Previous Message Next Message

  • Oberdan Otto

    Oberdan Otto Nov. 6, 2001, 11:29 p.m. (Message 28064)

    Re: Changing of hands.

    >[Anselm:] As far as Dalkeith's Strathspey is concerned, personally I 
    >don't think
    >crossing one's partner over with the right hand after leading down the
    >middle and up is enough of a bother as to imply leading down the middle
    >with a left hand instead, and I wouldn't suggest it to my class, but if
    >anybody desperately wanted to do it on these grounds I'd say feel free.
    >It's not as if it were a nuisance to the rest of the set.
    Although I am one to prefer the "natural hand" lead (opening away 
    from the body centerline), I agree with Anselm on this one.
    >[Martin:] 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,
    This goes against a little personal rule of mine which says: "Don't 
    change (hands or feet) until the change is needed. In this case there 
    is no imperative that makes the left hand needed for the lead up.
    >[Martin:] 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
    This satisfies the my little personal rule, but then I think that a 
    hand change at this point really isn't needed--probably OVERLY 
    helpful! She knows where she is going, so a somewhat early release of 
    hands allows both of you to get where you need to be. Oh! I see that 
    Frans describes this very nicely:
    >[Frans:] At the end of lead down the middle and up, drop hands early 
    >enough (end of bar 7) to have time to cross to your back to back 
    >position. The lady goes in front and the man holds back a bit for 
    >the crossing.
    Cheers, Oberdan.
    184 Estaban Drive, Camarillo, CA 93010-1611 USA
    Voice: (805) 389-0063, FAX: (805) 484-2775, email:

Previous Message Next Message