res009k3
Braes of Tulliemet
Oct. 3, 2001, 5:28 p.m. (Message 27714)
One of the first problems with any Gaelic names is the fact that there
is no national academy of Gaelic, thus no standards as to spelling.
This explains the "Tulliemet" vs. Tullimet" spellings, either is OK
along with the following which I generated just got from a program I
wrote some time ago to locate Irish names under other spellings. My
search string looks like this:
[a]T(u[i]/i)l[l](e/i[e]/[e]y)m[m]e(d/t[t]).
This will give you 294 correct spellings of which I have been able to
locate 6. The current spellings are derivitive from the Gaelic,
"Tulaich mhait" [hillock {tully = hilly} + good {or proper}].
Regarding 101 and VII-12, one should remember that 101 is a personal
publication of Miss M, and not necessarily official RSCDS as the
Collins series of books never went through the publications committee
of the Society.
A second problem is that too often, dance notes confuse the dance
[collection of figures to a particular tune] with how to dance [which
hand to take etc.]. Unfortunately too many teachers, devisors, and
dance note editors fail to recognize this and have caused a lot of
antisocial feelings regarding the "right" way to dance.
While I am not sure of the present process, I do know that TAC in the
past has picked up a lot of Miss M's off the cuff remarks as gospel,
which she would probably deny or say the opposite if given the chance.
One process of the past goes something like this:
1. At one time all official versions of RSCDS dances came
from a combination of the text + Miss M's first teaching
in St Andrews to the fully certificated and very advanced
classes in Younger Hall.
2. A TAC representative would sit in younger hall with the
book in one hand and take notes on everything Miss M
would say in the process of the initial teaching.
3. Later, the TAC representative would have tea with Miss M
and go over her notes.
4. The results of the process would appear in the TAC notes.
This ignores that there were often discrepencies between what
Miss M taught and what members of the publications committee
remembered from their dance through on Coates Crescent prior to
publication. Also, when questioned, Miss M would often change her
mind and or deny that what was taught was what she wanted.
Lastly, some dances were often done differently the same week in
the Younger Hall evening presentations to the summer school at
large.
I am not saying that the dances were changed, only that the dancing
was changed as notes were interpreted differently by herself from time
to time, or by her surrogates such as Bill Ireland when it came to
demonstration.
Unfortunately my first hand knowledge of RSCDS publications only
begins with Book XXI, so my interpretation of Braes of Tullimet is
only from my own notes and the original texts.
As the RSCDS published reference is "A Perthshire dance. Collected on
Borders, up Yarrow," we are still lost. "A Perthshire dance" is a twee
way of saying that Tulliemet is in Perthshire, which has nothing to do
with the dance beyond the fact that the original tune, which the
Society chooses not to use, refers to Tulliemet as might the words to
a related poem. NB: Miss M suggests the original tune, but the Society
suggests "Hon. Mrs. Drummond of Perth's Strathspey" by John Bowie. So
as far as we know, this dance was collected by an unknown person in
the Borders. My first suspicion as to the collector would be someone
of the Ian Jamieson ilk, who at various times the Society has chosen
not to recognize. [The Border Book was sort of an underground
publication from 1945 until after Miss M's passing.]
The questions raised in this discussion did not seem important enough
to be included in Miss M's original WYJTD.
-----
My opinions regarding questions of 9-12 & 13&14:
[9-12] There is no reason for an insertion "finish on the
sidelines," a la TAC.
1. For the 3s this is an obvious default since they
are not dancing in bars 13-16, where else would
they end, in the middle just to be in the way?
2. For the 1s this seems to be an unnecessary exag-
geration designed to keep them from stopping in
the center prior to the lead up. As such this is
simply a dancing point indicating that there
should be a flow between the circle and the lead.
Aside:
There is a significant reason for not ending on the
sides as the original track was probably ...
"cross up cast to corners" instead of ...
"lead up cast to corners".
I say this in that the usual cast to corners is done
from one's own side so that one's approach to the
corners is face on not from the side. But as this
is specificly not the RSCDS way in this case, the
flow of the dance is hurt by this possible error.
[I know that the notes are not in the RSCDS minutes
when this dance was published and there is no evi-
dence of a "chain of possession" to any extant
notes. So, if anyone knows of a preRSCDS source,
I would like to know about it. RG]
[13-14] While I prefer "nearer hand lead" as a way of
dancing, again this is an obvious default which
should apply to all dances when there is no re-
versal of direction or changing of sides.
At the same time, the non use of nearer hands might
be considered evidence that a cross and cast was
in the original for the reasons I mentioned in my
"aside" above.
For further guidance, or confusion, on these subjects, look at similar
situations in other RSCDS publications. As teachers, if we teach rules
of dancing, it will greatly simplify the teaching of dances.
R Goss
xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx