strathspey Archive: ladies' chain and the rest

Previous thread: ladies' chain
Next thread: L. Chain - (was Changing feet)

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39361 · Volleyballjerry · 29 Sep 2004 21:08:06 · Top

"What's the story behind the RSCDS requirement that men not cast into a
ladies' chain?

Mike"

As far as I know ~ and I'm happy to learn otherwise if it's the case ~
there's basically no story at all. If there's going to be any standardization of
figures, then it has to be one way or the other. So rather arbitrarily,
sometimes with historic justification, sometimes upon Miss Milligan's whim, this or
that was standardized to option A or option B. The same with the left foot
initiation of the quicktime poussette on the man's side. One could no doubt find
all sorts ~ hundreds! ~ of things in RSCDS-SCD to ask: why this way instead
of that way? More likely just so that it's always the SAME way rather than
one way's being necessarily judged somehow superior the other. Of course we
could just as well be casting into ladies' and men's chains. And if it had been
so standardized, then one could just as well be asking why we don't do it
without the cast.

Robb Quint
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39373 · Ron Mackey · 30 Sep 2004 00:38:17 · Top

> "What's the story behind the RSCDS requirement that men not cast into a
> ladies' chain?
>
> Mike"

I was told that, like finishing the reel without a loop it was to
keep things simple and avoid unnecessary twiddles. WYJTD says that
it is usually done when men are standing beside their partners and
merely says that men dance towards their partners places.


ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39375 · Ron Mackey · 30 Sep 2004 01:02:54 · Top

> "What's the story behind the RSCDS requirement that men not cast into a
> ladies' chain?
>
> Mike"

I was told that, like finishing the reel without a loop it was to
keep things simple and avoid unnecessary twiddles. WYJTD says that
it is usually done when men are standing beside their partners and
merely says that men dance towards their partners places.

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39376 · Ron Mackey · 30 Sep 2004 01:02:55 · Top

> "What's the story behind the RSCDS requirement that men not cast into a
> ladies' chain?
>
> Mike"

I was told that, like finishing the reel without a loop it was to
keep things simple and avoid unnecessary twiddles. WYJTD says that
it is usually done when men are standing beside their partners and
merely says that men dance towards their partners places.


ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39392 · Richard Goss · 30 Sep 2004 09:36:07 · Top

Touchy subject. This is an example of where, when the current regime is unhappy with current practice, they post date the documentation to agree with themselves.

If you get a chance, check out the original MissM (green) WYJTD, with the first and second RSCDS (blue) versions.

Right after Miss M´s passing, Duncan and his groupies started a strange path for the ladies in ladies chain.

According to the original (green) version, he is simply wrong (not to mention that what he is describing is impossible both in physics, and practice (see my tapes of dancing at Younger Hall).

According to the first (blue) version, the words have changed to fit the "Duncan" method, but the illustration no longer fits.

By the second (blue) version, the "Duncan" words remain, but the offending illustration has disappeared.

This is either an example of dishonesty, or poor scholarship. Changes between editions should not be left to the reader, going page by page, to discover. They should be annotated honestly as a change in subsequent volumes.

The teacher, when confronted with various editions of RSCDS publications, has to deal with changes anyway. The problem is that when discovered, one is never sure if the change is an accident, correction, or innovation. If the former, it should be ignored, if the latter two, they should be acknowledged as such.

An example, of which few RSCDS teachers, are aware. In the first editions of the first books it says that in "rights and lefts" the taking of hands is optional. Later, the option was dropped.

Why said so? When? Why?

Possible answers, there are two figures involved here, in EFDSS terms, one is the circular hey (a reel of four in a circle), and the other is a chain of four. To add to the confusion, there as an old Scottish tradition of touching hands in a reel (not picked up the the RSCDS). The combination of these is probably the reason why the "option" was included in the first place. But there is no record of the RSCDS consciously deciding that there is no reel of four in a circle, even though it exists in the original form of some of their dances..

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39393 · Richard Goss · 30 Sep 2004 09:39:01 · Top

There is another issue here. There is no record of any preSCD figure with a six bar reel of 3. Evidence, and good choreography, suggests that rather than the other 4 people stopping early to finish the reels of three, the active couple simply phrased their track in such a way as to finish in the right place, as opposed to a choregraphed, crossing home on 7&8.

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39394 · Martin · 30 Sep 2004 10:07:09 · Top

Richard wrote:
> There is no record of any preSCD figure with a six bar reel of 3.
>Evidence, and good choreography, suggests that rather than the other 4
>people stopping early to finish the reels of three, ...

