Thread Index
Red House, was Right of Reply and Vat man
Previous Thread Next Thread Unindented
-
Richard Goss Jan. 19, 2001, 10:25 a.m. (Message 24426)
Red House (was: Right of Reply (and the VAT man)) Sorry, Anselm, et al. but just got back from Morocco & Spain and am just catching up on my mail. I have a question regarding David South's Kardinia capers "album with its wonderful recording of Red House which is <<6x32 bars>>." The RSCDS (incorrectly)* published this dance 40 bar reel, while the EFDSS version is (correctly) a 48 bar reel. So who has notes for a 32 bar Red House? ------- Anticipating questions regarding my use of the term "incorrect", I append the following. The RSCDS version of these 40 bars is ... DANCE: Set cast rpt bk | chase | rpt bk | reel | reel || MUSIC: A | a | B | b | C || The EFDSS version follows Playford ... DANCE: Set cast | rpt bk | chase | rpt bk | reel | reel || MUSIC: A | a | B | b | C | c || So the RSCDS dances an ABbCc dance to AaBbC music. While the EFDSS does an AaBbCc dance to AaBbCc music. In other words the music that does not change for the first chase does change between the first and second chases. Again the chase music from the 3rd figure is retained for the first reel in the 4th. The 5th figure, or second reel begins a new strain of the melody. Many of the more traditional dances not being danced at the time but taken from books were made to fit the RSCDS concepts by disingenous editing. Since the RSCDS up until that time had a 4 bar set and cast, 8 bar sets and casts were reduced to that mode. Historically the 8 bar set and cast was 4 bars setting and a 4 bar cast which began with an advance, outward turn, followed by a lesierly 2 bar dance down the outside. One does not have to look at Playford to see where the Society is in error. It feels funny to have the music make a transition when the dancer does not. What the Society has done is knocked 8 bars off the beginning of the dance and 8 off the end of the music to make it fit. Goss xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx
-
Jim Healy Jan. 19, 2001, 12:29 p.m. (Message 24427, in reply to message 24426)
Greetings! Richard Goss writes: >One does not have to look at Playford to see where the Society is in error.< Would that it were that simple. Which edition of Playford? I do not claim to be an authority and Marjorie knows MUCH more about it than I do but I believe the RSCDS version of Red House comes from the 9th Edition of Playford while the EFDSS version comes from the last (or near to last). It will come as no surprise to Goss, at least, to know that the 9th Edition is the one in the A K Bell Library in Perth (previously in the Sandeman Library). The dance apparently changed a number of times during the long publication period of Playford's dances. Jim Healy Perth, Scotland
-
mlbrown Jan. 21, 2001, 3:09 p.m. (Message 24440, in reply to message 24426)
Richard The Society "corrected" this "incorrect" phrasing in the latest edition of book 7 (published in1986) ; (The music is now arranged A B B' C C' - bars 16 and 24 different; bars 32 and 40 different)) I'm not too convinced about the theory that the same dancing phrase should use the same musical phrase - we all dance Reel of the 51st to music arranged AABB without any problems, although Machine Without Horses does work particularly well with an AABB dance and an AABB tune. Malcolm -
Richard Goss Jan. 21, 2001, 4:57 p.m. (Message 24442, in reply to message 24426)
There is nothing wrong with using the same music for different phrases. My point is that the RSCDS was using different music for the same phrases and then retaining it for the next phrase as evidence of the error in their interp of Red House. if the music is AABBC and the dance is ABBCC the dancer has the urge to change the dance on the first B and C as they become out of sync. I can't remember the dance, but there is one in quad formation where there is a 4 bar phrase followed by and 8 bar rights and lefts, and then another 4 bar phrase. As this sixteen bars is ABAB and the dance is ABBA, there is an uncomfortable spot at the second A when the dancer wants to stop at half rights and lefts. Of course your comment does not address my point of the original error in the first 8 vs 16 bars which caused the problem in the music in the first place. -
-
Anselm Lingnau Jan. 22, 2001, 10:14 a.m. (Message 24447, in reply to message 24442)
Richard Goss <xxxxxxx.x.xxxx@xxx.xxx> writes: > There is nothing wrong with using the same music for > different phrases. My point is that the RSCDS was using > different music for the same phrases and then retaining it > for the next phrase as evidence of the error in their interp > of Red House. Yes, but it appears that in the meantime they have seen the light. If you check the various recordings for Red House in DanceData, some of which give the order of parts in the tune, you will find that it has been recorded the `correct' way even before the RSCDS book was updated. (I meant to listen to a few recordings from my collection over the week-end but didn't get around to it.) > I can't remember the dance, but there is > one in quad formation where there is a 4 bar phrase followed > by and 8 bar rights and lefts, and then another 4 bar > phrase. As this sixteen bars is ABAB and the dance is ABBA, > there is an uncomfortable spot at the second A when the > dancer wants to stop at half rights and lefts. There are lots of dances that follow the general pattern 8 bars to get 1st couple to 1st corners 8 bars for 1st couple to do