strathspey Archive: Balance vs. Set in Lines

Previous thread: Branch logos
Next thread: Monterey Mixer / By the Beautiful Sea

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23193 · David MacDuff · 22 Oct 2000 23:38:01 · Top

It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups
to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men
join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with
the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance,
especially in the context of balance, cross over,
balance, cross back.

This isn't really correct is it? Balance should be
reserved for when dancers face in opposite directions
as in:

1st couple turn with the right hand, cast off one
place (2nd couple move up), 1st couple turn with the
left hand to finish joining right hands with 1st
corners to balance.

Or is it now OK to use the term balance for setting in
line where it would be obvious that dancers are not
facing in alternate opposite directions?

David Kilgore Aldridge

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23194 · Richard Goss · 23 Oct 2000 00:29:23 · Top

David,

I have never liked the term "balance" except when used as a
part of the setting step, "balance & pas-de-basque".

My reason for this is the confusion caused between the
"Highland" and other dance usage as opposed to setting.
Historically, "balancing" has been used for a generic
setting step. Obviously a free style setting step where the
Society uses the term balancing would be inappropriate where
a uniformity of a foursome is required.

You will find that the Society answers your query in WYJTD.
----- [1982:63-4] -----
"BALANCE IN LINE"
"... reel time only ... pas-de-basque, right and left ...."
"Setting in line must not be confused with balancing in
line." "In setting in line the dancers all face the same way
...."
-----------------------
If a teachers has four in a line facing alternatively &
holding hands to set, the term "balance" is not only
redundant but confusing to those who know what a balance is
when setting. In American and EFDSS contra dancing, balance
refers to a coupe' as it does for the SOBHD. So I feel it
safe to say that the concept of a pdb in this figures is an
RSCDS "improvement" in a traditional folk dance form.
Therefore to your first question as to whether "balance"
should be restricted to couples facing alternate directions
in a line, I would say, "yes", and recommend that you simply
avoid the word as redundant and devisive in its ambiguity.

Goss
richard.n.goss@gte.net

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23195 · Marjorie McLaughlin · 23 Oct 2000 00:32:33 · Top

David Kilgore Aldridge wrote:
>
> It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups
> to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men
> join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with
> the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance,
> especially in the context of balance, cross over,
> balance, cross back.
>
> Or is it now OK to use the term balance for setting in
> line where it would be obvious that dancers are not
> facing in alternate opposite directions?

I've never used the term "balance" in lieu of "setting in lines", and I
can't recall hearing it used that way by any other SCD teachers. Perhaps
the teacher you've heard use it is familiar with contra dancing where
the term would be used as in "balance and swing your partner" (or
corner).

Marjorie McLaughlin
San Diego, CA

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23202 · SMiskoe · 23 Oct 2000 20:03:37 · Top

If you look in the directions for Scottish Reform, Book 3, you will see that
they specifically say 'balance in line'. Perhaps I have an old book and the
Society has updated its language but I have always felt that it was
permissible to use that phrase in as much as it was written some many years
ago.
Cheers,
Sylvia Miskoe, Concord, NH USA

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23203 · Norah Link · 23 Oct 2000 20:33:44 · Top

Just to add to the confusion... the attached link demonstrates the ballet
world's definition of "balance" -

http://www.abt.org/dictionary/terms/balance.html

You will find it looks remarkably like our pas-de-basque. Why "we" (the
RSCDS) decided it should only refer to dancers facing in alternate
directions, I couldn't say, although as Sylvia and others have pointed out,
other folk dance traditions use it similarly when one is facing someone else
with hands joined. It may not have originally required dancers to have
hands joined, and it may have referred originally only to the step, but with
common usage in dances being what it was, the definition became narrowed. A
guess only. "Balance-in-line" becomes a convenient way to describe dancers
performing this step with hands joined while facing in alternating
directions. "Set" on the other hand, could really refer to any "setting
step", where in SCD the most common one would be pdb, and certainly our
standard for 2 bars of setting is the pdb.

