strathspey Archive: Value for Money

Previous thread: Musical styles
Next thread: Music for "Haste to the Wedding"

Value for Money

Message 5099 · Jim & Marilyn Healy · 11 Oct 1996 15:06:55 · Top

Marjorie McLaughlin writes:

> Does it mean paying more (horrors) for an evening of music
> and dance?
I regret to say that I find Marjorie's use of brackets depressing
rather than amusing <nothing personal, Marjorie, I understand what
you mean>. Others in this thread have already suggested that if we
want to encourage musicians we need to be prepared to pay more.

In an interview in The Reel a couple of years ago, Wilma Miller,
then Chairman of the Society, said:
> Scottish Country Dancing has been too cheap for too long <

Leaving aside all the ethnic baggage of Scots and money, as a
group Scottish Country Dancers do appear to have a
make_do_and_mend, cheapest_is_best mentality.

Years ago, the standard band line-up here was a five or six piece
usually lead and second accordion, fiddle plus piano, drums and
double bass. We have had various threads on bands with clarinets
and other instruments and it is not so long ago that The Olympians
with fiddle, trumpet, accordion and rhythm section were still
playing regularly.

Now we are down to, at best, a three piece - one accordion, one
electronic piano and a drummer, a significant investment in
electronics and a propensity for loudness to show off the
technology rather than the music. The bands are smaller because we
have tried to keep the price <the same as last year> but, IMO, we
have gone too far. To put things in perspective, in the early
sixties a decent dance cost 6 shillings and a pint of pint of beer
was less than 2 shillings. Now a dance costs three pounds and a
pint in excess of one pound 50p. A change from a multiple of over
three times to less than double.

A story to finish with. Some years ago in Kuwait we ran an annual
St Andrew's Night. One year an ambitious committee decided to do
something special so we arranged to bring out Chic Murray, a
professional comedian, as speaker and doubled the price of the
tickets from the previous year. Loud were the lamentations and of
gnashed teeth in the outer darkness much was heard. In the end,
only two regulars refused to come and the night was a sell-out
(and a great success). Come the next year, guess which two were
first in line to buy their tickets :)

Jim Healy
Perth, Scotland

Value for Money

Message 5101 · Etienne Ozorak · 11 Oct 1996 16:58:58 · Top

On 11 Oct 1996, The_Healys wrote:>
> Years ago, the standard band line-up here was a five or six piece
> usually lead and second accordion, fiddle plus piano, drums and
> double bass. We have had various threads on bands with clarinets
> and other instruments and it is not so long ago that The Olympians
> with fiddle, trumpet, accordion and rhythm section were still
> playing regularly.
>
> Now we are down to, at best, a three piece - one accordion, one
> electronic piano and a drummer, a significant investment in
> electronics and a propensity for loudness to show off the
> technology rather than the music. The bands are smaller because we
> have tried to keep the price <the same as last year> but, IMO, we
> have gone too far.
>

I'm not sure that the issue is stricly one of price. Seems like the
typical 20-30 piece dance band of the forties was eventually replaced by
5-6 piece bands, which evetually were displaced by disk jockeys. Unlike
the larger urban and musical centers such as San Francisco or Boston,
you're hard pressed to find any live music in any bar or restaurants in
the midwest (where I live).

Yet another trend: very few people I know play any instrument,
professionally or otherwise. Is it the cost of lessons, the time that
few of them have to devote to learning an instrument? I'm not sure what
prevents more people from learning to play an instrument even just for fun.
I'm not sure what is to credit for these changes, but it seems to me that
the discussion of SCD music and costs must be somehow related.

Salut,
Etienne

Value for Money

Message 5114 · ReelLass · 12 Oct 1996 05:29:43 · Top

>>Marjorie McLaughlin writes:
>
> Does it mean paying more (horrors) for an evening of music
> and dance?
>>Jim Healy responds:
>>I regret to say that I find Marjorie's use of brackets depressing
>>rather than amusing <nothing personal, Marjorie, I understand what
>>you mean>. Others in this thread have already suggested that if we
>>want to encourage musicians we need to be prepared to pay more.
>>(snip)
> >Scottish Country Dancing has been too cheap for too long <

I, myself, would be very willing to pay considerably more for the great
pleasure of Scottish country dance and music!

But, we want our hobby to be accessible to the largest pool of people - and
not have people barred from participating because of financial constraints.

The cost of living here (San Francisco Bay Area) is very high and the cost of
babysitters is quite amazing. I think we try to hold the line on expenses,
not because we are "thrifty Scots" - but because we want to be affordable to
the greatest number of potential dancers.

~~~ tlb

Value for Money

Message 5122 · Donald F. Robertson · 13 Oct 1996 10:58:08 · Top

Etienne Ozorak wrote:

> Yet another trend: very few people I know play any instrument,
> professionally or otherwise. Is it the cost of lessons, the time that
> few of them have to devote to learning an instrument? I'm not sure what
> prevents more people from learning to play an instrument even just for fun.
> I'm not sure what is to credit for these changes, but it seems to me that
> the discussion of SCD music and costs must be somehow related.

The answer to this one is easy. I was lucky enough to go to school when
there were free band lessons with high-quality teachers and equipment.
Now, at least in post-Proposition 13 California, these are few and far
between. I was also lucky enough have part of my secondary school
education in England, where music theory and appreciation were both
required courses. Even when music was commonly tought in American
schools, theory, beyond the minimum required to play in a concert or
marching band, was not. That took -- expensive -- private lessons.

This also explains why British rock bands are, frequently, so much
better than American ones (compare the sophisticated melodic structures
used by Dire Straits or Richard Thompson -- who frequently uses
strathspey rhythms in his work -- to most American fare). In Britain,
even the secondary school garage band would have a certain minimum
knowledge of music theory.

-- Donald

--
_________________________
Donald F. Robertson

donaldrf@hooked.net
76217.2066@CompuServe.com

The known is finite, the unknown is infinite; intellectually
we stand on an islet in the midst of an illimitable ocean of
inexplicability. Our business in every generation is to
reclaim a little more land. --Thomas Huxley.

Value for Money

Message 5144 · Ian Price · 15 Oct 1996 05:40:59 · Top

>But, we want our hobby to be accessible to the largest pool of people - and
>not have people barred from participating because of financial constraints.

Why? There is another body of opinion that sees quality and quantity as a
mutually exclusive tradeoff.

Can the declining standards on the dancefloor be attributed to the prostitution
of our cultural heritage - plastic Scotland again!

[in the interests of provoking a proper debate, not 'should I wear a kiltpin in
my stockinged feet?'.]

-2chter

Value for Money

Message 5149 · Armin Busse · 15 Oct 1996 16:13:47 · Top

>Can the declining standards on the dancefloor be attributed to the
prostitution of our cultural heritage- pastic Scotland again!
2chter

I hear a gauntlet hitting the floor. I'll pick it up.

Since when is making cultural heritage accessable to the common man
prostitution? People with money have always been able to get culture, we,
the working (and studying) folk must make our own as we do not HAVE the
money to buy it. Isn't that what Scottish COUNTRY dancing is about? It is
not Scottish GENTRY dancing is it?

It is a very fine balancing act, trying not to charge to much but still
having enough to pay the musicians. Oranizers for SCD events are almost
always amatuers and they make mistakes estimating costs. There are fixed
costs, the hall is the biggest, piano rental... There is not a fixed
resource. What if not enough people come? The rent of the hall is paid in
advance, where does the shortfall go? How many organizers have had to make
cash outlay in the hopes of recovering the cost only to find not enough
funds are generated by the event?

I think the fairest way is to garantee the band a minimum and then a
(good) percentage of the door when the breakeven point is surpassed.

A question; Is there any guidebook for neophyte organizers?
one that would answer questions like-
How much do I pay the musicians?
When should I book the hall?
How much do I charge for tickets?..

In some regions there is a mentoring system at work, but for many, would-
be, organizers there isn't anyone to ask and there are SO many questions
and SO many variables that the opportunity for error is incredible.

Maybe to get value for money we need information.

Coletta Busse
a.busse@bionic.zer.de
## CrossPoint v3.02 ##

Value for Money

Message 5151 · Etienne Ozorak · 15 Oct 1996 17:17:21 · Top

On Tue, 15 Oct 1996, Armin Busse wrote:

> I think the fairest way is to garantee the band a minimum and then a
> (good) percentage of the door when the breakeven point is surpassed.
>
> A question; Is there any guidebook for neophyte organizers?
> one that would answer questions like-
> How much do I pay the musicians?
>
> In some regions there is a mentoring system at work, but for many, would-
> be, organizers there isn't anyone to ask and there are SO many questions
> and SO many variables that the opportunity for error is incredible.
