strathspey@strathspey.org:44172

GOSS9@telefonica.net

Re: Teaching Rights and Lefts (was Modern technology in preparation forthe prelim?)

Feb. 7, 2006, 8:01 a.m. (Message 44172, in reply to message 44170)

I prefer the Boyd approach to the Loretta one, in that the "whom" is 
not always so cut and dried. Before I arrived at the Boyd approach, I 
was indictrinated by the "square" approach my my teachers, and of 
course passed it on. It is only in a square where one has a choice of 
turning right or left, in a circle the choice is as obvious as the next 
free hand. Besides, there are no square movements in any dances, so why 
waste time with an impossible concept in the first place. 

To me, such 
concepts are one of the reasons the Society has not caught on with the 
population at large, because while the words say interaction with a 
bunch of people, the hidden message, is not the set within itself, but 
from the viewpoint of the spectator who is not a participant, e.g. 
straight lines and right angles, when all dancing is a series of 
curves.

While I am on the subject, I had an RSCDS moment at a 
Mallorquí dance class last night. Remember the thing about a pdb being 
danced in place and not side to side. Ridiculous of course as in place 
is as impossible as straight lines and right angles, what should be 
stressed is less side to side. Anyway, we were doing fandangos, 
themselves an outgrowth of contry dances, and the figure was 
"triángulos" (the double in the RSCDS is redundant, and also 
inaccurate, since our figure has nothing to do with that found in 
historical dances), and guess what, the teacher was saying that in this 
figure one should not move from side to side in the setting step, but 
do it on the spot.