Thread
Index
Move on
simon scott
March 22, 2006, 6:41 p.m. (Message 44840)
By far the majority of SCD issues I agree with or accept. As you can tell I have strong feelings opposing two chords in these type of dances. But you may be tired of seeing my name pop up on the matter so I'll "try" to resist further comment and move on. What's next? Should there be two chords at the end so that they can change back! ! Cheers Simon Vancouver
Personally, I agree, and prefer that instead of two chords, simply a longer (as in 4 bar) intro. I think the bowing and moving, which started out as a simple polite recognition unrelated to any dance, has gotten out of hand. The two chords sound strict and militaristic, by the numbers. With a 4 bar intro, those less rigid will know that they have time to acknowledge both partners, and those with the "by the numbers dem team" bent, can still have their bow, by the numbers. To me, if the bow is supposed to be a form of acknowledgement before the dance, then having everyone, covering perfectly going down and up, has certain element of sincerity. In [my] the old days, after sporting events the teams would cluster and exchange hand shakes, some did, some didn´t, some had more enthusiasm then others. If you go to some highschool games now, the two teams line up and march past each other touching hands, often not even acknowledging the other. Regimenting a social grace often takes away its meaning. I feel that the source of the problem has more to do with the evolution of RSCDS-country dancing then any historical or necessary process. Because the early society chose not to follow some of the EFDSS conventions, it ignored an entire corpus of country dances, ironicly caused "ecossaise" in some sources. The EFDSS term is simply called "longways improper". The MC solution is simple, when announcing the dance, just as one would say "form square sets for x", could say "form sets, longways imporper for say "Glasgow Highlanders".