And how frustrating it is, too, for the corner dancers who are supposed to
stop dancing before the end of the phrase.
I sometimes wonder why we bother to have music, since some authorities seem
to insist on our ignoring it. Are these also the people that say "The music
will tell you" ?

Martin,
in Grenoble, France.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/scots.in.france/scd.htm

who is Asquith ?

Message 39399 · Martin · 30 Sep 2004 12:02:33 · Top

I have just bought R Whiteheads' CD, "Dancers' Choice 2", accompanied by
instructions for a few dances, and found reference to "Asquith turn" in a
dance by Brigit Frie.
Can anyone tell me how this is done?

There is also an interesting 5-cp dance by Ian Barbour, in which all five
cps set&link from side lines into lines across the dance.
I imagine this resolves itself into a line of 3, a line of 4, and
another line of 3.
It would be nice to have confirmation that my imagination is on track.

I have not yet danced to this recording, but it sounds really good, tuneful
and lively
(unlike Dancers' Choice 1" where the band sounds a bit tired, the speys go
on for ever, and there's a drum or something being beaten twice to each bar
throughout.
Apparently they've shot their drummer and bought a cheap mechanical device
instead).

Martin,
in Grenoble, France.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/scots.in.france/scd.htm

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39400 · Anselm Lingnau · 30 Sep 2004 12:35:55 · Top

Richard Goss wrote:

> There is another issue here. There is no record of any preSCD figure with a
> six bar reel of 3. Evidence, and good choreography, suggests that rather
> than the other 4 people stopping early to finish the reels of three, the
> active couple simply phrased their track in such a way as to finish in the
> right place, as opposed to a choregraphed, crossing home on 7&8.

I think this is not as much as a problem as it seems. There is this piece in
one of the Hugh Foss booklets where he talks about the phrasing of the
dancing vis-a-vis the phrasing of the music, and it turns out that there are
rather a lot of figures that have the 6+2 nature at least to some extent
(think of the allemande, poussette, rondel, turn
corner-partner-corner-partner, or even n hands round (where you let go at the
beginning of the second-to-last bar in order to go home)).

This ties in with many Scottish tunes that have a 6+2 nature as well, where
the last two bars use a different musical ÈmotifÇ than the preceding six. It
is true that this 6+2 nature comes out of a 2+2+2+2 rather than a 3+3+2 (as
would be required for a rondel or 6-bar reels of three), but even so there is
this notion of Ègoing homeÇ which suits the end of the 6+2 figures mentioned
above. To make this stuff more obvious, think of the B part of the canonical
Montgomeries' Rant music (where the dance ends on a six-bar reel of three).
It goes roughly like

TUM teedle teedle tum, TUM teedle teedle teedle, (2 bars) \
TUM teedle teedle tum, teedle teedle teedle teedle, (2 bars) + 6 bars
TUM teedle teedle tum, TUM teedle teedle teedle, (2 bars) /
TEEDLE teedle teedle teedle teedle teedle TUM. (2 bars) - 2 bars

So the two final bars of the tune are very different from the six before that,
which is exactly what you get in six-bar reels of three and crossing over.
The tune goes home and the dancers do as well.

Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau, Frankfurt, Germany ..................... anselm@strathspey.org
Then I realized that I had spelled `-' wrong. -- John Whitmore learns APL

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39401 · Richard Goss · 30 Sep 2004 13:10:31 · Top

"I think this is not as much as a problem"
If not a problem, why does it take so much effort to teach beginners that this is a six bar figure, and the other is an 8 bar, if all one has to do is listen to the music.

"Hugh Foss" ... phrasing of the dancing vis-a-vis the phrasing of the music"
Yes, he does, but you have to remember, that the Foss learning curve corresponds to that of Miss M, who created the problem. Many of the early writers, while challenging Society styles in one area, end up justifying them in another, because that is the only style they knew.

"lot of figures that have the 6+2 nature"
examples given ...
allemande & poussette -- both invented by the Society after 1923, before that time never existed in a form that would support your´s or Foss´s point.
In 90% of all dance references, the allemande is a two bar figure to use up the music for progression. Most of the RSCDS "down and back, allemande", if you check the phrasing in the original dances are down for 4, back for 2, allemande into second place, in the same eight bar phrase.
The RSCDS pousette, in its context is a half pousette. Whenever traditional dances had a pousette, there are two possibilities:
1. the progression has already happened (Petronella &c.) and the pousette is all round.
2. the progression has not happened (Waltz Country Dance) and the all round is all round and a half.