>
Most of the musicians who play for SCD are wonderful at mentoring dance
groups. We see it as a two-way dialogue and not simply an opportunity to
negotiate in our favor. The alternative to not mentorig our "employer"
is the probability of erroneous assumptions and misunderstanding.

As far as fees are concerned, so much is dependent on local variables,
which makes it difficult to come up with general rules of thumb. For
example, the east and west coasts of the US has far more musicians
"competing" than does the central US (where I happen to be based),
which MIGHT maintain fees to reasonable levels. In the central US,
travelling distances are much greater for the musicians, resulting
in greater expenses (my group has to fly to at least half of our
engagements).

As far as I know, most musicians in the US have a set fee for an event,
though I expect there is some degree of flexibility in what is charged.
I don't know of any group operating on the principle of getting a portion of
the "gate", though I could see some benefit to it, especially in cases
where the musicians are local to an event. I certainly wouldn't trek my
trio all the way to Texas for three days work for $25!

As I mentioned before, so much is dependent on local variables. Probably
the best way to discuss this is with your local musician (assuming you
have some)!

Salut,
Etienne

Value for Money

Message 5152 · Sandra Rosenau · 15 Oct 1996 18:08:50 · Top

Regarding the request for a "how-to" manual for organizing dance
events, TACTalk has published articles that go into detail on these
issues. I recall the TACTalk editor is on this net - perhaps he can refresh
us on how to get reprints of information that came out some years back.

The article I remember included a timeframe for setting dates, finalizing
contractual agreements for the venue, the musicians, and the sound
system; it went into detail on things like when the program needs to be
drafted, discussed with the musicians, finalized, printed, mailed; even
checks on the state of the floor (woe betide he who evaluates the floor
and comes back two months later to find it's been stripped, refinished,
and now feels like an ice rink.) There was some discussion on how to
negotiate with the band as well.

Sandra Rosenau
sjrosenau@tasc.com

Value for Money

Message 5158 · Ian Price · 16 Oct 1996 01:48:04 · Top

----------
From: Ian Price
To: Cyberdancers
Subject: Re: Value for Money
Date: 15 October 1996 14:03

>From: A.BUSSE@BIONIC.zerberus.de (Armin Busse)
>Path: bionic.zerberus.de
>Subject: Re: Value for Money
>Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:01:00 +0100
>Old-Reply-TO: A.BUSSE@BIONIC.zerberus.de (Armin Busse)
>X-Mailer: CrossPoint v3.02
>References: <961015013936_73707.523_HHE39-1@CompuServe.COM>
>X-Gateway: ZCONNECT bi-node.zerberus.de [UNIX/Connect v0.74b4p]
>Lines: 39
>Resent-Message-ID:
<"MXi6C3.0.jQ.z_tOo"@mars.tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de>
>X-Mailing-List: <strathspey@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de>
>X-Loop: strathspey@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
>Reply-To: strathspey@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
>Precedence: list
>Sender: strathspey-request@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
>
>>Can the declining standards on the dancefloor be attributed to the
>prostitution of our cultural heritage- plastic Scotland again!
>2chter
>
>I hear a gauntlet hitting the floor. I'll pick it up.

Ker-thunk! <grin>

>Since when is making cultural heritage accessable to the common man
>prostitution? People with money have always been able to get culture, we,
>the working (and studying) folk must make our own as we do not HAVE the
>money to buy it. Isn't that what Scottish COUNTRY dancing is about? It is
>not Scottish GENTRY dancing is it?

I dunno. You'd have to ask HM The Queen, who is the patron of the RSCDS.
Many would say that's exactly what it is.

It was pointed out many years ago that 'the common man' is a blooming sight
more likely these days to have the wherewithal to afford cultural enrichment
than the aristocracy, so that can't be it. 'Wot about the workers', indeed!

Furthermore we can't blame the common man for 'buying' a cultural 'product'
which is being mass-marketed by the Scots themselves. The problem of course
occurs when the activity falls into the hands of the 'enthusiasts' who are
both beyond the arm's length of the indigenous cultural guardians, and
posess enough economic clout to make the tail wag the dog (pardon the triple
mixed metaphor).

I do wonder what moral authority some people claim, based only on their
study of the culture in probably a specific aspect and period, and not
necessarily their having experienced it.

I don't notice such an open-season on the cultures of other immigrant groups
in North America, particularly the more recent groups from Asia and the
Pacific Rim. I suspect Scottish culture is in demand because of its quality
