heys, or 4-in-lines, or wave balances or what-have-you, and keeping the common elements like M allemande L 1-1/2 spread apart as well. It gets tricky to find just exactly the right puzzle piece to fit into a program slot. Sometimes I'm looking for, for example, a dance with no LL F&B, _with_ a half hey, where the swings are separated by something other than either a circle or an allemande and that doesn't start with N bal and sw but features a lot of N interaction. Gotta get that database happening... Once I've got a sequence of dances I like, I put it away and then look at it again the next day. I usually catch somethin
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
You can see my thoughts at http://www.colinhume.com/callers.htm#Planning Colin Hume
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
From that, it sounds like you are still using physical cards *and* your dance organizer. Is that correct, or has the software replaced the cards for you? On 9/17/2013 2:05 AM, Colin Hume wrote: You can see my thoughts at http://www.colinhume.com/callers.htm#Planning Colin Hume ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 08:48:14 -0400, Jack Mitchell wrote: > From that, it sounds like you are still using physical cards *and* > your dance organizer. Is that correct, or has the software > replaced the cards for you? Sorry, I agree the wording on the web page was confusing and I've now moved the paragraph about the Dance Organiser further down. The software has replaced the cards, though I normally have them in the boot (trunk) of my car just in case! If I'm just calling a few dances in an evening with several other callers (as I do at Cambridge Contra) I still use cards - but then I have to put my glasses on! Colin Hume
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Maia wrote: > I'm calling one of a regular (monthly) contra dance > > series in the Berkshires. It's open to all and has a beginners warm-up for > any who are interested. Attendance runs maybe 14-26 (ish), including a fair > number of people who have danced before but aren't > super-experienced/"hotshot" dancers. There'll be a live band. The > expectation will probably be mostly contras with a waltz at the end of > either half--I doubt people would object to or necessarily expect other > formations/types of dances. > > That help at all? Interested to hear what you have to say! > Yes. That helps. This gig sounds like a contemporary open, public contra dance, a form that is what I specialize in calling and also a form that I consider to be possibly the most challenging kind of event to call. Some others have given good advice here. I do some things differently and I will focus on those differences. Please keep in mind that my own approach is quite different than how most other callers do it. This approach comes from how I “define” or “frame” these events, so I need to explain that briefly. I think most of us, if we think about it at all, tend to frame these open, public contra dances as, simply; “a dance gathering of contra dance enthusiasts with a live band and a caller.” This is most certainly true…but this frame leaves out some essential elements and there are other true ways to frame these events. I frame them as; “an open, public social event—both sponsored and hosted by a group of dance enthusiasts—that includes live music and, primarily, progressive set dances facilitated by a caller.” In this frame the first-timers are seen more as a central purpose of the event. It’s an open social event. Consequently the task of integrating newcomers into the hall becomes a primary task of the caller. Yes dancers and other organizers can help but the caller is in a key position to lead the assembly in the process of integration…and although there are many integration strategies and tactics, one way the caller can encourage integration is through programming. Integrating the hall is a leadership task. There are many leadership strategies, and some of the best ones are very subtle and sometimes subconscious. One of them is called “leadership by omission.” In that case the leader encourages action by what they do NOT do. Another one is a variant of that and I call it “leadership by assumption.” In this strategy I assume that the dancers will support me and do as I ask them. That’s the deal. I ask them to integrate the hall and then assume their full support in this effort. In the practice of programming that means I choose dances with the assumption that every first-timer in the hall will be partnered with a regular and that they will be distributed throughout the hall. My program is designed to make this process both fun and successful for everyone. There are many other strategies needed to make this work but I am only discussing programming here. I do prepare a specific program, but I include 14 dances and one or two of them will be dropped as I see how the evening progresses. Occasionally I will add a dance while at the event. I start by picking a first and a last dance. I have a few dances marked for these positions and I rotate through them. The first dance has to be easy, familiar to the regulars, and with lots of connection. It must be a dance that can guarantee success for everyone in the hall with little, if any, teaching and it should have good neighbor interaction. (swings) The last dance should also have excellent neighbor interaction and a similar profile. (I have several dances that I can use for either the first or last dance.) The idea here is to