Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

[Lindsey Dono via Callers]

Hi Luke,
Thanks for sharing all of this! I'm looking for ideas for a sophisticated crowd 
and a very square room; 4x4s (and 6x6s etc) end up progressing folks to the 
same neighbors multiple times, and no one cares to be inactive. I could likely 
get away with one dance where I'd call all the way through; typically I've been 
dropping out after ~5 times through with this crowd.
I'll check out the Mad Robin site and let you know what, if anything, I decide 
to try!
Lindsey
(PS: Odd connection- I'm the girlfriend of your brother's former housemate in 
WA; we've had Jason over for dinner.)  From: Luke Donforth 
<luke.do...@gmail.com>
 To: Lindsey Dono <lynz...@yahoo.com> 
Cc: "callers@lists.sharedweight.net" <callers@lists.sharedweight.net> 
 Sent: Friday, May 1, 2015 11:37 AM
 Subject: Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

I should note, I've never actually tried calling "Luke's Options are Limited" 
it was mostly a theoretical exercise for me. To my knowledge it's never been 
danced.

If you have only two sets, it's not clear to me how a transgressive contras are 
functionally different than 4 face 4 dances or their cousin, Tempest Formation. 
(In my box, I'd put "Kim's Game" under Tempest Formation.)
The Tempest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qNp-n4CbdI
It becomes a question of if everyone is changing lines, or just half the 
couples are, but you're bouncing back and forth. 

If that's all you want, great. There's lots of room to write more 4 face 4 and 
tempest formation dances, and you can incorporate pass through lines there.

If you have more than two sets involved, I haven't found a way to keep things 
from being either complicated or boring for some dancers.

Option 1: all 1s and 2s progress the same way every time
If you have a progression that's down one couple, and over one set to the left 
for the 1s, and up one couple over one set to the right for the 2s, you no 
longer change numbers when you reach the bottom of the hall, you also change 
numbers when you reach the sides. So even with 5 sets across and 20 hands four 
deep, nobody is going to go more than 5 hands-four from their original 
position. If you've got a square (10 sets across, 10 hands four deep, etc) some 
folks on the main diagonal see 10 different couples, but other folks will 
bounce back and fourth on short diagonals of just a few couples. 

Option 2: have options that vary the progression
This is what "Luke's Options are Limited" attempts to do 
(http://www.madrobincallers.org/2013/01/25/attempting-a-grid-contra-choreography/
 ). If gives you different dances (thematically linked) to travel to different 
points on the floor. You could find other pairs of improper/becket dances using 
wide lines and long lines, and even incorporate passing through lines. But 
you're stuck with having to have different dances to call and be calling all 
the way through the dance. I personally try and get out of the way of the band 
and dancers interacting, and dislike calling through the entire dance.

Option 3: expand 4 face 4 to 6 face 6, 8 face 8, etc.
I played around with this a bit, and I think others have as well (Roger 
Auman?). There are dances up at 
http://www.madrobincallers.org/2014/02/26/6-facing-6-contra-dances/
I haven't done anything with them after writing them, but if they inspire you; 
feel free to use them. The hard part (in my opinion) is giving everyone 
something interesting to do. If your line of 6 has a pass through along the 
set, you've got to keep your trail buddy groups together and permuting, or some 
folks get a bum ride.

Option 4: I haven't found one, but let me know if you do!

Have fun.

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Michael Dyck via Callers 
<callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

On 15-05-01 01:02 AM, Lindsey Dono wrote:


Is "grid contra" the more standard terminology than "transgressive?"


I hadn't heard the term "transgressive contra" before, and I'm not finding hits 
for the term in search engines.

Here's what I've got:

1990-1995
Chris Kermiet: "Beckett's Crossing"
(in his "Zany Contras and Other Stuff!")
http://k-1.us/contras/beckettscrossing.html
(refers to it as "a progressive contra dance")

May 2010
Peter Foster: "Crisscross"
http://pfoster.pcug.org.au/dance/contra.htm#cri
(Doesn't really have a term for the dance form.)

Jan 2012?
Seth Tepfer: "Transgression"
http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/2012-January/004159.html
(refers to it as a "grid contra", but also refers to progression across as 
"transgression", hence the dance's title)
See also other posts in that thread.

Jan 2013
Luke Donforth: "Luke's Options are Limited"
http://www.madrobincallers.org/2013/01/25/attempting-a-grid-contra-choreography/
(refers to it as a "grid contra")

-Michael
___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net






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

Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

[Winston, Alan P. via Callers]

Luke --

For option 2 (thematically linked dances in alternation) I wonder if you 
could just way it was a medley; not only keep calling but rather than 
pingponging just between pairs you could use multiple pairs.


