Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
To continue this discussion a little longer - I hope the horse isn't already dead - we danced French Fours at the Nelson dance last night, with lots of teens and younger dancers. French Fours is a proper dance and it has one of the greatest distinctions between the actives and the inactives. (Page 91 in the Tolman/ Page Country Dance Book) Active are very active all the time, while the inactives participate in the R&L over and back in the B2 part and nothing else. I think that most in the hall thought it a good selection (although there may have been a few who wanted something more active). It was called by a younger caller after a more active and complicated dance and later in the evening. French Fours gave dancers a bit of a rest - at least if they were not active. And it does have a move that is uncommon in the A1 part to keep it interesting. The inactives were all jigging in place and moving forward and back in time to make room for the actives to get by. As the dancers got into the grove of the music it was fun to watch them all dancing smoothly together, and it was clear that most of them enjoyed the change of pace. Rich. David Millstone remarked on 3/6/2008 5:21 PM: At the risk of overstating the case-- and thank you, Jack, wherever you are, for chiming in- I'll quote from another of David Smukler's essays. In this case, he's discussing Chorus Jig but his comments about the role of the twos are relevant in the Rory O'More context: - Valuing the role of the "supporting cast" As in many other chestnuts, the twos have an important and perhaps underappreciated role... Just think of your slow progress toward the top of the hall as paying your dues in the contra world. Keep dancing. Sooner or later, whether this time or another, you will reach the head of the set. Your turn will come to be a number one couple for time after time, supported by all those other dancers whom you helped out on other occasions. But, aside from the importance of being there for the ones, could it be that there are other hidden opportunities in the number two role? Absolutely! First of all, you have the gift of time. You can watch other dancers, and learn from observing them, an increasingly rare opportunity in our contemporary everyone-moving-all-the-time contra choreography. Some of this observation is social (Who's dancing with whom tonight? Look at the amazing matching smiles on those two!), and some is dance-related (Oh, that's how Mary and Tom do that really neat balance!) (Aha! They only go six steps down the center and then they take two full beats to turn alone). Another benefit can be found in the reduced physical demand placed on you as a dancer. After being active for a while, enjoy this time to relax as an "inactive," required only to ensure that turning contra corners goes well. A program that varies the activity level from dance to dance will allow more people, young and old, to participate in dancing, and to feel energized and not exhausted by their participation. However, if you are not ready for a rest, you have an invaluable opportunity as a number two dancer to improvise some clogging steps during the first half of Chorus Jig. This sort of "jigging"--a free-form way to play along with the band--has become rare in the contemporary dance scene. Freestyle clogging while standing out as a number two dancer is only possible if the inactives are, well, inactive. If everyone is moving, there simply is no opportunity for the solo foot percussion that resonated on dance floors in years past. Speaking of the band, the number two role also offers you the chance to devote more of your conscious attention to the music. -- As Jack says, some of these older dances really validate the notion of this being a community-centered dance form, rather than the couple-centered activity that many seem to think it is. David P.S. Shameless plug: CDSS is publishing Cracking Chestnuts, the collection of essays by David S. and myself on some twenty classic dances. Music, detailed commentary, an appendix with more suggested dances... We're told that it should be available by this fall. ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
I'll be sure to contact the Kellys. --- "crunchym...@juno.com" wrote: > Susan, > I've replied to you offlist, but I'll reiterate for > anyone else who may be passing through Memphis, > Tennessee: This is the Volunteer state and we love > volunteer guest callers in Memphis, and the people > to contact about calling here are Joan and Ernest > Kelly. Contact info may be found here on the Memphis > Contra Dancers webpage: > http://members.aol.com/horselovers/index.html > Can this dance work if the inactives are included in > the Rory O'More line? So at the end of A1, instead > of actives only, everyone would come forward into a > LWL, taking hands with their partner and a neighbor > or the opposite gender. Balance, balance, and twirl, > repeat, then the initial call for B1 would be > something like: > 1's by the right whilethe 2's back out, 1st corners > alle-mande > > Has anyone tried it this way? I think this is what I > will do, if I don't end up scrapping it all together > due to nervousness or time constraints. I would strongly recommend against doing this. It's important to let people experience our dance history. In fact, many of the chestnuts were originally done as triple minors; I occasionally call a triple minor (almost never Sackett's Harbor, more typically Beaux of Albany) just to go even further back into that history. By the way, Rory O'More has no twirl written into it. It's a recent addition, as is the "Petronella clap". Susan Elberger > Thank you so much for your input!! > Alison Murphy > > > > "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, > it will be in the guise of fighting a > foreign enemy." > ~ James Madison >HTTP://WWW.RONPAUL2008.COM > _ > Click for free info on online masters degrees and > make up to $150K/ year > http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifnHYB5oYT22mMSjcgoJzv4cUMwQUVR1nAf0QFsvZserdI0j/ > > > ___ > Callers mailing list > call...@sharedweight.net > http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