Rondel, proves nothing as it is a modern figure, based on the learning, or mislearning, of the Society´s past.

"corner-partner-corner-partner" or "hands round" do not fit, as the joining and letting go, are more of a transition function, than a choregraphic must (example of "demonstration-team-ism"

"This ties in with many Scottish tunes that have a 6+2"
I would have to see some tune names as examples here. But still invalid, as I don´t see how it applies to the dances that we do 6+2. "Montgomerie´s Rant" does not count since no one knows what music it was danced to, although the notes indicate that it was a strathspey.
When it comes to our allemand, really a entry 2, promenade 4, exit 2, you would need 242 music to make it fit.


"true 6+2 nature comes out of a 2+2+2+2 rather than a 3+3+2"
yes, which means that half way through the music, the halfway point of the reel has already been passed.

"»going home«" may "suit[s] the end of the 6+2 figures" but, I feel, that it is antisocial and makes a big thing of what was originally an adjustment to prepare for the next figure or repeat.

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39402 · Ian Brockbank · 30 Sep 2004 17:21:46 · Top

Hi Richard (quoting Anselm),

> "I think this is not as much as a problem"
>
> If not a problem, why does it take so much effort to teach
> beginners that this is a six bar figure, and the other is an
> 8 bar, if all one has to do is listen to the music.

Er, have you tried getting dancers to listen to the music?

> "lot of figures that have the 6+2 nature"
> examples given ...
> allemande & poussette -- both invented by the Society after
> 1923, before that time never existed in a form that would
> support your4s or Foss4s point.
> In 90% of all dance references, the allemande is a two bar
> figure to use up the music for progression. Most of the RSCDS
> "down and back, allemande", if you check the phrasing in the
> original dances are down for 4, back for 2, allemande into
> second place, in the same eight bar phrase.
> The RSCDS pousette, in its context is a half pousette.
> Whenever traditional dances had a pousette, there are two
> possibilities:
> 1. the progression has already happened (Petronella &c.) and
> the pousette is all round.
> 2. the progression has not happened (Waltz Country Dance) and
> the all round is all round and a half.

To me, 80 years of tradition is still quite a reasonable argument.
That means that almost everyone who now dances dances that way, rather
than the way it was danced when the dances on which the dances we now
do are based were danced.

Yes, the history is interesting, but what happened in the 20th century is
just as much a part of the heritage of SCD in an RSCDS style as what
happened in the 18th - in some ways more. 6+2 is here to stay (and makes it
less likely I'll run into someone who has a different idea of how to phrase
the arriving in place at the right time).

Cheers,

Ian Brockbank
Applications Software Team Leader
e: ian.brockbank@wolfsonmicro.com / apps@wolfsonmicro.com
scd: ian@scottishdance.net
t: +44 131 272 7145
f: +44 131 272 7001

ladies' chain and the rest

Message 39414 · Richard Goss · 1 Oct 2004 10:44:21 · Top

You seem to have missed my point, I am not asking that we change the published dances, only that we consider other tradition when editing and including new ones. OK, the Society said, down and back to the top for 8 bars, followed by our 8 bar half pousette to progress. Fine, no problem. However, does this mean that if someone discovers another ancient MS with down and back pousette, and knowing the trdition in which it was written still has to do the same as Petronella. Of course not, when the notes obviously indicate that the first 8 end in second place, and the pousette, is a fast time all round pousette.

In answer to Anselm, listening to the music is counter productive since we teach people to phrase, then we break the rule, by rephrasing the reel so as not to fit the music to those who are listening.

6-bar reels

Message 39403 · Martin · 30 Sep 2004 18:28:38 · Top

Anselm wrote:
>(...)
>So the two final bars of the tune are very different from the six before
>that,
>which is exactly what you get in six-bar reels of three and crossing over.

Fine for 1st cp, but I think the point of discussion is not what 1st cp is
doing, but rather the early stopping of supporting cps, where they could
just as well finish the musical phrase curving gracefully into places,
while 1st are crossing over.