I don't know how balance came to refer to the particular movement in
Highland often referred to by others (including the RSCDS) as a coupe.
Although obviously, there are possibly other ways of referring to setting,
etc. For example, I had never before heard of "balancing" as another term
for "setting". Richard Goss obviously has a huge amount of experience in
this, both from his own dancing and his research, so I don't like to
contradict. Merely offering up another point of view, and perhaps hoping to
be educated a bit further.

regards,
Norah

> -----Original Message-----
> From: SMiskoe@aol.com [mailto:SMiskoe@aol.com]
> Sent: October 23, 2000 12:04 PM
> To: strathspey@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
> Subject: Re: Balance vs. Set in Lines
>
>
> If you look in the directions for Scottish Reform, Book 3,
> you will see that
> they specifically say 'balance in line'. Perhaps I have an
> old book and the
> Society has updated its language but I have always felt that it was
> permissible to use that phrase in as much as it was written
> some many years
> ago.
> Cheers,
> Sylvia Miskoe, Concord, NH USA
>
> --
> SMiskoe@aol.com
>

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23204 · Coletta Busse · 23 Oct 2000 21:44:56 · Top

Sylvia Miskoe, wrote;
If you look in the directions for Scottish Reform, Book 3, you will see that
they specifically say 'balance in line'....
and she's right.
In SCD "Balance in line" is a FIGURE not a step. Setting is a step, Balance
in Highland dancing is a step.
The confusion seems to be coming about by folks abrieviating the name of the
figure.
Balance in line is dancers setting, in a specific configuration; facing
opposite directions, hands linked.
cheers,
Coletta

_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23205 · Mike Briggs · 23 Oct 2000 21:47:38 · Top

Does the term apply to just two dancers (could be partners) setting
facing each other with right hands joined? If not, why not?

Mike
--
---------------------------------------------
Norma Briggs Voice: 608 835 0914
Michael J. Briggs Fax: 608 835 0924
BRIGGS LAW OFFICE
1519 Storytown Rd Oregon WI 53575-2521 USA
---------------------------------------------
HTTP://BRIGGSLAW.HOMESTEAD.COM
---------------------------------------------

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23206 · Richard L. Walker · 23 Oct 2000 22:23:04 · Top

My video tape about the "Reel of the 51st Division" includes images of the
WWII era dance. The POW segment shows men setting using one setting step;
the up-to-date segment shows dancers using today's setting step. If anyone
knows what type setting step (reminded more of balancing than setting) was
used for the WWII segment perhaps you wouldn't mind explaining how it is
done. I thought it looked rather neat - and it accommodated heavy shoes.

"Richard L Walker"<rlwalker@granis.net>
Pensacola, FL 32504-7726 USA

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23207 · e.ferguson · 24 Oct 2000 03:02:23 · Top

Sylvia Miskoe, wrote:
> Perhaps I have an old book and the Society has updated its
> language.

As Coletta already stated, the official RSCDS meaning of "Balance
in Line" is unambiguous.

The Manual, page 6.7 (section 6 presents Formations) reads:

Balance in Line in Reel and Jig Time.
This formation is danced by three or four dancers in line facing
alternate ways. It can be danced in the sidelines, across or
diagonally. [description follows; Pas de Basque R + L, nearer
hands joined]

The Formation Index (1996 edition) lists 14 dances with this figure.

No "Balance in Line" is defined for Strathspey time.

Taken literally, the wording of the manual replies NO to Mike
Briggs' question on whether two dancers can "balance in line".
One could extend the notion from 4 and 3 dancers to 2, but (with
Richard Goss' remark in mind) why not simply say "set" ?

No step called "Balance" is defined in the Manual, but, as Richard
points out, "Balance" has a very different meaning in the Highland
step "Balance & Pas de Basque".

Enjoy.