David's quote of David's essay brings to mind how I sometimes see Chorus Jig (and other dances) danced here. First, concerning foot percussion and clogging, that is sometimes a hint to the musicians to simply drop out completely and let the feet make the music.for a few measures. That happens here from time to time and is usually very well received. Inactives sometimes (often?) try to fill in the quieter times with additional swings. With Chorus Jig, inactives will often swing their partner while the actives walk down the outside. Then, while actives walk down the center, inactives may swing the inactive in the next set behind them, breaking the swing just in time to cast off with the active returning back down the center. Inactive indeed! - actually not at all inactive in deed... Rich. David Millstone remarked on 3/6/2008 5:21 PM: At the risk of overstating the case-- and thank you, Jack, wherever you are, for chiming in- I'll quote from another of David Smukler's essays. In this case, he's discussing Chorus Jig but his comments about the role of the twos are relevant in the Rory O'More context: - Valuing the role of the "supporting cast" As in many other chestnuts, the twos have an important and perhaps underappreciated role... Just think of your slow progress toward the top of the hall as paying your dues in the contra world. Keep dancing. Sooner or later, whether this time or another, you will reach the head of the set. Your turn will come to be a number one couple for time after time, supported by all those other dancers whom you helped out on other occasions. But, aside from the importance of being there for the ones, could it be that there are other hidden opportunities in the number two role? Absolutely! First of all, you have the gift of time. You can watch other dancers, and learn from observing them, an increasingly rare opportunity in our contemporary everyone-moving-all-the-time contra choreography. Some of this observation is social (Who's dancing with whom tonight? Look at the amazing matching smiles on those two!), and some is dance-related (Oh, that's how Mary and Tom do that really neat balance!) (Aha! They only go six steps down the center and then they take two full beats to turn alone). Another benefit can be found in the reduced physical demand placed on you as a dancer. After being active for a while, enjoy this time to relax as an "inactive," required only to ensure that turning contra corners goes well. A program that varies the activity level from dance to dance will allow more people, young and old, to participate in dancing, and to feel energized and not exhausted by their participation. However, if you are not ready for a rest, you have an invaluable opportunity as a number two dancer to improvise some clogging steps during the first half of Chorus Jig. This sort of "jigging"--a free-form way to play along with the band--has become rare in the contemporary dance scene. Freestyle clogging while standing out as a number two dancer is only possible if the inactives are, well, inactive. If everyone is moving, there simply is no opportunity for the solo foot percussion that resonated on dance floors in years past. Speaking of the band, the number two role also offers you the chance to devote more of your conscious attention to the music. -- As Jack says, some of these older dances really validate the notion of this being a community-centered dance form, rather than the couple-centered activity that many seem to think it is. David P.S. Shameless plug: CDSS is publishing Cracking Chestnuts, the collection of essays by David S. and myself on some twenty classic dances. Music, detailed commentary, an appendix with more suggested dances... We're told that it should be available by this fall. ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
"...our dance organizer is against imbalanced dances anyway, and the Rory O'More twirls are one of her favorite moves." Unless your dance organizer is in superb physical condition, _Rory O'More_ will illustrate for her a good reason why some dances have active and inactive roles. To dance _Rory O'More_ in celebratory New England style requires athleticism when danced at a zesty pace and with the proper tune (and there's a point worth making: I wouldn't recommend this dance without a band that knows or is willing to learn the tune, as otherwise the fine flavor of the dance may be lost). In this case it makes sense to dance hard in the active role but get a bit of a break as an inactive couple. _Rory O'More_ stands out even among other active/inactive dances, and it would be a shame if your dance organizer denied herself the unique pleasure of making this discovery for herself. Robert Jon Golder 164 Maxfield St New Bedford, MA 02740 USA 508-999-2486
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
