Thread
Index
UP with A&R
ron.mackey
May 9, 2007, 1:51 a.m. (Message 48688)
I'm quite amazed by this. When I learned dancing it was one of the regular drills during step practise so that once we had got used to it there was no problem at all. It is all a matter of balance and rhythm and as that is the basis of all good dancing, what's the problem? Done well it can be an elegant figure. I have noticed that those who love to travel unnecessarily large distances to do any dance are inevitably awkward in A & R because they can't pull back on their balance. If you do what we rarely hear of today, that is keep the line of head, hips and heels there's no difficulty. I've just done Bob Campbell's 'My Friend Joe' with a group of non-experts and once they'd had a bit of practise they made the one- step A & R look very good.
Le 9 mai 07 à 01h51, xxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx a écrit : > (...) they made the one-step A & R look very good. In strathspey time, I presume; yes, that's fine. It's the quicktime dances that are spoilt by A&R (shuffling because you often have nowhere to advance to without treading on your pt's toes). I say spoilt, because the figure breaks the momentum of good jigs and reels. Perhaps a solution would be to drop hands and turn A&R into siding (a la ECD), going shoulder to shoulder with your pt, rather than face to face ? Martin
> In strathspey time, I presume; yes, that's fine. It's the quicktime > dances that are spoilt by A&R (shuffling because you often have > nowhere to advance to without treading on your pt's toes). > > I say spoilt, because the figure breaks the momentum of good jigs and > reels. Hi, Martin, Again I'm puzzled. Were you not taught how to dance small for the sake of good phrasing? :~) Of course I understand you have said you don't like to slow in the Schiehallion reels. To me, dancing all one pace takes half the pleasure out of the dance with the lack of subtle phrasing. That's why I pass LSh in Marie's Wedding.:~) ^^ Regards, Ron
I agree with Ron, this can be quite an elegant figure - I wouldn't say it's my favourite (can't be compared to a strathspey poussette for instance), but it's ok. I think part of the problem is too-narrow sets (one of my pet hates!) OK, sometimes you're on in a crowded ballroom and you have to adapt (not just for A & R either), but why do people still stand about 1m 20 apart when it isn't crowded? Maybe because, as someone said, they only have one length of step - medium? I like to travel large distances (e.g. in down the middle & up), but one of the things that makes SCD interesting is light and shade, varying your steps (or the length of your arms for turns) to be just in the right place at the right moment. When figures are done in harmony with the rest of the set and each figure flows seamlessly into the next, it's just such a perfect moment, well worth any amount of work on steps etc.! Sophie Selon xxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx: > I'm quite amazed by this. When I learned dancing it was one > of the regular drills during step practise so that once we had got used > to it there was no problem at all. It is all a matter of balance and > rhythm and as that is the basis of all good dancing, what's the > problem? Done well it can be an elegant figure. > I have noticed that those who love to travel unnecessarily > large distances to do any dance are inevitably awkward in A & R > because they can't pull back on their balance. If you do what we > rarely hear of today, that is keep the line of head, hips and heels > there's no difficulty. > I've just done Bob Campbell's 'My Friend Joe' with a group of > non-experts and once they'd had a bit of practise they made the one- > step A & R look very good. -- Sophie Rickebusch FR - St Martin d'Heres
Le 9 mai 07 à 11h01, Sophie Rickebusch a écrit : > (...) one of the > things that makes SCD interesting is light and shade, varying your > steps Whether your lines are 1m apart or 3m, you'll get light and shade (or drive and dribble, as you wish). Two steps to cross to opposite side cannot be performed in the same way as two to approach the centre line as in A&R, or to retire as after poussette or allemande. It's not a question of size of set. Martin
The difference is that with a decent-sized set, you get long and short steps (light and shade), whereas with a tiny set, you get short steps and on the spot dithering (or dribble)... so yes, size does matter! Most dancers can cross 3 m in 2 skip-change of step and fit them into half that distance, but if the set is 1.5 m wide to start with, then you're stuck with trying to fit 2 steps into .75 m. With my size 7s, that's about 3 lengths of foot (even on the balls of the feet and with my best turnout), so it's physically impossible to do hop-step-close-step twice, even if I only "step" to just in front of the toes of the supporting foot. Sophie Selon Martin Sheffield <xx.xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx.xx>: > > Le 9 mai 07 à 11h01, Sophie Rickebusch a écrit : > > > (...) one of the > > things that makes SCD interesting is light and shade, varying your > > steps > > Whether your lines are 1m apart or 3m, you'll get light and shade (or > drive and dribble, as you wish). > > Two steps to cross to opposite side cannot be performed in the same > way as two to approach the centre line as in A&R, or to retire as > after poussette or allemande. > It's not a question of size of set. > > Martin > > > -- Sophie Rickebusch FR - St Martin d'Heres
IMHO I think it sometimes depends on the type of set. It works quite well in Barry Priddey's "Woodland Assembly" where the dance is done in a square or quadrille set. Quite a few of the old country dances (American & English) as well as Irish set dances use advance & retire as a staple. Tom Mungall Baton Rouge, La, USA
Ron Mackey wrote:
> I'm quite amazed by this. When I learned dancing it was one
> of the regular drills during step practise so that once we had got used
> to it there was no problem at all. It is all a matter of balance and
> rhythm and as that is the basis of all good dancing, what's the
> problem? Done well it can be an elegant figure.
I must say I'm with Ron here. Also I don't see why advancing and retiring pas
de basque are necessarily preferable to skip-change-of-step -- and as I'm
about 6'5" I ought to know all about doing small steps in a narrow set!
When I started out with SCD I tended to retire in pas de basque rather than
skip-change but this problem was easy to deal with once the teacher at a
weekend workshop told us to emphasise the hop at the beginning of the
retiring skip-change of step, which makes it impossible to continue into a
pas de basque. This is what I teach my class these days and it works well.
Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau, Frankfurt, Germany ..................... xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxx.xxx
There is no such thing as an underestimate of average intelligence.
-- Henry Adams