Eric

Eric T. Ferguson, van Dormaalstraat 15, 5624 KH EINDHOVEN, Netherlands
tel: +31-40-243 2878 fax: +31-40-246 7036 e-mail: e.ferguson@antenna.nl

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23208 · SMiskoe · 24 Oct 2000 04:59:46 · Top

Brief history of balance as in square/contra dancing:
In square an contra dancing when you 'balance' you are doing what in SCD and
ECD is called 'setting'. You can balance your partner, another person, or do
the step while in a line (usually of 4 and usually facing different
directions) or while holding hands in a circle of 4. You can do it on the
spot or make the movement a slight forward and back or, especially in a line
of 4, side to side.
Since you're not on your toes, you can make lots of noise while you do it (if
you wish). 19th century dance notes speak of wonderful dancers who could
execute many different styles of balance.
Cheers,
Sylvia Miskoe, Concord, NH USA

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23209 · Angus Henry · 24 Oct 2000 08:36:43 · Top

>It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups
>to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men
>join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with
>the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance,
>especially in the context of balance, cross over,
>balance, cross back.
>
>This isn't really correct is it? Balance should be
>reserved for when dancers face in opposite directions
>as in:
>
>1st couple turn with the right hand, cast off one
>place (2nd couple move up), 1st couple turn with the
>left hand to finish joining right hands with 1st
>corners to balance.
>
>Or is it now OK to use the term balance for setting in
>line where it would be obvious that dancers are not
>facing in alternate opposite directions?

No

Angus
--

* * * * * * * * * * * * *
Angus & Puka Henry:- 4 Eagle Court, WULAGI, NT 0812, AUSTRALIA
PHONE: (International) + 61 (0)8 8927 9203
FAX: as phone, but phone FIRST to arrange for it to be switched on!
Website: <http://www.octa4.net.au/ahenry/>

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23211 · Oberdan Otto · 24 Oct 2000 18:15:13 · Top

>It has slipped into common usage in some dance groups
>to refer to set in lines (i. e. in a longwise set, men
>join hands facing ladies, who join hands and set with
>the pas de basque or common scottishe) as balance,
>especially in the context of balance, cross over,
>balance, cross back.
>
>This isn't really correct is it? Balance should be
>reserved for when dancers face in opposite directions
>as in: ...

I agree with the many other respondents that in SCD terminology
"balance" is not a correct substitute for the verb "set" and that
"balance in line" to describe a formation of dancers is the only
usage "balance" that I am familiar with in the SCD genre.

HOWEVER, it does describe actions in couple dances, including
Scottish couple dances (not country dances) that are muted versions
of the PdB setting step (i.e. leave off the jete and don't spring off
of the floor...just "balance"). Perhaps the terminology you have
heard carried over from couple dances in a Ceilidh dance setting.
Ceilidh dances are usually simple and taught on the spot. SCD styling
is usually not an ingredient in Ceilidh dancing, so in that context
"balance" would correctly produce what the caller (teacher) wanted
the dancers to do.

I used the term "balance" for a muted setting step when I don't want
the dancers to do a full-up PdB step (before they are warmed-up for
example).

In the Round Dancing (couple dancing) genre, one may hear an
instruction like "balance away and together" to describe and action
where the dancers (usually holding nearer hands) set turning away
from each other and then set again turning toward each other (the
step is a generic PdB, not and SCD PdB). I am not an authority on
Ceilidh (e.g. old-thyme) couple dances but I imagine the term
"balance" could be correctly used there as well to describe a muted
setting step.

Cheers, Oberdan.

184 Estaban Drive, Camarillo, CA 93010-1611 USA
Voice: (805) 389-0063, FAX: (805) 484-2775, email: ootto@ootto.com

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23212 · Anselm Lingnau · 24 Oct 2000 19:17:16 · Top

Oberdan Otto <ootto@ootto.com> writes:

> I am not an authority on Ceilidh (e.g. old-thyme) couple dances but I
> imagine the term "balance" could be correctly used there as well to
> describe a muted setting step.

I don't have the book to hand right now, but I seem to remember that we
do find `balance' to describe a step rather than a formation in the
RSCDS instructions for the Waltz Country Dance.

And I know at least one pas-de-valse country dance (Robert McOwen's Lang
frae Glasgow) where the explanations say `For setting, use a waltz-time
balance right and left'.

So it seems that `balance' (w/o `in line') is all right in country
dancing as long as you're talking about waltz-time things.

Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau ......................... lingnau@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
[E]very science must go through a pre-scientific phase of identifying phenomena
before getting serious. Unfortunately software engineers are making so much
money that the odds of their art turning into a science are very slim.
-- Bill Gribble

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23215 · Richard Goss · 25 Oct 2000 04:23:12 · Top

BALANCE:

Its recap time. So lets see what we have so far.