give everyone a chance to interact with everyone else and pay their respects before ending the evening. (This is a chance to apologize for not partnering with a favored partner that night, for example.) It’s a chance to say good night to everyone. This dance, however, should also have excellent partner interaction. The first three dances of the evening are where I put most of my programming effort. The goal of this segment of the evening is to build the confidence of all of the dancers and to minimize the perceived importance of partnering decisions. This helps to limit any cliquish or defensive partnering behaviors by the dancers early in the evening. I do this first by keeping the dance slots as short as possible with little or no walk-through. For this early segment of the evening I also select dances with excellent neighbor interaction and with minimal partner interaction. By “minimal partner interaction” I am speaking in context. I am very aware of the fact that some dancers will complain if there are dances with no partner swing. By “minimal” I mean, generally, keeping the number of counts of partner swinging down compared to other dances. I often call at least one “no partner swing” dance
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
I often call at least one “no partner swing” dance during the evening, and this will happen during the first three dances. Most callers do this in the form of a “mixer” during the evening. I will often substitute a “no partner swing” contra dance because I see the entire evening as a “mixer”…particularly the first half of the evening. Another way to “minimize” partner swinging is to program dances in which only the ones have a partner swing. “Scout House Reel” for example, is an excellent first dance choice. For some reason, and I'm really not sure why, I've shied away from "down the hall" dances as first dances, but you're right about Scout House Reel. It would be a great opener. It's got a simple progression, lots of hand contact, no weird fractions and lots of big group movements. Unruly Reunion (or if you circle R first, Monterey Detour) would fit that same set of criteria. The strategy here is to limit what I call “partnering pressure” which I define as: “that feeling that one needs to find a particular kind of partner or any partner quickly.” By programming short slots with easy dances that allow minimal walk-throughs I can subtly create a sense that there will be many more partnering opportunities during the evening. This also reduces the apprehension of some dancers that they will get “stuck” with a “bad partner” for a long dance slot. In general this programming encourages more generous and community-minded partnering behaviors. It is, after all, a social event. When you say "short slot", how long are you talking about? I know I tend to run dances shorter than other callers, so my time sense is probably a little off. I have coded my database using the NEFFA dance planning matrix. This is a great tool, by the way. Is this the one that shows up as "Rich Goss's Program Matrix Spreadsheet" on this page: http://www.quiteapair.us/calling/ ? I print out my cards using Filemaker Pro and they are color-coded for difficulty level. I am in the process of creating a key on the back of the cards that will allow me to select from the NEFFA matrix criteria by looking at the backs of the cards—without using a computer—while at a dance. Have you found that your concept of the difficulty levels for any given dance has evolved or changed as your calling skills and style have grown and changed over the years? I've certainly noticed a change with English dances I had tagged as "easy" or "hard" early on in my calling career. My ability to teach a dance well changes how hard it appears to the dancers. And in the obverse, a simple dance taught badly can seem really difficult. That's one reason I haven't put much energy into grading dances into categories of difficulty. I do tag dances that I know I can pull out for a ONS or a group of schoolkids or drunken tourists or wedding guests, but beyond that it's up to me to gauge the level of the room and teach accordingly. It's hard to quantify the level of difficulty. Kalia
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Kalia asked:: > When you say "short slot", how long are you talking about? I know I tend > to run dances shorter than other callers, so my time sense is probably a > little off. This is a good question. I know that I need to be careful on this issue. I, like you, thought that my slots were "shorter than other callers" at one time. My thanks to Jim Saxe who took the time to come to one of my dances and timed every slot. It was a real wake-up call to see that my slots were not that "short" after all. Slots often seem shorter from behind the mike. Since then I hope I have made some progress. This is an ongoing effort. The fact is that it is hard work to keep the slots short. You need to work closely with the band. They need to be on board with this goal, otherwise ending too soon can be frustrating for the musicians. If you are diligent you can shave enough time off of the early slots to gain enough time for one extra dance slot in the evening. The important factors here are: 1. Where do you shave off the time? and 2. How does this change the perception of the dancers? I try to shave a minute, if possible, off of the walk-through and teaching time. This is one reason I don't teach from the mike and leave this job to the regulars. It just