strathspey@strathspey.org:63102

Anselm Lingnau

Re: Are Hornpipes and Reels the same thing?

Sept. 10, 2012, 5:36 p.m. (Message 63102, in reply to message 63099)

Alasdair Graham wrote:

> if current SCD
> technique doesn’t differentiate between a Hornpipe and a Reel is that any
> reason to change the dance type (as published) to fit in with the limited
> SCD repertoire?

The – RSCDS-style – SCD repertoire may be »limited« but it is what we have, so 
this is what the database deals with. There is no point in catering for types 
of dance that Scottish country dancers do not actually do. Conversely, there 
is no point in muddying the waters about the types of dance that Scottish 
country dancers *do* actually do by introducing arbitrary and useless 
distinctions.

Also, as I said, Rob Sargent is trying to reintroduce hornpipes as hornpipes 
(rather than glorified reels), and having both »real« hornpipes and »vanity« 
hornpipes with no reliable way of distinguishing the two doesn't help anybody. 
The other option – slowing down »The Sailor« &c. and playing them as »real« 
hornpipes, like Rob Sargent's dances – isn't going to fly because there are 
nearly 90 years of RSCDS-style SCD tradition to the contrary, and many of the 
dances in question wouldn't even work that well if slowed down.

> If Hornpipe music is played as Reel music is that not because the musician
> can’t/doesn’t know how to play a Hornpipe?

Musicians are service providers. I think I can speak for my musician 
colleagues when I say that we would be 100% happy to play slow dotted 
hornpipes for dancing if they were actually called for at SCD functions, which 
(again modulo Rob Sargent) they aren't. We do play »The Jigtime Polka« for The 
Garry Strathspey, which is basically the same thing, complete with the slow 
tempo, the dotted rhythm and the POM-POM-POM at the end of a phrase, so if I 
were a less tolerant person than I am I might take the »musician can't/doesn't 
know how to play« as arrogance bordering on insult.

> However, I see where you are coming, from with your tag
> line, and I’m not sure it is the preferred course.

Suppose you were a dance teacher searching the database for reels 
incorporating a promenade and hello-goodbye setting. You would probably expect 
»The College Hornpipe« to show up in the results even though it is notionally 
a »hornpipe«, and that dance would probably serve its purpose in your class 
admirably in spite of that fact. So there is no point in keeping »hornpipes« a 
distinct category from »reels« because it either makes things more difficult 
for database users since they must remember to search for »reel or hornpipe« 
when they really mean »anything reel-like«, or more difficult for database 
implementors (me) since they must special-case »hornpipes are really reels« in 
various places – which is a particular hassle now because, post Rob Sargent, 
this actually means »SOME hornpipes are really reels«.

Please give me a reason why hornpipes should deserve special treatment while 
other styles such as »pipe march«, »Scotch measure«, or »polka«, all of which 
occur as *musical* styles that have been co-opted for reel-technique dances, 
don't. The reel/hornpipe distinction doesn't serve any purpose other than to 
confuse new dancers, and the sooner we get rid of it the better.

Incidentally, while we're on the topic of the SCD database: One improvement 
that is being considered is adding musical »genre« information for tunes and 
recordings. The main purpose for this would be to make it easier to 
distinguish between »regular« strathspeys and slow-air/song-tune/pastoral 
strathspeys, but it would serve just as well to distinguish between »real« 
reels, »vanity« hornpipes, and »real« hornpipes. This is our chance to put the 
distinction where it belongs, namely at the »music« level rather than the 
»dance« level, and if we do it right then people who are looking for hornpipe 
*dances* because they enjoy the *musical* style will be even better off than 
they are now, because many reels use hornpipe music without actually being 
called hornpipes.

> A note attached to
> each such dance to explain your change would be my option, for what it is
> worth.

You may be interested to hear that when I made the actual change (last 
December), only 12 dances needed to be considered and only 4 of those were 
actually changed from »hornpipe« to »reel«, so having vanity hornpipes 
classified as »reels« in the database goes back a long way – probably all the 
way to Alan Paterson, if not Keith Napier (I'm in the office now so can't 
check my – paper – copy of Napier's Index). The fact that apparently so far 
nobody except you has seen fit to challenge this design decision should tell 
us something.

If you want to contribute an exhaustive list of dances that are in the 
database as »reels« but should be labeled as »really a (vanity) hornpipe«, 
then do feel free. I'm a strong subscriber to the philosophy that it is always 
best if those people who feel most strongly about something do the work to get 
it accomplished, so please send me a file containing the database IDs of the 
dances in question and I'll be happy to add the notice ;^)

Anselm
-- 
Anselm Lingnau, Mainz/Mayence, Germany ................. xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx
Using MS-Word is like smoking; emailing those files is like blowing smoke into
other people's faces.        -- Jeff Goldberg, paraphrasing Juhapekka Tolvanen