1. In US contras, balance means a generic setting step.
2. The EFDSS uses balance as a setting step usually
involving a step swing, this is also used in Scotland
in Ceilidh and County style dancing, and was probably
generally before the RSCDS
3. The RSCDS calls setting while holding hands in facing
in opposite directions, balancing, otherwise calls it
setting in line.
4. In ballet, balence is a low impact form of our
pas-de-basque
5. Milligan describes a balance figure in 1951 WYJTD (non-
official RSCDS later official after quiet revisions). At
about the same time, some dances that used to say balance
just say set.
6. Wild Geese, provenance unknown, has the balance figure
without
the words.
7. Anselm seems to remember the term balance used in the
teaching
of Waltz Country Dance [aka Dutch Foursome]. Here the ballet
pas de valse, looks a lot like balence.
8. I [Goss] was taught the same part of Waltz Country Dance
as a
3/4 time or waltzing pas-de-bas(?que?). To be done as per
the
[incorrectly written] instructions for "Yellow Haired
Laddie".
9. Now according to David, we have modern SCD's with the
term
balance being currently being used. While Anselm says that
because it is used in WCD it is OK to use in in setting w/o
the alternate facing in a line.
-----
This discussion's path justifies my initial thesis that
while recognizing an ambiguity, we should quietly retire the
term "balance" be cause of the ambiguity. Of course there
will be those who will want to change the rest of the world
to fit what they think they learned.
To quote the late, Hugh Foss's title, "We Agree to Differ"
will not help in this case. As the continued use of this
term will continue to be devisive and confusing. So I
propose the following:
1. Let the country dance world outside the RSCDS have the
word
"balance" as its use without us is generically consistant.
2. Let the SOBHD, have their setting step called "balance
and
pas-de-bas" even though they really mean "coupe' and pas-de-
bas". At the least the balance part that we use in Highland
setting steps is consistant with the rest of the country
dance
world.
3. Since,
A. the RSCDS, has already substituted "set" for "balance"
in some of its dances (usually with English sources) where
we have inserted pas-de-basque where the English balance
used to be and by such act has admitted we have a problem,
B. the RSCDS, has avoided the word in some of its recent
publications when the previous conditions would have
suggested otherwise,
C. there is no necessity of this word being included in
current vocabulary of the RSCDS,
I therefore propose, in the interest of peace and harmony
among peoples and nations, that like minded teachers ...
A. refrain from using the word "balance" except in the
aformentioned SOBHD setting step, and ...
B. take every opportunity to encourage the powers that be
within the RSCDS, to reconcile their publications in
such a way that this verbal ambiguity die a natural
death.

Goss
richard.n.goss@gte.net

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23220 · SallenNic · 25 Oct 2000 16:45:16 · Top

Richard Goss writes:
"Its recap time. So lets see what we have so far. ..." etc.
An interesting and helpful summary from him.
The EFDSS usage of the word "balance" is, as far as I am concerned, always
used to denote a "step - swing" step, (such as is found in La Russe Quadrille
and Bonny Breast Knot), and very often associated with an immediately
following "swing" (Ballroom hold and pivot step).
I have always thought this shewed mid to late C19th origins, probably
descent from the "Balance" (with an acute accent on the 'e' - can't do that
on e-mail!) used in Ballroom Quadrilles.
Nicolas B., Lanark,
Scotland.

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23221 · Rebecca Sager · 25 Oct 2000 17:29:05 · Top

> B. the RSCDS, has avoided the word in some of its recent
> publications when the previous conditions would have
> suggested otherwise,

No - in Book 33 - The Music Makars, and Book 38 - Follow Me Home, the
RSCDS uses "balance in line" to describe setting in lines with alternate
people facing in the opposite direction. These are two that came to mind
immediately, there are probably others. Johnnie's Welcome Hame, Book 32?
- yes it's used in the description of The Spoke.

> C. there is no necessity of this word being included in
> current vocabulary of the RSCDS,

The necessity is to describe the above quite common formation in a
succinct fashion, understandable to the majority of Scottish country
dancers. I see no reason to suggest discontinuing its use because a few
(surely very few?) use it incorrectly.