At the risk of overstating the case-- and thank you, Jack, wherever you are, for chiming in- I'll quote from another of David Smukler's essays. In this case, he's discussing Chorus Jig but his comments about the role of the twos are relevant in the Rory O'More context: - Valuing the role of the "supporting cast" As in many other chestnuts, the twos have an important and perhaps underappreciated role... Just think of your slow progress toward the top of the hall as paying your dues in the contra world. Keep dancing. Sooner or later, whether this time or another, you will reach the head of the set. Your turn will come to be a number one couple for time after time, supported by all those other dancers whom you helped out on other occasions. But, aside from the importance of being there for the ones, could it be that there are other hidden opportunities in the number two role? Absolutely! First of all, you have the gift of time. You can watch other dancers, and learn from observing them, an increasingly rare opportunity in our contemporary everyone-moving-all-the-time contra choreography. Some of this observation is social (Who's dancing with whom tonight? Look at the amazing matching smiles on those two!), and some is dance-related (Oh, that's how Mary and Tom do that really neat balance!) (Aha! They only go six steps down the center and then they take two full beats to turn alone). Another benefit can be found in the reduced physical demand placed on you as a dancer. After being active for a while, enjoy this time to relax as an "inactive," required only to ensure that turning contra corners goes well. A program that varies the activity level from dance to dance will allow more people, young and old, to participate in dancing, and to feel energized and not exhausted by their participation. However, if you are not ready for a rest, you have an invaluable opportunity as a number two dancer to improvise some clogging steps during the first half of Chorus Jig. This sort of "jigging"--a free-form way to play along with the band--has become rare in the contemporary dance scene. Freestyle clogging while standing out as a number two dancer is only possible if the inactives are, well, inactive. If everyone is moving, there simply is no opportunity for the solo foot percussion that resonated on dance floors in years past. Speaking of the band, the number two role also offers you the chance to devote more of your conscious attention to the music. -- As Jack says, some of these older dances really validate the notion of this being a community-centered dance form, rather than the couple-centered activity that many seem to think it is. David P.S. Shameless plug: CDSS is publishing Cracking Chestnuts, the collection of essays by David S. and myself on some twenty classic dances. Music, detailed commentary, an appendix with more suggested dances... We're told that it should be available by this fall.
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
At 04:40 PM 3/6/2008, you wrote: [snip] > And I am afraid I may be castigated for calling a dance where the 2's are completely inactive for more than 32 beats! I think the only way to deal with this is to face it head on, rather than to attempt to "slip it by." You might talk about how "we all enjoy dances with so-called Rory O'More balances. Here's an opportunity to dance the original, from which the figure originates." You could highlight the key supporting role that the twos play (see the final paragraph in David Smukler's article). And you might want to built into your program, later on in the evening, a more contemporary dance with the Rory O'More balances, demonstrating how this move has been revived in new contexts. I try to call contra corners whenever I can --- whether it's Labor of Love or Chorus Jig or Alternating Corners or something else -- and I point out that 1) Contra Corners (and other dances with unequal figures) are a good illustration of the fact that contra dancing is a community dance -- you're dancing with all of the other folks in your set. It's up to the "inactive" folks to be "active" in helping the 1's to be where they need to be and to watch out for the 1's coming out of contra corners. If folks want to be moving all the time, they should go take swing dance lessons! (I know...that's a bit of a simplification, but there's some truth there and in what David said.) I guess what I'm trying to say (and would have said in my last email, but David's spurred me on) is that you can use a chestnut dance like this or chorus jig or petranella to both show folks where some of these forms came from and to remind them that even when they're not "active" they still have things to do in the dance, be it helping the 1's or just clapping and encouraging and having fun!! Jack I would recommend that you have folks line up in short sets (eight couples would be ideal) so that everyone gets a chance to be an active dancer. I don't know your Memphis scene, but if you have long lines, the twos are not going to be very happy. Shorter lines will let everyone experience the thrill of the ones' role. My sense is that most dancers-- "most, " but certainly not all-- will willingly try something out of the norm. If you tried to slip an entire evening of older dances by your dancers, yes, you might be "caller non grata." Even here in New England, where the chestnuts probably are called more than any other part of the country, few of us would do an entire program of older dances, unless it was specifically advertised as such, a special event featuring classic contras. And elsewhere, where the contra tradition does not have such deep roots, it may be a harder sell, but keep in mind, we're talking one dance out of an entire evening. My (more than) 2 cents David Millstone Lebanon, NH ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