makes sense to keep things moving. I do NOT shave time off of the set formation and socializing time. I see this time as part of the dancer socializing time that belongs to them. When callers try to quiet the crowd too early it encourages the dancers to ignore them. You have to strike a careful balance. I also try to shave off about one time through the tune by ending the dance sooner. That's about half a minute. The dancers will perceive a shorter walk-through and dance time as evidence that the caller is skilled and effective at calling. (This is part of what I call "building and maintaining the illusion of competence.") When the dancers trust the caller they will be more likely to support her efforts and will listen more carefully. This also shortens the time needed for a slot. By keeping the walk-throughs short and starting the music early (at full tempo--more on that later) the caller and band signal to the crowd that they will make the evening fun and that everyone will be successful. This increases dancer confidence and those dancers are then more likely to be generous in their partnering decisions. If a slot is only nine minutes rather than ten this seems like less of an investment in each partnering decision. When the regulars see how much fun others are having while dancing with first-timers they will want to be a part of that. You can, with some effort, gain one extra dance slot for the evening. But the perception will be of an evening with more partnering opportunities. Remember: Most callers start the evening more slowly with longer walk-throughs and often start the music at a slower pace. If you break that "tradition" you will be perceived to be a dynamic caller who can make a high-energy dance evening happen. (Or, more likely, they will simply think that the band is really hot! Good calling will not make you famous or popular, but that's another thread.) In reality your walk-throughs will never get shorter. In fact they may get longer during the second half as you introduce more complex material and add a "mini-lecture." But the initial impression will last through the evening. When I mentioned the NEFFA Dance Planning Matrix Kalia asked: > Is this the one that shows up as "Rich Goss's Program Matrix Spreadsheet" > on this page: http://www.quiteapair.us/calling/ Yes. It looks like he may have altered it. I have altered it a little myself. (I don't, for example, include the "angry robin" figure because I don't call dances with that figure. You should alter it to fit your own needs. The original is in the back of "Give and Take," I believe. Kalia then asked: > Have you found that your concept of the difficulty levels for any given > dance has evolved or changed as your calling skills and style have grown > and changed over the years? I've certainly noticed a change with English > dances I had tagged as "easy" or "hard" early on in my calling career. My > ability to teach a dance well changes how hard it appears to the dancers. > And in the obverse, a simple dance taught badly can seem really difficult. > That's one reason I haven't put much energy into grading dances into > categories of difficulty. I do tag dances that I know I can pull out for a > ONS or a group of schoolkids or drunken tourists or wedding guests, but > beyond that it's up to me to gauge the level of the room and teach > accordingly. It's hard to quantify the level of difficulty. I started out using a difficulty scale of 1-10. That seemed excessively graduated but I have kept it. I seldom call a dance above a level 6. I have two dances I have rated at 8 in my database but none higher than that. I know there are some of them out
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On Sun, Sep 15, 2013, rich sbardella wrote: > > As someone new to contras, I am quite interested in Maia's question. > I would also love a suggestion of where to begin. I can call, and > stay on phrase, but 20-30 dances that are available for public > calling/dancing, accessible to newer dancers, and easy to walkthrough. > Variety, without difficulty. The recent discussion has raised my > anxiety as to what is legal to call w/o infringing on someone's > property as well. Looks like nobody ever followed up, but based on the latest posts in the thread, I think you're safe in not worrying about infringing, particularly as long as you attribute dances to their creators (as best you can). -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013, Greg McKenzie wrote: > > The first three dances of the evening are where I put most of my > programming effort. The goal of this segment of the evening is to build > the confidence of all of the dancers and to minimize the perceived > importance of partnering decisions. This helps to limit any cliquish or > defensive partnering behaviors by the dancers early in the evening. I do > this first by keeping the dance slots as short as possible with little or > no walk-through. For this early segment of the evening I also select ^^^ > dances with excellent neighbor interaction and with minimal partner > interaction. Going to sound like a broken record, but I think this is a recipe for causing difficulty for hearing-impaired dancers. Experienced as I am, I *hate* no-walkthrough dances. You may recall I've made earlier comments about the clarity and enunciation of the average square dance caller compared with the average contra caller -- the contra caller usually suffers in comparison, even without music. You probably won't even see the effects