In fact, its use is expanding, with the introduction of the Strathspey
"balance in line", with Highland Schottische steps as in Monadh Liath
(actually Drewry calls this "Highland Schottische Balance") and both
Highland and Common Schottische in Dogsbody in Milton Levy's Tin Woodman
collection. I don't have the original instructions for this to check what
his description of the formations was.

Becky

Becky Sager
Marietta GA USA

>
>
>

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23222 · Keith Eric Grant · 25 Oct 2000 17:36:34 · Top

Richard Goss wrote:
>
> BALANCE:
>
> Its recap time. So lets see what we have so far.
>
> B. take every opportunity to encourage the powers that be
> within the RSCDS, to reconcile their publications in
> such a way that this verbal ambiguity die a natural
> death.
>

So, on the balance, a fairly complete summary with the recommendation that
we put balance out (in the sense of putting out the cat) rather than to be
out of balance with the world.

...Keith (balancing delicately and nonlinearly)

--

+------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
I Keith Eric Grant I Hail to the mountains with summits of I
I <keg@ramblemuse.com> I blue. To the glens with their meadows of I
I http://www.ramblemuse.com/ I sunshine and dew. To the women and men I
I------------------------------I ever constant and true. Ever ready to I
I Over the hills, but not I welcome one home. I
I too far away from the I From the Scottish-American traditional I
I San Francisco East Bay I song "Mist Covered Mountains". I
+------------------------------+-------------------------------------------+

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23223 · Richard Goss · 25 Oct 2000 19:38:52 · Top

I have a teaching philosophy involving instructions that are
different for different people moving at the same time.

This is because when you are explaing A, B stops listening
and doesn't always start when you have shifted to him,
especially if A's instructions are long and complicated.

Solution: creat meaningful language based on already known
terms to be inclusive.

We already know that "first corners" are m1w3 w1m2

So instead of saying 1m w 3s and 1w w 2s, I suggest
1st corner couples meaning your 1st corners & their partners

The next step is what do you do when
1s & 1st corners join hands and set
This is simple, extrapolating from the above I have used
1st diagonal as in join hands in your first diagonal & set

given the term "first corners" -> "first corner couple"
& -> "first diagonal"
extends one known term to another logical one without adding
any more concept load as all are built on the concept of
corners.

When I it comes to which hand, I find that by not
indicating, the average beginner discovers this himself. By
teaching handing outwith the concept of a dance, most of
these problems are easily solved. Since we usually
begin a handing activity with the right hand, and
give right hand to first corner,
then you have only one hand left to give to your
partner in your first diagonal.
The major problem I have experienced with neologisms, unless
they come from the top, is that they are more threatening to
those who have already solved the mystery of the initial
problem and are too mentally lazy to put themselves in the
position of a newcomer who easily gets overwhelmed with
words, when too many words concerning how to dance are
inserted into how to do this dance.

Goss
richard.n.goss@gte.net

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23224 · Richard Goss · 25 Oct 2000 20:18:31 · Top

Rebecca,

I think you have been missing the point in part of this
discussion.

In examples already given, the Society has already
(inconsistantly) been replacing "balance" with "set" when
they have re-issued their books. They have already printed
new dances with what used to be call "balance" with the word
"set".

All I have been saying, is that this idea of the Society is
a good one which would be better if they consistantly
followed it through.

The entire concept of a balance in strathspey is impossible
because it is impossible to properly perform the setting
step and still maintain hands. To cite WYJTD, "balance ...
occurs in reel time only". So in the Society's mind a
strathspey balance would be impossible.

Your own confusion (and the Society's) is implicit in your
statement. "Balance in line", in WYJTD is a formation, but
everywhere, including nonRSCDS Scottish dancing in Scotland,
balancing is a non-pas-de-basque setting step.

The confusion was caused by the Society's continued lack of
consistancy.
"Balance in line" 1st appears in "Scottish Reform"
Book 3.1 (1926, cont. at least until 1950 edition)
3&4 7&8 Balance meaning set (2 pas-de-basques)
Somewhere between the 1950 edition and the 1964 edition
the Society decided to change balance for set
(probably because:
A. the RSCDS does not balance here, and
B. everyone else does balance here and the
Society wants them to stop (Reel 51st, esp.)
So in Book 3.1 (1964->) 3&4/7&8 now say set.
(because that is what we are doing here)

Unfortunately WYJTD still uses "Scottish Reform" (which now
contains no mention of a balance), as an example of a
balance in line.