image, which is in my view being compromised by its very uncontrolled
growth.

Kind Regards,

/
/
/ __ ,__.
/ (__\/ (,

scottish america (was Re: Value for Money)

Message 5160 · Joe Shelby · 16 Oct 1996 02:50:12 · Top

> >I hear a gauntlet hitting the floor. I'll pick it up.
> Ker-thunk! <grin>
> >Since when is making cultural heritage accessable to the common man
> >prostitution? People with money have always been able to get culture, we,
> >the working (and studying) folk must make our own as we do not HAVE the
> >money to buy it. Isn't that what Scottish COUNTRY dancing is about? It is
> >not Scottish GENTRY dancing is it?
> I dunno. You'd have to ask HM The Queen, who is the patron of the RSCDS.
> Many would say that's exactly what it is.

agreed, based on "historical trends" (remember, this is "history", not
fact!)...in other discussion groups (soc.culture.scottish, rec.folk-dancing,
in particular, plus the ECD mailing list), the idea that "country" in
ECD/SCD refered to "folk" has pretty much been shot to hell. Many seem to
be of the opinion that "country" became associated as a misnomer, perhaps
from the Italian 'contra' or French 'contre', both meaning "line". The
(R)SCDS has always maintained SCD's cross-class structure, at least with
regards to the city folk (the phrase i've heard several times is that the
kitchen staff would dance the same dances in the kitchen that the gentry
were dancing in the ballroom).

The Flett research seems to pan this out. They mention dance teachers were
abound by the mid 1800s in scotland, teaching scottish dancing (both country
dances, and highland reels and solo dances). these students they taught
were not just anybody, but those who likely could afford the classes. now
they might not have been _too_ expensive, but would still likely keep the
new industrial working class out of it.

In the highlands, the reels and solo dances were pretty much exclusively
being taught (at least until the clearances and other social factors put
music and dance to too low a priority to survive); some villages were still
only dancing reels (no country dances) even by 1914. The loss of the steps
we now call "Cape Breton" steps seems to have been 20th century; they just
for some unknown reason stopped teaching people the steps. part of their
many self-image problems, they just "gave up" on the dances.
(but the old people remember learning them... :)

by the time the urge to dance "scottish" dances resurged, in the 1920s, too
many of the old dances were lost, some to be found in Cape Breton, or even
Australia; dance steps of the semi-surviving dances were changed, modified.
Many steps used in modern SCD are quite different from the 1890s, due to the
change to a soft-soled shoe (the ghillie also used in highland and
soft-soled irish).

> It was pointed out many years ago that 'the common man' is a blooming sight
> more likely these days to have the wherewithal to afford cultural enrichment
> than the aristocracy, so that can't be it. 'Wot about the workers', indeed!

every "class" has culture, of one type or another. one can't look at the
complicated "drinking song" culture of the cockney london city dwellar, or
the complex dance and music culture of rural morris (cotswold) england, or
even the complex culture of the very poor (by 18th century standards)
highlands, and then say that the poor of lowland scotland "couldn't afford
culture". they would have had something, either an imitation of the gentry,
or an inspiration for them. (cultural tendencies go both ways. the baudy,
offensive drinking song of the 18th century lower class was very popular
among the gentry of the 19th, in certain circumstances...)

as for today...

> Furthermore we can't blame the common man for 'buying' a cultural 'product'
> which is being mass-marketed by the Scots themselves. The problem of course
> occurs when the activity falls into the hands of the 'enthusiasts' who are
> both beyond the arm's length of the indigenous cultural guardians, and
> posess enough economic clout to make the tail wag the dog (pardon the triple
> mixed metaphor).

The scots since the late 18th century have always had a problem with
accepting someone elses "recreation" of who they were. The romantisizing of
scotland (first the "Family Tartans" of those two "stewart" claiments during
George IV's, then the idea that the short kilt of 1728 was "Scottish", then
golf :) has always been an issue. Scotland during George IV and Victoria's
time was becoming a commodity, a tourist site; the highlands in particular.
all the while the true highlands of scotland were being destroyed by the
clearances and other socio-economic pressures, and the borders and lowlands
were losing their people to the cities thanks to the steam engine (a
scotsman's fault, mind you) and roads eliminating all their early 18th
century hard work at the canal network and water power...

has this trend to "market" scotland stopped? some would say no. (the more
vocal types of soc.culture.scotland or the SNP would yell "no", of course).