Martin,
in Grenoble, France.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/scots.in.france/scd.htm

6-bar reels

Message 39406 · Fyreladdie · 30 Sep 2004 19:25:54 · Top

The 6 bar reel thing has never been a problem for me. I don't think all
couples need to be moving all of the time. Often, in dances, I find it
necessary for supporting couple to be stationary in order to anticipate the next
figure. Doing a full 8 bar reel of 3 can have them facing the wrong direction or
make for a challenging transition. Besides, there is nothing that says we
should only do things a certain way. Poor John Drewry and many others would be out
of business, if that were the case.
Some challenges need to exist. For those who do not understand music and
cannot count; I grieve. SCD does have a good degree of structure. It is that
structure that makes it challenging and pleasing. There are other forms of
dancing which allow for extra twirls and movement, which I do not find as
satisfying. It's a bit like putting ten pounds of flour in a five pound bag. I don't
believe in being ridged but movement is a lot like silence. Sometimes less is
more.

Bob McMurtry
San Francisco Branch
Felton, California

6-bar reels

Message 39408 · Bherbold · 30 Sep 2004 20:08:57 · Top

In my opinion, the way to make 6 bar reels fit the musical phrase is not to hear the music differently, but to see oneself as part of a set rather than as a solo dancer -- thereby a corner finishes dancing by enjoying the lead couple crossing home.

The ultimate in this is General Stuart's Reel where the 1s flirt outrageously with each each other and the other set members before finally taking hands, for the first time with each other, as they cross home on 31&32. A climax much to be anticipated, and to be enjoyed by the other men and women with whom they have been setting and turning.

Other times the conflict between dance phrases and musical phrases can add a lovely bit of tension and release. Dancing a chain progression is always counter to the music at the end of bar 4 but that only makes the final turns on 7&8 that much more satisfying when the dancing phrase 'lines up' again with the musical phrase.

I certainly agree that we have what we've got after 80 years of RSCDS and if it is different than what Pepys may have seen or done, that doesn't alter my enjoyment of it. And for me, that includes foot changes, 6 bar bits, and the rest of it; within that framework I find some dances better than others. If someone writes a dance with a same-foot poussette, I'll dance it that way just as I'll use skip change in Drewry's Petronella-in-Tandem but never in Petronella itself. Heck, if someone writes a poussette danced with skip-change, I'll give it a try -- but I'd advise against using the same-foot approach in that.

--
Bruce Herbold
SF Branch

PS and, yes Miriam, anytime you hear me say that the music will tell you what to do, I'm being less than serious, except perhaps Flowers of Edinburgh.

6-bar reels

Message 39413 · Richard Goss · 1 Oct 2004 10:38:42 · Top

"has never been a problem for me"
I dont think personal problem of dancer is the issue here. The question is whether the 6 bar phrasing of the reel is historicly accurate, necessary, or choreographicly needed.

"couples need to be moving all of the time"
No they don´t. However if the original notes say reel, and a reel is a figure requiring six people, then why don´t the original notes say reel, and then 1s cross home. The 6 bar reel is a choreographic invention of the early society to solve the getting home problem, and serves no other purpose. If it is possible for the 1s to solve the problem by extending, which they already do, there is no reason for the others to be cheated out of their 8 bars. A reel requires 3 people for 8 bars by definition.

"Often, in dances, I find it necessary for supporting couple to be stationary in order to anticipate the next figure."
Please give an example, as I can´t think of any.

"Doing a full 8 bar reel of 3 can have them facing the wrong
direction or make for a challenging transition."
Please give examples (dances where the Society is already incorrect as in parallel reels, and DWS do not count because all you are doing is saying that we have to cut the reel short to make up for a mistake in the figure to start with),.

"Besides, there is nothing that says we should only do things a certain way."
Yes, there is, the RSCDS says so, and unless or untill it changes its policy in reels of three on the opposite sides, that is the way we should teach it. Having said that, as that is what I have always done, in spite of how I feel, this does not mean that I have always danced that way when it makes no difference to the set or my partner.

"John Drewry and many others would be out of business,"
That is unlikely to happen as long as his creations are within the historical context of country dancing or are extensions of the traditions. However, should JD´s innovations involve samba setting steps, and jive swings and turns, dances containing these elements should not be brought into the RSCDS canon.

Went to a class on the mainland last Monday night, all of the dances were RSCDS except one "Goatfell Gallope" (I had never heard of it). While I can usually pick up an unknown dance from an oral cue at a dance, this dance I had difficulties with as a result of the choreography. To me the shoulders passed, phrasing, and the turn at the end just seemed wrong. My usual test for faulty choreography is to look at the mistakes others make, The most common one was that most wanted turn turn by the right hand at the end (choreography says "left" for no reason that I can see). The fact is that in country dancing, right hand is allways given, unless it follows a right hand or there is some subsequent figure requiring left. So, since this dance does not support the tradition, and its variations add nothing to it, the composer of this dance should be out of a job. If the Society ever decided to publish it, it should be after getting the author´s permission to edit it into the tradition.

"Some challenges need to exist."
I agree, but only to the extent that they make the dances interesting, while at the same time do not detract from the social interaction of the dancers by producing an elitist dead end that says, "OK, I know that A is normal, but we are doing pointless B just to be interesting even though it adds nothing to the process.

6-bar reels

Message 39418 · Alan Paterson · 1 Oct 2004 13:18:24 · Top

Richard Goss wrote:

> Went to a class on the mainland last Monday night, all of the dances
> were RSCDS except one "Goatfell Gallope" (I had never heard of it).
> While I can usually pick up an unknown dance from an oral cue at a
> dance, this dance I had difficulties with as a result of the
> choreography. To me the shoulders passed, phrasing, and the turn at
> the end just seemed wrong. My usual test for faulty choreography is
> to look at the mistakes others make, The most common one was that
> most wanted turn turn by the right hand at the end (choreography says
> "left" for no reason that I can see). The fact is that in country
> dancing, right hand is allways given, unless it follows a right hand
> or there is some subsequent figure requiring left. So, since this
> dance does not support the tradition, and its variations add nothing
> to it, the composer of this dance should be out of a job. If the
> Society ever decided to publish it, it should be after getting the
> author«s permission to edit it into the tradition.

The dance is Goat Fell Gallop, is by Roy Goldring and has been received
favourably by my group.

Richard's claim that there is no logical reason for turning left hand at
the end isn't QUITE so cut-and-dried. Turning left makes it easier for
the man, turning right would make it easier for the lady.

No contest!

<vbg>

Alan (whose dance Cambusnethan has a left-hand turn at the end to make
it easier for the man as well. Well - the poor thing has to let the lady
go first just before and may well be getting a bit stressed by then)

6-bar reels

Message 39419 · Jim Healy · 1 Oct 2004 13:27:22 · Top

Goss,

I do like a passionate view but, even by my standards, you do go over the
top sometimes. The Goat Fell Gallop was written by Roy Goldring who, IMO,
has written some of the best dances in the modern canon – off the top of my
head, John of Bon Accord, Reel of the Royal Scots, Saltire Society Reel, EH3
7AF among those published by the Society as examples. I do think that it is
a little excessive to suggest that he be drummed out of the devisor corps on
the basis of one dance that may be a little less successful than others. On
that basis we would have to stop everyone devising dances as soon as they
had an unsuccessful one (says whom?). As you are keen on examples today,
what do we do with Iain Brockbank? He has stated publicly that he revised
and retitled a dance because he was unhappy with the original, only for some
dancers to announce on Strathspey that they preferred the original. Do we
take away his keyboard on the basis of his own opinion or on that of the
other dancers? And, as for Bratach Bana … well, obviously Drewry should have
been stopped long ago.

Overall, I am confused by the thrust of your argument on 6 or 8 bar reels
for supporting couples. Let me accept for the sake of argument that the
tradition is eight bars for everyone. Advances in Scottish dancing are
achieved, as in most other fields, by breaking the rules - the only question
is whether the “choreographic invention” is perceived as a progressive
innovation or an unacceptable breach of the tradition. (I do agree that
there are some things that are beyond the pale of the tradition but not
everyone shares my opinion that La Baratte falls into that category.) No
matter how it came about, the six bar reel has been accepted by modern
dancers and adopted as practice and thus, as they say, sic transit Gloria
Swanson.

Jim Healy
Perth, Scotland

_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger

6-bar reels

Message 39430 · Richard Goss · 1 Oct 2004 20:53:09 · Top

My drummed out was in response to a previous post about dance inventors be out of a job. The context, is that if this "Goat" dance is typical, which in Goldering´s it certainly is not than we, as the Society, should be avoid encouraging such dances as not in our best interests. I never meant to imply that we should ban the author, just not put our "imprimatur" and "nihil obstat" on the products that do not fit where we would like our tradition to go.

There are two ways in which the tradition grows, by Society encouragement, and popular demand. For example, there was a time when Drewry dances were banned at St Andrews, fortunately, his dances were good, and within the limits of tradition, and strangers at St Andrews, danced at town dances in St Andrews, Dundee, Perth, Carnoustie, Lethan, Edinburgh, etc., picked them up and spread the word. Eventually the Society played catchup. This is not to say that I would endorse all of JD´s dances. As far as I know, none of the Foss dances have ever made the approved list, but this does not stop us from dancing them, and the influence of his dances has inspired other authors.