To my knowledge, John Drewry never had any official status
with the Society until after Miss Milligan's death. So maybe
no one told him about the change when it was made.

The late Milt Levy was my student, who, comming from
international folk dancing and the EFDSS, never did get
along well with RSCDS terms.

To have a reasonable discussion, it is not sufficient to
find exceptions (I have already said that the Society has
been inconsistant in this), what you must do is
answer/explain the facts presented by the person with whom
you are disagreeing. I am not fortunate enough to have met
and polled the majority of dancers (which sounds like, "Mon,
all the kids are ...." in which case an intelligent mother
will say, "Tell me their names and I'll call their
mothers."). I would be willing to consider your comments as
relevant when you can respond to, or explain mine.

------

Goss
richard.n.goss@gte.net

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23230 · Rebecca Sager · 26 Oct 2000 00:39:49 · Top

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

----__JNP_000_4974.22a7.1c7f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I am not a historian. I have been dancing not quite 20 years. In my
dancing lifetime, "balance in line" has been consistently used by my
teachers, locally and teachers of international fame, to mean this one
simple thing, setting in lines with alternate people facing in opposite
directions. If this is a neologism, it is one that comes from the top.
Has Mr. Goss not noticed that WYJTD was replaced years ago by the RSCDS
Manual? Page 6.7 describes Balance in Line very clearly.

The dances I cited are not "exceptions" but are examples of current, ie:
the past 20 years, RSCDS terminology. I only have Scottish Reform in the
"Revised Edition 1961" Pocket Book, but that uses "balance in line" in
bars 3-4 and 7-8. My Book 13 is the "Revised Edition 1980" Pocket Book,
and in Reel of the 51st, there's "balance in line" again. My Pocket Book
24 is undated, but I believe it had to have been published between those
two dates, and the term doesn't appear in Wild Geese.

That the RSCDS may have used different terms at different times is not
surprising, there are many examples of that. I am not concerned that
balance may mean something else in other dance disciplines, nor that it
may have meant something different in the past. Language and dance are
both in continuous flux.

At this point, the RSCDS still does not "officially" recognize the
possibility of the Strathspey balance in line, but these dances exist and
are being danced and enjoyed. This recognition will come in due time.
Yes, changing hands in a lovely continuous movement is part of this
formation, but the essential character of alternate dancers facing in
opposite directions is maintained.

A lot of Mr. Goss' stuff leaves me very confused, but I am quite clear on
the two points I chose to answer. Obviously I can't prove that the
majority of dancers understand the term "balance in line", despite the
Society's recently consistent use of it, but that's the way I understand
it. My mother's phone number is 01352-740-441 ( but don't all call her,
she's 89)

Becky

Becky Sager
Marietta GA USA
----__JNP_000_4974.22a7.1c7f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dwindows-1252" http-equiv=3DContent-=
Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bottomMargin=3D0 leftMargin=3D3 rightMargin=3D3 topMargin=3D0>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>I am not a historian. I have been dancing not quite 20 years. In my =
dancing=20
lifetime, "balance in line" has been consistently used by my teachers, =
locally=20
and teachers of international fame, to mean this one simple thing, setting =
in=20
lines with alternate people facing in opposite directions. If this is a=20
neologism, it<STRONG><U> is </U></STRONG>one<STRONG> </STRONG>that comes =
from=20
the top. Has Mr. Goss not noticed that WYJTD was replaced years ago by the =
RSCDS=20
Manual? Page 6.7 describes Balance in Line very clearly.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The dances I cited are not "exceptions" but are examples of current, =
ie:=20
the past 20 years, RSCDS terminology. I only have Scottish Reform in the=20
"Revised Edition 1961" Pocket Book, but that uses "balance in line" in bars=
3-4=20
and 7-8. My Book 13 is the "Revised Edition 1980" Pocket Book, and in Reel =
of=20
the 51st, there's "balance in line" again. My Pocket Book 24 is undated, =
but I=20
believe it had to have been published between those two dates, and the term=
=20
doesn't appear in Wild Geese.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>That the RSCDS may have used different terms at different times is not=
=20
surprising, there are many examples of that. I am not concerned that =
balance may=20
mean something else in other dance disciplines, nor that it may have meant=
=20
something different in the past. Language and dance are both in continuous=
=20
flux.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>At this point, the RSCDS still does not "officially" recognize the=20
possibility of the Strathspey balance in line, but these dances exist and =
are=20
being danced and enjoyed. This recognition will come in due time. Yes, =
changing=20
hands in a lovely continuous movement is part of this formation, but the=20
essential character of alternate dancers facing in opposite directions is=20
maintained. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A lot of Mr. Goss' stuff leaves me very confused, but I am quite clear=
on=20
the two points I chose to answer. Obviously I can't prove that the majority=
of=20
dancers understand the term "balance in line", despite the Society's =
recently=20
consistent use of it, but that's the way I understand it. My mother's phone=
=20
number is 01352-740-441 ( but don't all call her, she's 89)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Becky</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Becky Sager </DIV>
<DIV>Marietta&nbsp; GA&nbsp; USA</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