i really don't know. i prefer to educate rather than market. i wear the
short kilt, and family tartan, with pride not because "someone said so" or
"it was the thing to do". knowing one's heritage (to me) involved knowing
how it has changed over time, and knowing that it has _always_ been
changing. i educated myself on what the older "real" traditions were. I
can accept without reservations that the "modern tradition" of scotland is
an invention, perhaps not always by a scot, because i accept the tie to the
old that it is representing. Some cultural pretenses developed out of
parody or base-flattery. The "modern scotland" of tartans and kilts
developed out of respect. I've had to really look at the events involved
and make an educated decision to believe that.

on the other hand (and this is a personal hangup), i have difficulty with
"modern ireland" (meaning post-victorian re-invention). the shamrocks and
green and st. patrick = drink-fest things still bother me. Partly this is
due to my not having learned the origin of each "tradition" of the irish (or
irish americans) the way that i learned the traditions of scotland. In
particular, what parts of the irish stereotype are Irish in origin, what
parts are english impressions, what parts are irish-american, and what parts
are american parodies of the irish-americans that somehow became "truth".

> I do wonder what moral authority some people claim, based only on their
> study of the culture in probably a specific aspect and period, and not
> necessarily their having experienced it.

there are those out there who will refuse to accept "modern scotland"
because of its _many_ pretenses. these are often but not always the ones
who cry out that scotland is a culture "up for sale". Some would say that
modern SCD and competitive Highland dance are just more examples of how
scottish culture is a forgery, a pale immitation of some lost world.

> I don't notice such an open-season on the cultures of other immigrant groups
> in North America, particularly the more recent groups from Asia and the
> Pacific Rim.

in spite of the population changes in america during the past 50 years, the
"culture" of the asian countries will never really be able to affect america
to any great extent.

> I suspect Scottish culture is in demand because of its quality
> image, which is in my view being compromised by its very uncontrolled
> growth.

the rise of celtic-derived culture in america is due to an increasing
awareness that america is not the "W.A.S.P." of its stereotypical past.
Many americans living in an Anglo-German america have found a new source of
pride in their true identity as Irish, or Scottish, or Welsh. Pride that
until recently was very surpressed, or worse: parodied (see my discussion on
ireland above).

well, 'nuf 'bout all that

the usenet newsgroup "soc.culture.scottish" is really the place for these
kind of discussions, of course, so i will only give personal replies beyond
this point.

joe
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Joseph Shelby : Software Engineer jshelby@autometric.com
5520 Cherokee Ave, Suite 210, Alexandria, VA 22312 (703) 658-6127
http://www.io.com/~acroyear
Big Time Television:
All Day, Every Day, Making Tomorrow Seem Like Yesterday!
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

scottish america (was Re: Value for Money)

Message 5165 · Anselm Lingnau · 16 Oct 1996 12:43:53 · Top

Joe Shelby <jshelby@ais.autometric.com> discusses Scottish culture and
its perception in the past and present. I won't take issue with the more
general points he made, but here are a couple of thoughts about some points
that have to do with dancing:

> the idea that "country" in
> ECD/SCD refered to "folk" has pretty much been shot to hell. Many seem to
> be of the opinion that "country" became associated as a misnomer, perhaps
> from the Italian 'contra' or French 'contre', both meaning "line".

Originally (way back in the late middle ages), the dances came to be called
`country dances' in contrast to the genteel dances the noble folk would do at
court. They would dance `country dances' to really let their hair down after
an evening of graceful minuets. Whether these dances, in fact, had anything to
do with what the common folk danced at the time is open for speculation. Many
people believe that the French or Italian terms are really mispronunciations
of `country'.

When country dancing became really popular in the late 17th and 18th century,
it started out as the town folks' pastime. At that time the distinction between
gentry, middle classes etc. in the big towns like Edinburgh was a lot less
pronounced, and so it is reasonable to assume that, even though the fashionable
Assemblies would cater to the tastes (and purses) of the more genteel
citizenry, the other folks would sooner or later end up doing the same stuff.
After all, dancing lessons were available to them as well (see below).

> [The Fletts] mention dance teachers were