Dear Alison, --- You wrote: This is very bad for me, as our dance organizer is against imbalanced dances anyway --- end of quote --- Immediate (and intemperate) reaction: tell your dance organizer to go soak her head! This is a classic case of the hot-shots dance gypsies-- the "overactive 10%"-- demanding the the programs meet their personal preferences, rather than that of the entire community. Next reaction: Just where does your dance organizer think these dances come from? Someone just sat down in 1985 and created a new dance form and called it contra dancing? We dance today and enjoy these dances because they have a long history behind them. Just as generations of dancers kept the dances alive for us to modify and enjoy today, so we have an obligation to keep the dances alive for future generations. (I'm up on a soapbox now, as you can tell, but there's no stopping me.) Sure, the everyone moving all the time dances are common, but keep in mind that an entire program of such dances in and of itself narrows the range of dancers who will become part of your dance community. The older dancers may not want to be moving all the time; the younger dancers (middle school, for example) may find all that constant motion confusing. Hard core dancers who've been at it for a while may have one or another physical ailment that requires them to slow down. There is NOTHING WRONG with including a dance in a program where, god forbid, some dancers stand around a little! (Okay, got that out of my system. Thanks for your patience...) More nuanced reaction: There is more to life (and to contra dancing) than dances where everyone is moving all the time. I would NOT recommend your proposed solution of having everyone in one center line-- that will just make that line unmanageable. There are plenty of modern dances-- More for Your Neighbor, for example, by Roger Diggle, comes to mind-- that have Rory O'More style balances for everyone. The usual solution is to have two long waves, one on each side of the set. You could do that and please your organizer's lust for motion. > And I am afraid I may be castigated for calling a dance where the 2's are completely inactive for more than 32 beats! I think the only way to deal with this is to face it head on, rather than to attempt to "slip it by." You might talk about how "we all enjoy dances with so-called Rory O'More balances. Here's an opportunity to dance the original, from which the figure originates." You could highlight the key supporting role that the twos play (see the final paragraph in David Smukler's article). And you might want to built into your program, later on in the evening, a more contemporary dance with the Rory O'More balances, demonstrating how this move has been revived in new contexts. I would recommend that you have folks line up in short sets (eight couples would be ideal) so that everyone gets a chance to be an active dancer. I don't know your Memphis scene, but if you have long lines, the twos are not going to be very happy. Shorter lines will let everyone experience the thrill of the ones' role. My sense is that most dancers-- "most, " but certainly not all-- will willingly try something out of the norm. If you tried to slip an entire evening of older dances by your dancers, yes, you might be "caller non grata." Even here in New England, where the chestnuts probably are called more than any other part of the country, few of us would do an entire program of older dances, unless it was specifically advertised as such, a special event featuring classic contras. And elsewhere, where the contra tradition does not have such deep roots, it may be a harder sell, but keep in mind, we're talking one dance out of an entire evening. My (more than) 2 cents David Millstone Lebanon, NH
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
I don't think this would work, because it is the cast off that sends folks into the middle to do the wavy line, and getting to the center (even if there was room) woudl be really awkward for the 2's. I suspect this would be tricky to "balance" by alternating 1's and 2's active because it would make it even more complicated than it already is. Depending on the shape of your hall and the size of your group, though, you could do this with more sets, with fewer people in them. That way folks would change between being 1's and 2's more quickly. Another possibility to get in contra corners in an older dance would be to do a triplet. It can be easier to learn contra corners when the folks not turning contra corners aren't having to be corners for more than one person. I seem to remember a discussion of triplets a few months ago on this list that might cover some more on them. Since contra corners was originally a triplet, though, it can be easier to learn that way. Rory O'More is an ambitious dance to teach and learn, and if you have dancers who are going to protest, that's just another strike against you. If you're particularly wanting to get contra corners in more often, I recommend one of the other "alternating corners" dances, such as the modern classic by Jim Kitch. If you're looking for a chestnut, Chorus Jig can be good, and I believe can be done alternating (I believe there was discussion of that a while back too -- in fact, I just found it -- see below). Good luck with the calling and please say hello to Meghan Carr if you happen to see her!! Jack Here's the alternating version of Chorus Jig: > That said, in many cases it's possible to simply alternative the active role> between the 1s and 2s, and balance the dance better. Some callers do this.