----__JNP_000_4974.22a7.1c7f--

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23233 · Simon Scott · 26 Oct 2000 02:49:03 · Top

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C03E9B.A4C4FC80
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I must say that I agree with Becky Sager's last two messages. =20
The phrase "balance in line" is certainly very well understood =
everywhere, and, if it is then I think it sad to make a such an =
unnecessary issue of it.
Let it "be" common usage and not confuse everyone with petty details.

Simon Scott
Vancouver

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C03E9B.A4C4FC80
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff bottomMargin=3D0 leftMargin=3D3 rightMargin=3D3 =
topMargin=3D0>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I must say that I agree with Becky Sager's last two messages.&nbsp; =
</DIV>
<DIV>The phrase "balance in line" is certainly very well understood =
everywhere,=20
and, if it is then I think it&nbsp;sad to make a such an unnecessary =
issue of=20
it.</DIV>
<DIV>Let it "be" common usage and not confuse everyone with petty =
details.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Simon Scott</DIV>
<DIV>Vancouver</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C03E9B.A4C4FC80--

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23381 · Chris1Ronald · 5 Nov 2000 20:58:09 · Top

In a message dated 10/25/2000 7:46:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,=20
SallenNic@aol.com writes:

> I have always thought this shewed mid to late C19th origins, probably=20
> descent from the "Balance" (with an acute accent on the 'e' - can't do=20
that=20
> on e-mail!) used in Ballroom Quadrilles.
> Nicolas B.,=20
Lanark,=20
> Scotland.

If you want to make a French "=E9", try "Alt130". It works with my software=20
(word). But I must admit I don't know if it survives e-mail transmission.

Chris.=20

Balance vs. Set in Lines

Message 23382 · Richard L. Walker · 5 Nov 2000 21:18:10 · Top

An aside:
If you install the "English (United States)" keyboard language with the
"United States - International" layout, you can make most symbols (=D1, =F1=
, =D3,
=F3, =D6, =F6, etc.) with just two strokes. The first stroke is the char=
acter
appearing above the letter ("~", "'", or '"' in the examples); the second
stroke is the letter itself. If the second stroke is a space, you get th=
e
"~", "'" or the '"' itself. How handy this might be depends on how many
times you normally use the ALT characters vs. how many times you use the =
"
or the ' symbols. I like it since I only have to use an approximation of
the symbol appearing above the letter along with the letter - no lookups.
"Richard L Walker"<rlwalker@granis.net>
Pensacola, FL 32504-7726 USA

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris1Ronald@aol.com [mailto:Chris1Ronald@aol.com]
If you want to make a French "=E9", try "Alt130". It works with my softwa=
re
(word). But I must admit I don't know if it survives e-mail transmission.

In a message dated 10/25/2000 7:46:02 AM Eastern Standard Time,
SallenNic@aol.com writes:
> I have always thought this showed mid to late C19th origins, probably
> descent from the "Balance" (with an acute accent on the 'e' - can't do
> that on e-mail!) used in Ballroom Quadrilles.

Previous thread: Branch logos
Next thread: Monterey Mixer / By the Beautiful Sea
A Django site.