6-bar reels

Message 39441 · hways · 2 Oct 2004 02:18:57 · Top

From: "Richard Goss" <goss9@sbcglobal.net>

As far as I know, none of the Foss dances have ever made the approved list,
but this does not stop us from dancing them, and the influence of his dances
has inspired other authors.
>

To say the least. And also James Cosh. Like it or not, it was Mairi's
Wedding that put an end to effective opposition to recently devised dances.

Harry

6-bar reels

Message 39443 · Fyreladdie · 2 Oct 2004 17:29:08 · Top

In a message dated 10/1/04 4:00:04 PM, deverill@iprimus.com.au writes:

<< Ah, but the problem is that the 'corner dancers' mostly can't phrase to
'curve gracefully into place'. In general, they are still occupying the
middle and the poor old first couple can't get between them to cross over
neatly.

Whoever suggested completing the reels in 6 bars, leaving the last two bars
to cross over, had obviously noticed this. >>

Ya took the words right out of my mouth, Mate.

Bob McMurtry

6-bar reels

Message 39446 · Ron Mackey · 3 Oct 2004 00:55:54 · Top

>
> To say the least. And also James Cosh. Like it or not, it was Mairi's
> Wedding that put an end to effective opposition to recently devised dances.
>
> Harry

The pity of that is the number of people (the majority in this
area) who don't like the way he wrote it!

Yes, you know I mean a left in the middle! :~)

6-bar reels

Message 39421 · Anselm Lingnau · 1 Oct 2004 15:11:26 · Top

Alan Paterson wrote:

> The dance is Goat Fell Gallop, is by Roy Goldring and has been received
> favourably by my group.

I have taught the Goat Fell Gallop a number of times to all sorts of classes,
including rank beginners, and it invariably went down rather well. If one can
find fault with it then certainly not with the phrasing, which IMHO is
totally straightforward. It may not be Roy Goldring's best creation ever but
for what it's worth it's certainly more danceable than many of the new dances
that I've seen.

> Richard's claim that there is no logical reason for turning left hand at
> the end isn't QUITE so cut-and-dried. Turning left makes it easier for
> the man, turning right would make it easier for the lady.

I appear to have misplaced my copy of _Graded & Social Dances 2_ for the
moment but I seem to remember that when I gave the issue some thought the
outcome was that the left-hand turn at the end made the entry into the next
turn of the dance more convenient for the dancers concerned. This could
probably be ÈfixedÇ by turning the complete dance around but then again some
other, more noticeable flaw would crop up in the process. Anyway, it's not as
if the world would come to a sudden end if a dance had a left-hand turn at
the end.

Incidentally, maybe the single most popular dance that I've come up with so
far (judging from its fairly regular appearance on dance programmes at least
here in Germany) has an obvious counterclockwise movement before the
corresponding clockwise movement, thereby violating the centuries-old
tradition of ÈdeisealÇ. So far the choreography police seem to have been
unaware of this transgression, but I'm expecting a visit from some guys in
floppy hats and long tartan coats any early morning now that I've run away at
the mouth ...

Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau, Frankfurt, Germany ..................... anselm@strathspey.org
Excuse me while I open Pandora's box. -- Ed Berard

6-bar reels

Message 39439 · Brian Charlton · 2 Oct 2004 00:59:14 · Top

G'Day,

Ah, but the problem is that the 'corner dancers' mostly can't phrase to
'curve gracefully into place'. In general, they are still occupying the
middle and the poor old first couple can't get between them to cross over
neatly.

Whoever suggested completing the reels in 6 bars, leaving the last two bars
to cross over, had obviously noticed this.

Brian Charlton,
Sydney, Australia

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin [mailto:mj.sheffield@wanadoo.fr]
Sent: Friday, 1 October 2004 2:16 AM
To: strathspey@strathspey.org
Subject: 6-bar reels (was: ladies' chain and the rest)

Anselm wrote:
>(...)
>So the two final bars of the tune are very different from the six before
>that,
>which is exactly what you get in six-bar reels of three and crossing over.

Fine for 1st cp, but I think the point of discussion is not what 1st cp is
doing, but rather the early stopping of supporting cps, where they could
just as well finish the musical phrase curving gracefully into places,
while 1st are crossing over.

Martin,
in Grenoble, France.

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/scots.in.france/scd.htm

Previous thread: ladies' chain
Next thread: L. Chain - (was Changing feet)
A Django site.