--Alan


On 5/1/2015 11:37 AM, Luke Donforth via Callers wrote:
I should note, I've never actually tried calling "Luke's Options are 
Limited" it was mostly a theoretical exercise for me. To my knowledge 
it's never been danced.


If you have only two sets, it's not clear to me how a transgressive 
contras are functionally different than 4 face 4 dances or their 
cousin, Tempest Formation. (In my box, I'd put "Kim's Game" under 
Tempest Formation.)

The Tempest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qNp-n4CbdI
It becomes a question of if everyone is changing lines, or just half 
the couples are, but you're bouncing back and forth.


If that's all you want, great. There's lots of room to write more 4 
face 4 and tempest formation dances, and you can incorporate pass 
through lines there.


If you have more than two sets involved, I haven't found a way to keep 
things from being either complicated or boring for some dancers.


Option 1: all 1s and 2s progress the same way every time
If you have a progression that's down one couple, and over one set to 
the left for the 1s, and up one couple over one set to the right for 
the 2s, you no longer change numbers when you reach the bottom of the 
hall, you also change numbers when you reach the sides. So even with 5 
sets across and 20 hands four deep, nobody is going to go more than 5 
hands-four from their original position. If you've got a square (10 
sets across, 10 hands four deep, etc) some folks on the main diagonal 
see 10 different couples, but other folks will bounce back and fourth 
on short diagonals of just a few couples.


Option 2: have options that vary the progression
This is what "Luke's Options are Limited" attempts to do 
(http://www.madrobincallers.org/2013/01/25/attempting-a-grid-contra-choreography/ 
). If gives you different dances (thematically linked) to travel to 
different points on the floor. You could find other pairs of 
improper/becket dances using wide lines and long lines, and even 
incorporate passing through lines. But you're stuck with having to 
have different dances to call and be calling all the way through the 
dance. I personally try and get out of the way of the band and dancers 
interacting, and dislike calling through the entire dance.


Option 3: expand 4 face 4 to 6 face 6, 8 face 8, etc.
I played around with this a bit, and I think others have as well 
(Roger Auman?). There are dances up at

http://www.madrobincallers.org/2014/02/26/6-facing-6-contra-dances/
I haven't done anything with them after writing them, but if they 
inspire you; feel free to use them. The hard part (in my opinion) is 
giving everyone something interesting to do. If your line of 6 has a 
pass through along the set, you've got to keep your trail buddy groups 
together and permuting, or some folks get a bum ride.


Option 4: I haven't found one, but let me know if you do!

Have fun.

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Michael Dyck via Callers 
> wrote:


On 15-05-01 01:02 AM, Lindsey Dono wrote:


Is "grid contra" the more standard terminology than
"transgressive?"


I hadn't heard the term "transgressive contra" before, and I'm not
finding hits for the term in search engines.

Here's what I've got:

1990-1995
Chris Kermiet: "Beckett's Crossing"
(in his "Zany Contras and Other Stuff!")
http://k-1.us/contras/beckettscrossing.html
(refers to it as "a progressive contra dance")

May 2010
Peter Foster: "Crisscross"
http://pfoster.pcug.org.au/dance/contra.htm#cri
(Doesn't really have a term for the dance form.)

Jan 2012?
Seth Tepfer: "Transgression"

http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/2012-January/004159.html
(refers to it as a "grid contra", but also refers to progression
across as "transgression", hence the dance's title)
See also other posts in that thread.

Jan 2013
Luke Donforth: "Luke's Options are Limited"

http://www.madrobincallers.org/2013/01/25/attempting-a-grid-contra-choreography/
(refers to it as a "grid contra")

-Michael

___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net 
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net




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


___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net

Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

[Luke Donforth via Callers]

I should note, I've never actually tried calling "Luke's Options are
Limited" it was mostly a theoretical exercise for me. To my knowledge it's
never been danced.

If you have only two sets, it's not clear to me how a transgressive contras
are functionally different than 4 face 4 dances or their cousin, Tempest
Formation. (In my box, I'd put "Kim's Game" under Tempest Formation.)
The Tempest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qNp-n4CbdI
It becomes a question of if everyone is changing lines, or just half the
couples are, but you're bouncing back and forth.

If that's all you want, great. There's lots of room to write more 4 face 4
and tempest formation dances, and you can incorporate pass through lines
there.

