strathspey@strathspey.org:28028

Martin.Sheffield

Re: Changing of hands.

Nov. 2, 2001, 10:32 a.m. (Message 28028, in reply to message 28021)

Anselm wrote:

>There seems to be a
>certain `modern' school of thought that says that dances should be as
>streamlined as possible, 

If, by streamlining, you mean, getting rid of misinterpetation of old texts
or of ill-considered rules, then why not be modern?

> ...with not a lot of thinking (or reacting to the other dancers in the
>set) required, 

I would have said that, by doing things easily and spontaneously, we shall
have less need to concentrate on "doing the right thing" thus freeing our
brains for more interaction with the other dancers.

>there is
>also a certain charm to dances that do have little kinks and special
>places that require attention to be done well. 

Why do we dance?  To do the dances "well", or to enjoy music, movement, and
each other's company?
(non-exclusive choice)

>As far as Dalkeith's Strathspey is concerned, ...

I don't remember anyone suggesting leading *down* LHJ. 
There's no reason why one should not go down RHJ, change hands, then lead
up LHJ, or, alternatively, lead down RHJ, lead up RHJ (to respect the
Memory), and politely offer LH on bar 16 to help the lady over to face 2nd
man.

Still puzzling over your ref to the nether reaches of RSCDS book 16, Anselm...

Taking a quick look in bk 16, I found:
"1st cp lead down,... turn and lead up, ... man handing his pt across in
front of him to opp side."
(Same words appear in many other RSCDS books. My abbrev'ns. )

If 1st cp is to keep their RHJ, then the description would have been "1st
cp turn to face 1st man and release hands. 1st man turns (or dances across)
to face 2nd lady."
To me, the words "handing his pt across" imply something different -- a
change of hands into a sideway movement without any turning.

Martin,
 in Grenoble, France.

 http://perso.wanadoo.fr/scots.in.france/scd.htm
              (dance groups,  events,  some new dances ...)