something with 1st corners 8 bars for 1st couple to do something very similar with 2nd corners 8 bars to fix up the progression (see, for example, the Reel of the 51st Division, Music Makars, The Laird of Milton's Daughter, and Follow Me Home, to name but a few very well-known dances). In principle all of these would suggest to use music in ABBA (or ABBC) form. However, Scottish dance tunes being what they are, usually the A part can be thought of as a `question' and the B part as an `answer', so playing a tune in ABBA order usually leaves a certain `dissatisfaction', and thus the music for these dances is always played ABAB, or AABB, or AAB with a 16-bar B part. (As for the ABBC idea, we would probably run out of tunes very quickly because most Scottish dance tunes only have two parts.) And it turns out that most dancers don't really seem to mind. Another case in point is Mairi's Wedding, where the diagonal half reels of four of bars 9-24 would strongly suggest playing the tune like ABBAB -- but it seems that music for Mairi's Wedding is invariably played (and recorded) ABABB, and going to the `correct' order would presumably throw people off. Having said that, the situation that you subscribe -- 4 bars of something, then an 8-bar figure that crosses a `phrase boundary' (as it were), then 4 bars of something else -- is much more of a problem than the 8-bar sequence issue detailed above. This has to do with the fact that, in Scottish dance tunes, the division into two 8-bar parts is much more definite than the division of an 8-bar part into two 4-bar phrases. Dancers are conditioned to expect that a dance figure will finish when an 8-bar phrase finishes (or should be, anyway), and to carry on dancing in spite of this can be difficult. It seems to work in some dances where the music doesn't have quite that decisive a difference between the first and second 4-bar phrase (the Twa Minute Reel comes to mind, to Kerry Mills' Whistling Rufus -- incidentally not a Scottish tune to begin with), but in general dance devisers probably do better to stay away from 8-bar figures across `major' phrase boundaries. > Of course your comment does not address my point of the > original error in the first 8 vs 16 bars which caused the > problem in the music in the first place. This is not an error but an issue of interpretation. Red House is really one of the more clear-cut dances in Playford, and it would be difficult to arrive at the RSCDS version of the dance `by mistake'. Hugh Foss, in his `Notes on Evolution', contrasts the two versions (RSCDS and EFDSS). My opinion in the matter is that, from an academic point of view (EFDSS) the `long' version is closer to Playford, but from a practical dancing point of view (RSCDS) having the supporting couple basically stand around for 40 out of 48 bars while the 1st couple are exerting themselves may be too much of a good thing (even with the current RSCDS version some people are complaining). I wonder how the English dancers do it -- if you start near the bottom of the hall in a `longways' set you must be stone cold and bored stiff until you reach the top if you ever do ... Anselm -- = Anselm Lingnau ......................... xxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx-xxxxxx= urt.de There are two kinds of fool. One says `This is old, and therefore good.' = And one says, `This is new, and therefore better'. -- John Brunner, _The Shockwave = Rider_ -
SallenNic Jan. 22, 2001, 3:56 p.m. (Message 24456, in reply to message 24426)
In a message dated 22/1/01 8:14:59 am, xxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx-xxxxxxxxx.xx writes: >I wonder how the English dancers > >do it -- if you start near the bottom of the hall in a `longways' set > >you must be stone cold and bored stiff until you reach the top if you > >ever do ... > > > >Anselm Actually, no, because you act as 3's and 2's alternately on the way up. Nicolas B., Lanark, Scotland. -
Anselm Lingnau Jan. 22, 2001, 4:02 p.m. (Message 24457, in reply to message 24456)
xxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx writes: > Actually, no, because you act as 3's and 2's alternately on the way up. That is certainly true for 3-couple dances but Red House as I know it is a 2-couple dance. Therefore, unless I'm wrong, if you begin as a `2' you stay a `2' (mostly doing nothing) until you reach the top, at which point you miss one turn and then start again as a `1' (busy). Where do the 3s come in in Red House? Anselm -- Anselm Lingnau ......................... xxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx-xxxxxxxxx.xx It is best to love wisely, no doubt; but to love foolishly is better than not to be able to love at all. -- William Makepeace Thackeray
-
SallenNic Jan. 23, 2001, 1:53 a.m. (Message 24464, in reply to message 24426)
In a message dated 22/1/01 2:03:23 pm, xxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxxx.xxx-xxxxxxxxx.xx writes: >> Actually, no, because you act as 3's and 2's alternately on the way up. > >That is certainly true for 3-couple dances but Red House as I know it is >a 2-couple dance. Therefore, unless I'm wrong, if you begin as a `2' you >stay a `2' (mostly doing nothing) until you reach the top, at which >point you miss one turn and then start again as a `1' (busy). Where do >the 3s come in in Red House? Silly me! Of course it is Duple Minor! However, B2 is danced by the 2nd Couple, and C1 and C2 each have one of the 2nd Couple Heying with the 1st Couple. So not the boring or freezing experience you suggested:) Nicolas B.