of this, because anyone who has problems will just quietly leave. That's what the vast majority of hearing-impaired people do. You may in fact be one of the rarer contra callers with excellent enunciation and a killer sound engineer (because it's a lot harder to get good speech over live music), but I think it's really inappropriate for you to encourage no-walkthrough as a general practice. Side note: I've noticed *WAY* more hearing-impaired people square dancing than contra dancing, despite the fact that contra dancing is overall much easier for hearing-impaired people (because you only need to hear the walkthrough until you learn the dance). I wonder why that is -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013, Greg McKenzie wrote: > > I try to shave a minute, if possible, off of the walk-through and teaching > time. This is one reason I don't teach from the mike and leave this job to > the regulars. It just makes sense to keep things moving. I do NOT shave > time off of the set formation and socializing time. I see this time as > part of the dancer socializing time that belongs to them. When callers try > to quiet the crowd too early it encourages the dancers to ignore them. You > have to strike a careful balance. I also try to shave off about one time > through the tune by ending the dance sooner. That's about half a minute. One easy way of shaving time from the walkthrough that I wish more callers would use: *Don't* have dancers return to their starting points, just start the dance from the place the walkthrough lands. That can save up to thirty seconds. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On 9/28/2013 8:54 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: One easy way of shaving time from the walkthrough that I wish more callers would use: *Don't* have dancers return to their starting points, just start the dance from the place the walkthrough lands. That can save up to thirty seconds. Depends on if you do one walk through or two. With two walk throughs, no one is out at the top. With one, you're leaving out a top couple -- unless it's a double (or quadruple) progression dance. I no long send people back to the beginning if I do two walk throughs unless I deem it a tricky dance, where seeing familiar faces again helps solidify how the dance goes. ~erik hoffman
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Several minutes could be saved each evening (maybe time for an extra dance) if people would take hands four as soon as they lined up From: Aahz Maruch To: call...@sharedweight.net Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2013 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [Callers] How to devise a program On Tue, Sep 17, 2013, Greg McKenzie wrote: > > I try to shave a minute, if possible, off of the walk-through and teaching > time. This is one reason I don't teach from the mike and leave this job to > the regulars. It just makes sense to keep things moving. I do NOT shave > time off of the set formation and socializing time. I see this time as > part of the dancer socializing time that belongs to them. When callers try > to quiet the crowd too early it encourages the dancers to ignore them. You > have to strike a careful balance. I also try to shave off about one time > through the tune by ending the dance sooner. That's about half a minute. One easy way of shaving time from the walkthrough that I wish more callers would use: *Don't* have dancers return to their starting points, just start the dance from the place the walkthrough lands. That can save up to thirty seconds. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Yes, as Lynn says, several minutes could be saved if people took hands four right away. And even more if they'd just shut up. Then again, often, in that moment between dances, while people are lining up, it is the chance to meet and talk a bit -- an important time in our community. So, I honor that chance to chat, and don't worry about trying to squeeze more dances in. I'm sure there's a gradient: some callers push the next dance, squeeze more dances in, some cut dances shorter, squeeze more dances in, and some are a bit looser. And, I'm sure there are some dancers who favor one approach and others who favor the other... Which reminds me: a while back there was a discussion on getting worried about programming a dance. I think: A good program tends to build confidence in dancers while providing a variety. In some ways this was easier to do back in the days when a contra dance meant contras, squares, circles, Sicilian circles, and more. (But then callers had to know how to call squares, a bigger challenge than calling contras...) But there are enough figures, forms, and the like to create a wide variety with just contras and 4 face 4s. Confidence is gained when one concept leads to the next. So, it's worth considering what you have to teach to get from one dance to the next, and how it varies. But, and this is a big BUT: Dancers come to the dance to have fun, enjoy the movement to the music, and interact. For many of us, you could call the same dance five times in a row, and with different partners, and different music, we may not notice. (Ok that's a slight exaggeration.) More important is the sense of joy projected. After all, it's only a dance! ~erik hoffman oakland, ca On 9/28/2013 12:05 PM, lynn ackerson wrote: Several minutes could be saved each evening (maybe time for an extra dance) if people would take hands four as soon as they lined up.