> (I don't think there's a good way to do it with Chorus Jig, though.) Yes there is - when sets are long enough, I've been using this version for a few years; 1A1. 1's down the outside, turn alone and return 1A2. 1's down the center, turn alone, return and cast off 1B1. 1's turn contra corners 1B2. 1's balance, swing 2A1. 2's up the outside, turn alone and return 2A2. 2's up the center, turn alone, return and cast off 2B1. 2's turn contra corners 2B2. 2's balance, swing As we all know, it has been customary for the inactives to cheat and swing during the A1. When the actives are done with B2 in this version, they can start cheating by simply keep on swinging - they're already there. Then after about a 28 beat swing they'll appreciate being inactive for a while. At 03:54 PM 3/6/2008, you wrote: I have a new problem however! Now that I understand the casting off, these two explanations also pointed out something I'd completely overlooked in the A1- that it is 1's/active's only in the long wavy Rory O'More line! I should have noticed this, it's right there in print, but somehow I missed it. This is very bad for me, as our dance organizer is against imbalanced dances anyway, and the Rory O'More twirls are one of her favorite moves. I thought I could slip this one by, as the origin of Rory O'More, but not if she has to be inactive for more than 16 beats at a time. And I am afraid I may be castigated for calling a dance where the 2's are completely inactive for more than 32 beats! So this brings me to a new question: Can this dance work if the inactives are included in the Rory O'More line? So at the end of A1, instead of actives only, everyone would come forward into a LWL, taking hands with their partner and a neighbor or the opposite gender. Balance, balance, and twirl, repeat, then the initial call for B1 would be something like: 1's by the right whilethe 2's back out, 1st corners alle-mande Has anyone tried it this way? I think this is what I will do, if I don't end up scrapping it all together due to nervousness or time constraints. Thank you so much for your input!! Alison Murphy "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." ~ James Madison HTTP://WWW.RONPAUL2008.COM _ Click for free info on online masters degrees and make up to $150K/ year http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifnHYB5oYT22mMSjcgoJzv4cUMwQUVR1nAf0QFsvZserdI0j/ ___ Callers mailing list call...@sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
Re: [Callers] need (more) help with Rory O'More
Susan, I've replied to you offlist, but I'll reiterate for anyone else who may be passing through Memphis, Tennessee: This is the Volunteer state and we love volunteer guest callers in Memphis, and the people to contact about calling here are Joan and Ernest Kelly. Contact info may be found here on the Memphis Contra Dancers webpage: http://members.aol.com/horselovers/index.html Rich, Thank you so much for your prompt and wonderfully clear explanation of the entire sequence in A1 and of casting off proper in particular! The entire A1 seems very clear to me now; casting off proper is kind of like a same gender courtesy turn. I think I will definitely find a group of 4 to demo it, as it seems much easier to see and imitate than explain. David, Your addendum on casting off proper, that the actives will walk forward while the inactives walk backwards/turn in place, was very helpful in cementing my ability to visualize the move. And I really appreciated how you broke everything down for me. I don't anticipate problems teaching Rory O'More slides/twirls as our dancers are very familiar with the move from other dances. But your suggestion to have the 1's end the swing facing UP solved my problem of how to get the dancers to consistently end the swing w/ lady on the left. We spend every learners lesson trying to teach people that the lady should be on the right, it's pretty ingrained here. I have a new problem however! Now that I understand the casting off, these two explanations also pointed out something I'd completely overlooked in the A1- that it is 1's/active's only in the long wavy Rory O'More line! I should have noticed this, it's right there in print, but somehow I missed it. This is very bad for me, as our dance organizer is against imbalanced dances anyway, and the Rory O'More twirls are one of her favorite moves. I thought I could slip this one by, as the origin of Rory O'More, but not if she has to be inactive for more than 16 beats at a time. And I am afraid I may be castigated for calling a dance where the 2's are completely inactive for more than 32 beats! So this brings me to a new question: Can this dance work if the inactives are included in the Rory O'More line? So at the end of A1, instead of actives only, everyone would come forward into a LWL, taking hands with their partner and a neighbor or the opposite gender. Balance, balance, and twirl, repeat, then the initial call for B1 would be something like: 1's by the right whilethe 2's back out, 1st corners alle-mande Has anyone tried it this way? I think this is what I will do, if I don't end up scrapping it all together due to nervousness or time constraints. Thank you so much for your input!! Alison Murphy "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." ~ James Madison HTTP://WWW.RONPAUL2008.COM _ Click for free info on online masters degrees and make up to $150K/ year http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifnHYB5oYT22mMSjcgoJzv4cUMwQUVR1nAf0QFsvZserdI0j/