> abound by the mid 1800s in scotland, teaching scottish dancing (both country
> dances, and highland reels and solo dances). these students they taught
> were not just anybody, but those who likely could afford the classes. now
> they might not have been _too_ expensive, but would still likely keep the
> new industrial working class out of it.

Check again. Many of the dancing teachers would teach various classes at
various social levels and at various prices. I seem to remember that the
expense would be quite reasonable. Actually, there were even schemes where
the teacher would let the third etc. child of a family participate free
after the fees for the first two had been paid. This makes sense considering
that many parents wouldn't have let *any* of their children take dancing
lessons on the grounds of fairness if they could only afford paying for
some of them. In the more expensive classes, white gloves etc. would be
_de rigueur_, while, in the common folks' classes, the people could do
without them. It seems to me that the dancing teachers did a lot to encourage
the `lower classes' to take lessons -- this is also good business sense
since there were a lot more of them! Of course if you were really penniless
then dancing lessons were not for you.

> Some would say that
> modern SCD and competitive Highland dance are just more examples of how
> scottish culture is a forgery, a pale immitation of some lost world.

I can't speak for competitive Highland dancing, but calling modern SCD
a `pale imitation of some lost world' IMHO falls short of the mark. In his
_Evolution_in_Scottish_Country_Dancing_, Hugh Foss says, `By the way, the
golden age of Scottish Country Dancing is *now*' [my emphasis]. Scottish
country dancing has never been as popular and as varied as in our time (the
existence of this mailing list is just one facet of this). Today's living
tradition of SCD owes a lot to the 18th century, just like it owes a lot to
the early SCDS, but it is very much an ongoing concern, not a `forgery'.

One might even argue that the `international' flavour of today's SCD is
really closer to the `country dancing' of the early 18th c. (back when the
genre wasn't called `Scottish' or, indeed, anything). Of course the footwork
is different, there are more figures and more dances, but the `spirit' of
this social pastime is, I hope and believe, still the same. Purists of
Scottish `culture', feel free to call it a pretense, a forgery, a pale
imitation -- but I'll still enjoy myself out there on the dance floor,
thank you very much.

Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau ......................... lingnau@tm.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de
Bagpipes are the missing link between music and noise. --- Gordon Mooney

scottish america (was Re: Value for Money)

Message 5217 · Maghi King · 18 Oct 1996 18:23:45 · Top

Anselm Lingnau wrote:
>
> Joe Shelby <jshelby@ais.autometric.com> discusses Scottish culture and
> its perception in the past and present. I won't take issue with the more
> general points he made, but here are a couple of thoughts about some points
> that have to do with dancing:
>
> > the idea that "country" in
> > ECD/SCD refered to "folk" has pretty much been shot to hell. Many seem to
> > be of the opinion that "country" became associated as a misnomer, perhaps
> > from the Italian 'contra' or French 'contre', both meaning "line".
>
> Originally (way back in the late middle ages), the dances came to be called
> `country dances' in contrast to the genteel dances the noble folk would do at
> court. They would dance `country dances' to really let their hair down after
> an evening of graceful minuets. Whether these dances, in fact, had anything to
> do with what the common folk danced at the time is open for speculation. Many
> people believe that the French or Italian terms are really mispronunciations
> of `country'.
>
- I was trying not to respond to Joe's original mistake, but now I can't
keep quiet.

Contra in Italian and contre in French are quite similar: they mean
against something, as in contre le mur, against the wall, or contre les
idees recues (sorry about lack of accents: against received ideas).
Thus, although in modern French I suspect that one might more easily say
en face de votre partenaire for facing one's partner, it's easy to see
how someone might think that a contredanse is a dance danced in longways
sets, with two lines facing one another. Neither contra nor contre means
a line.

Notice that I'm not taking a position in the debate: the professional
philologist in me just couldn't hande the inaccuracy being accepted!

Maghi
--
Please note my new e-mail address (old address was king@divsun.unige.ch)
Maghi King | E-mail: Margaret.King@issco.unige.ch
ISSCO, University of Geneva | WWW: http://issco-www.unige.ch/
54 route des Acacias | Tel: +41/22/705 71 14
CH-1227 GENEVA (Switzerland) | Fax: +41/22/300 10 86

Previous thread: Musical styles
Next thread: Music for "Haste to the Wedding"
A Django site.