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On 9/28/2013 11:46 AM, Erik Hoffman wrote: On 9/28/2013 8:54 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: One easy way of shaving time from the walkthrough that I wish more callers would use: *Don't* have dancers return to their starting points, just start the dance from the place the walkthrough lands. That can save up to thirty seconds. Depends on if you do one walk through or two. With two walk throughs, no one is out at the top. With one, you're leaving out a top couple -- unless it's a double (or quadruple) progression dance. I no long send people back to the beginning if I do two walk throughs unless I deem it a tricky dance, where seeing familiar faces again helps solidify how the dance goes. ~erik hoffman The argument against starting from the place reached after the second walk-through is that the couple who were the top #2s or the bottom #1s will have gotten one walk-through in their current role, then sat out the second walk-through. if you don't bring everyone back to their original starting places, then those folks are starting the dance in a role they haven't gotten to walk through at all. If the dance is asymmetrical in any way, or if it's early in the night and new dancers haven't gotten any practice in going around the end of the dance, this can be really disorienting and cause instant breakage. I had been starting from progressed-after-walk-through places for quite a while, thinking of it as efficient, but got the comment about the negative effect on those end couples at more than one dance (both ECD and contra). I've switched to bringing everyone back to starting positions at least for the first few dances of the night, and certainly for the tricky dances. Later in the program, folks are more comfortable with going around the ends and I get more casual about starting from progressed places. Kalia
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
At 11:49 AM -0700 9/29/13, Kalia Kliban wrote: On 9/28/2013 11:46 AM, Erik Hoffman wrote: On 9/28/2013 8:54 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: One easy way of shaving time from the walkthrough that I wish more callers would use: *Don't* have dancers return to their starting points, just start the dance from the place the walkthrough lands. That can save up to thirty seconds. Depends on if you do one walk through or two. With two walk throughs, no one is out at the top. With one, you're leaving out a top couple -- unless it's a double (or quadruple) progression dance. I no long send people back to the beginning if I do two walk throughs unless I deem it a tricky dance, where seeing familiar faces again helps solidify how the dance goes. ~erik hoffman The argument against starting from the place reached after the second walk-through is that the couple who were the top #2s or the bottom #1s will have gotten one walk-through in their current role, then sat out the second walk-through. if you don't bring everyone back to their original starting places, then those folks are starting the dance in a role they haven't gotten to walk through at all. If the dance is asymmetrical in any way, or if it's early in the night and new dancers haven't gotten any practice in going around the end of the dance, this can be really disorienting and cause instant breakage. Another way to save time is the "rolling start", if the band has been paying attention to the walkthrough (maybe vamping a beat, and diddling the melody here and there). Some bands are very good at it. The walkthrough just seamlessly morphs into the dance before the dancers realize it. They think they're doing another walkthrough, and getting it right. There is no time spent going back, and the edge effect is unaffected (everyone will get a chance to experience it). I called recently with the Avant Gardeners, and they really do a smooth job of it, as do others. It can help a lot if the musicians are also dancers, and if they already have a tune set chosen and aren't focusing tune selection instead of the floor during the walkthrough. -Eric
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
Aahz wrote: You may in fact be one of the rarer contra callers with excellent enunciation and a killer sound engineer (because it's a lot harder to get good speech over live music), but I think it's really inappropriate for you to encourage no-walkthrough as a general practice. Thank you Aahz. You are absolutely correct. I was trying to restrict my post length by focusing only on programming. My comments should have been prefaced with a stipulation that this programming will not work if you do not know and apply some of the core contra calling skills of; clear enunciation, concise word choices, projection, using the most effective word order, and impeccable timing. To that I would also add; knowing how to earn and hold the attention of the crowd, clear transitions between social and instruction times, and an effective strategy for integrating the hall. (I mentioned in my post that integrating the hall was the primary reason for the programming style I use. The caller's style, messaging, and programming have to work together without "mixed" messages.) It is true that the vast majority of contra dance callers do not do some, or many of these things. Our dances "work" largely with the help of the regulars who take responsibility. The dancers, largely, provide cover for callers who lack these skills. I am a strong advocate of work on the basic, core skills of calling. I would rather see all callers focus on the basics rather than on complex dances or fancy calling "gimmicks." The basics are where I try to put my own efforts at developing my calling skills. The basics always need work. I usually only do one or two "no-walk-through" dances in an evening. For most dances I try to work with the band for a "rolling start." I can see why someone might "hate" a dance with no walk-through. But I would urge you to direct your concern at the basic skills of the caller. If they attempt a no-walk-through dance without clear, precise calling, blame should not be directed at anyone but the caller. Remember: It's always the caller's fault. So, yes. We should all focus on the basic, core skills first. Then I recommend working on techniques and strategies for integrating the hall...unless, of course, you never call at open, public dance events. Greg McKenzie, (who was part of a rock band in high school and who consequently, himself, suffers from a slight hearing loss as he ages. West Coast, USA *** On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013, Greg McKenzie wrote: > > > > The first three dances of the evening are where I put most of my > > programming effort. The goal of this segment of the evening is to build > > the confidence of all of the dancers and to minimize the perceived > > importance of partnering decisions. This helps to limit any cliquish or > > defensive partnering behaviors by the dancers early in the evening. I do > > this first by keeping the dance slots as short as possible with little or > > no walk-through. For this early segment of the evening I also select > ^^^ > > dances with excellent neighbor interaction and with minimal partner > > interaction. > > Going to sound like a broken record, but I think this is a recipe for > causing difficulty for hearing-impaired dancers. Experienced as I am, I > *hate* no-walkthrough dances. You may recall I've made earlier comments > about the clarity and enunciation of the average square dance caller > compared with the average contra caller -- the contra caller usually > suffers in comparison, even without music. > > You probably won't even see the effects of this, because anyone who has > problems will just quietly leave. That's what the vast majority of > hearing-impaired people do. > > You may in fact be one of the rarer contra callers with excellent > enunciation and a killer sound engineer (because it's a lot harder to get > good speech over live music), but I think it's really inappropriate for > you to encourage no-walkthrough as a general practice. > > Side note: I've noticed *WAY* more hearing-impaired people square dancing > than contra dancing, despite the fact that contra dancing is overall much > easier for hearing-impaired people (because you only need to hear the > walkthrough until you learn the dance). I wonder why that is > -- > Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 > http://rule6.info/ > <*> <*> <*> > Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html > ___ > Callers mailing list > call...@sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers >
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013, Kalia Kliban wrote: > On 9/28/2013 11:46 AM, Erik Hoffman wrote: >>On 9/28/2013 8:54 AM, Aahz Maruch wrote: >>> >>>One easy way of shaving time from the walkthrough that I wish more >>>callers would use: *Don't* have dancers return to their starting >>>points, just start the dance from the place the walkthrough lands. >>>That can save up to thirty seconds. >> >>Depends on if you do one walk through or two. With two walk throughs, >>no one is out at the top. With one, you're leaving out a top couple -- >>unless it's a double (or quadruple) progression dance. I no long send >>people back to the beginning if I do two walk throughs unless I deem it >>a tricky dance, where seeing familiar faces again helps solidify how the >>dance goes. > > The argument against starting from the place reached after the > second walk-through is that the couple who were the top #2s or the > bottom #1s will have gotten one walk-through in their current role, > then sat out the second walk-through. if you don't bring everyone > back to their original starting places, then those folks are > starting the dance in a role they haven't gotten to walk through at > all. If the dance is asymmetrical in any way, or if it's early in > the night and new dancers haven't gotten any practice in going > around the end of the dance, this can be really disorienting and > cause instant breakage. Also, if you call only one walkthrough, if you have an odd number of couples, the bottoms won't have danced at all. Maybe we should have three walkthroughs. > I had been starting from progressed-after-walk-through places for > quite a while, thinking of it as efficient, but got the comment > about the negative effect on those end couples at more than one > dance (both ECD and contra). I've switched to bringing everyone > back to starting positions at least for the first few dances of the > night, and certainly for the tricky dances. Later in the program, > folks are more comfortable with going around the ends and I get more > casual about starting from progressed places. If people are complaining about not going back to the starting point, that trumps my opinion... -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
Re: [Callers] How to devise a program
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013, Greg McKenzie wrote: > Aahz wrote: >> >> You may in fact be one of the rarer contra callers with excellent >> enunciation and a killer sound engineer (because it's a lot harder to get >> good speech over live music), but I think it's really inappropriate for >> you to encourage no-walkthrough as a general practice. > > Thank you Aahz. You are absolutely correct. I was trying to restrict my > post length by focusing only on programming. My comments should have been > prefaced with a stipulation that this programming will not work if you do > not know and apply some of the core contra calling skills of; clear > enunciation, concise word choices, projection, using the most effective > word order, and impeccable timing. To that I would also add; knowing how > to earn and hold the attention of the crowd, clear transitions between > social and instruction times, and an effective strategy for integrating the > hall. (I mentioned in my post that integrating the hall was the primary > reason for the programming style I use. The caller's style, messaging, and > programming have to work together without "mixed" messages.) Part of my point is the necessary emphasis on the "and": most sound engineers from what I've seen focus on getting the sound of the band into shape and spend only minimal time balancing the caller's voice just above the band. Despite your admonition that the caller is responsible for everything (which certainly is worthwhile as general advice), I think that placing the onus for the sound system also on the caller is probably going a bit too far. > It is true that the vast majority of contra dance callers do not do some, > or many of these things. Our dances "work" largely with the help of the > regulars who take responsibility. The dancers, largely, provide cover for > callers who lack these skills. I am a strong advocate of work on the > basic, core skills of calling. I would rather see all callers focus on the > basics rather than on complex dances or fancy calling "gimmicks." The > basics are where I try to put my own efforts at developing my calling > skills. The basics always need work. Only experienced callers will potentially be able to master all the foundation arts -- which is part of why describing calling techniques that only work for people who have mastered the foundations is IMO a Bad Idea unless carefully labeled. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html
