I think it would be much better as a longways set. It's the awkward getting
into place at the beginning and end(s) that puts me off the dance.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Anselm Lingnau [SMTP:email@example.com] > Sent: 05 December 2001 10:12 > To: firstname.lastname@example.org > Subject: Re: Glasgow Highlanders > > Angus Henry <email@example.com> writes: > > > Does anybody know why the irregular progression in this dance (which > > incidentally I enjoy dancing), or how it was decided? > > I wouldn't know for sure, but I think this is one of those dances that > used to be done in a longways set `for as many as will'. (At any rate it > works rather well that way, and we do it like that frequently > hereabouts.) This means that the irritating discontinuity only took > place at the very ends of the line, and people could just discreetly > `fudge it' without generating undue attention to themselves. I agree > with Ian's comment that the standing couples are probably supposed to > loiter around on their own side of the dance. > >