If you have more than two sets involved, I haven't found a way to keep
things from being either complicated or boring for some dancers.

Option 1: all 1s and 2s progress the same way every time
If you have a progression that's down one couple, and over one set to the
left for the 1s, and up one couple over one set to the right for the 2s,
you no longer change numbers when you reach the bottom of the hall, you
also change numbers when you reach the sides. So even with 5 sets across
and 20 hands four deep, nobody is going to go more than 5 hands-four from
their original position. If you've got a square (10 sets across, 10 hands
four deep, etc) some folks on the main diagonal see 10 different couples,
but other folks will bounce back and fourth on short diagonals of just a
few couples.

Option 2: have options that vary the progression
This is what "Luke's Options are Limited" attempts to do (
http://www.madrobincallers.org/2013/01/25/attempting-a-grid-contra-choreography/
). If gives you different dances (thematically linked) to travel to
different points on the floor. You could find other pairs of
improper/becket dances using wide lines and long lines, and even
incorporate passing through lines. But you're stuck with having to have
different dances to call and be calling all the way through the dance. I
personally try and get out of the way of the band and dancers interacting,
and dislike calling through the entire dance.

Option 3: expand 4 face 4 to 6 face 6, 8 face 8, etc.
I played around with this a bit, and I think others have as well (Roger
Auman?). There are dances up at
http://www.madrobincallers.org/2014/02/26/6-facing-6-contra-dances/
I haven't done anything with them after writing them, but if they inspire
you; feel free to use them. The hard part (in my opinion) is giving
everyone something interesting to do. If your line of 6 has a pass through
along the set, you've got to keep your trail buddy groups together and
permuting, or some folks get a bum ride.

Option 4: I haven't found one, but let me know if you do!

Have fun.

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Michael Dyck via Callers <
callers@lists.sharedweight.net> wrote:

> On 15-05-01 01:02 AM, Lindsey Dono wrote:
>
>>
>> Is "grid contra" the more standard terminology than "transgressive?"
>>
>
> I hadn't heard the term "transgressive contra" before, and I'm not finding
> hits for the term in search engines.
>
> Here's what I've got:
>
> 1990-1995
> Chris Kermiet: "Beckett's Crossing"
> (in his "Zany Contras and Other Stuff!")
> http://k-1.us/contras/beckettscrossing.html
> (refers to it as "a progressive contra dance")
>
> May 2010
> Peter Foster: "Crisscross"
> http://pfoster.pcug.org.au/dance/contra.htm#cri
> (Doesn't really have a term for the dance form.)
>
> Jan 2012?
> Seth Tepfer: "Transgression"
>
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers-sharedweight.net/2012-January/004159.html
> (refers to it as a "grid contra", but also refers to progression across as
> "transgression", hence the dance's title)
> See also other posts in that thread.
>
> Jan 2013
> Luke Donforth: "Luke's Options are Limited"
>
> http://www.madrobincallers.org/2013/01/25/attempting-a-grid-contra-choreography/
> (refers to it as a "grid contra")
>
> -Michael
>
> ___
> Callers mailing list
> Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
> http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net
>



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

Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

[Colin Hume via Callers]

On Fri, 1 May 2015 04:44:13 + (UTC), Lindsey Dono via Callers
wrote:
> (Based on a YouTube video, Colin Hume's Kim's Game looks like a
> 4x4, but contains this "pass through to a new line" concept...)

And the YouTube video is correct (though naturally the band aren't
playing the tune I wrote for it).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URKq4xSqDtc

Colin Hume

Email co...@colinhume.com  Web site http://www.colinhume.com

Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

[Michael Dyck via Callers]

On 15-05-01 12:44 AM, Lindsey Dono via Callers wrote:

Clarification: by "transgressive," I mean contras that progress between
lines (pass through to a new line) as well as along them.


A.k.a "grid contras"?

-Michael

Re: [Callers] Transgressive contras

[Lindsey Dono via Callers]

Clarification: by "transgressive," I mean contras that progress between lines 
(pass through to a new line) as well as along them. 
(Based on a YouTube video, Colin Hume's Kim's Game looks like a 4x4, but 
contains this "pass through to a new line" concept...)



On Apr 30, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Lindsey Dono via Callers 
 wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to start exploring transgressive contras; care to share dances you've 
tried and the hall's reaction(s)? 
Happy dancing!Lindsey Dono___
Callers mailing list
Callers@lists.sharedweight.net
http://lists.sharedweight.net/listinfo.cgi/callers-sharedweight.net