{"items": [{"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212596782191685", "anchor": "fb-212596782191685", "service": "fb", "text": "Disagree: It is way easier to teach starting with proper formation than improper. Also, I like the idea of lining up proper and then switching. Improper cannot exist without proper -- QED. Furthermore, I like the old flavor of it. It reminds people that contra dancing has a history -- that's why I use actives and inactives rather than 1s and 2s.", "timestamp": "1336148299"}, {"author": "John", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212607362190627", "anchor": "fb-212607362190627", "service": "fb", "text": "Of course since I often dance with another man - at gender-free or gendered dances I often use the method of choosing roles by how the hands-four turns out. Teaching to stand proper isn't a bad idea though since often people start lining up and the hands-four doesn't happen and propagate for a while, sometimes erroneously.", "timestamp": "1336149569"}, {"author": "Jesse", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212610655523631", "anchor": "fb-212610655523631", "service": "fb", "text": "I learned improper, and just picked up proper when needed. Flavor is one thing, simplicity for newcomers is another. Contra is very much a \"learn more as you need it\" activity.
To John's point on sorting out lineups, I'd like to hear a caller ask everyone to line up along the sides next to their partner & across from another couple - the quick way of assembling a Beckett.", "timestamp": "1336150012"}, {"author": "Tili", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212612848856745", "anchor": "fb-212612848856745", "service": "fb", "text": "Although it may be historically true that improper cannot exist without proper, I don't think it is conceptually true. When I started dancing at the Concord Scout House on Thursdays a few years ago, the callers would normally tell us to make long lines, they would be set up proper (although usually not noted as this), and then the caller would say \"Take hands four from the top, ones cross over\". That is possibly more terminology than needed, but the relevant thing here is that I didn't know when I started that there were any dances where the men and women stayed on one side, and in fact, I tend to picture contra dances to myself as networks of alternating roles. (Followers sometimes chain across or something like that, but the majority of the time, you're only interacting with people of the opposite role.)The idea of \"proper\" is historically interesting, but not important for teaching new dances.As for the fact of proper, i.e. lining up followers and leaders before taking hands four and crossing over, I agree with John that it seems somewhat easier than trying to have everyone line up already facing up and down the hall.", "timestamp": "1336150105"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212621728855857", "anchor": "fb-212621728855857", "service": "fb", "text": "I agree that a discourse about ones and twos and proper and improper is not necessary, but it is useful to tell beginners that they are heading in this direction (up or down, if you like jargon) until they run out of couples.
Starting with the men and women in separate lines before the ones cross over is the most efficient way to form improper sets. It is the caller's job to call \"ones cross over\" \"or becket\" or \"proper dance, don't cross over\" as soon as possible. A caller who assumes that dancers will line up improper without calling it, loses points in my book.", "timestamp": "1336151071"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212636662187697", "anchor": "fb-212636662187697", "service": "fb", "text": "I mostly agree with what Dave said, except that using actives and inactives actually is extra terminology and doesn't make sense for equal opportunity dances. But I do like lining up with the people dancing the men's role in the men's line and people dancing the women's role in the women's line.", "timestamp": "1336152718"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212650282186335", "anchor": "fb-212650282186335", "service": "fb", "text": "Saying \"actives/inactives\" is the same amount of terminology as \"1s/2s.\" What I like about it is that it has flavor and history that the terms 1 and 2 don't. To a stark beginner, both sets of terminology are likely to be equally meaningless, but as a dancer learns more about dancing, they'll eventually get to learn why actives are called actives.", "timestamp": "1336154392"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212653525519344", "anchor": "fb-212653525519344", "service": "fb", "text": "it's not the amount of terminology, it's that odds are neither couple is any more active than the other couple. so it doesn't make any sense.", "timestamp": "1336154637"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212656068852423", "anchor": "fb-212656068852423", "service": "fb", "text": "As I said, all terms are likely to be equally meaningless to a new dancer. Consider the term \"allemande\". The term \"neighbor\". The term \"up and down the hall\". Words mean what the caller tells the dancers they mean.", "timestamp": "1336154945"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212663112185052", "anchor": "fb-212663112185052", "service": "fb", "text": "@Andrew: \"caller who assumes that dancers will line up improper without calling it\"
Nowadays dancers will usually line up and take hands four improper without the caller needing to say anything. If I see that they've done this, I'll just start teaching the dance. This is part of a \"don't say more than is needed\" calling aesthetic.", "timestamp": "1336155746"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212665392184824", "anchor": "fb-212665392184824", "service": "fb", "text": "@Dave: \"Improper cannot exist without proper -- QED\"
An alternating lady/gent formation can exist without a companion non-alternating form. The terms are mostly important to callers and experienced dancers who will be fine regardless. I'm trying to look at this from the point of view of a new dancer, showing up for the first time to a whirlwind of new moves, terms, and novel forms of social interaction.", "timestamp": "1336156020"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212666845518012", "anchor": "fb-212666845518012", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, that was a pun, meant to be read figuratively. Without the concept of \"proper\" decorum, how can the concept of \"improper\" exist, that which defies proper.", "timestamp": "1336156199"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212667388851291", "anchor": "fb-212667388851291", "service": "fb", "text": "As far as taking something form the point of view of a new dancer, most here have verified that lining dancers up is the easiest for new people to understand.", "timestamp": "1336156270"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212667615517935", "anchor": "fb-212667615517935", "service": "fb", "text": "lining up PROPER... sorry", "timestamp": "1336156291"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212669105517786", "anchor": "fb-212669105517786", "service": "fb", "text": "@Dave: \"most here have verified that lining dancers up proper is the easiest for new people to understand\"
Really? Do we know either way? Most of us haven't been new people in a long time.", "timestamp": "1336156449"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212680678849962", "anchor": "fb-212680678849962", "service": "fb", "text": "Re \"improper cannot exist without proper,\" it's not so QED. Can light exist without dark? You might claim that linguistically improper cannot exist without proper, but conceptually is a different question.", "timestamp": "1336157285"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212687822182581", "anchor": "fb-212687822182581", "service": "fb", "text": "I was talking about lining new dancers up as a caller. That has been my personal experience. But, Jeff, you are right in that I usually only have to say \"ladies on one side, gents on the other\" for very long, even in a crowd of all beginners. It is very useful the first couple dances, however. Re: Andrew's comment, I'd say that the term \"improper\" implies a breaking with a \"proper\" code of behavior, so I'd stand by my original statement.", "timestamp": "1336158091"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212744872176876", "anchor": "fb-212744872176876", "service": "fb", "text": "@Jeff: \"Nowadays dancers will usually line up and take hands four improper without the caller needing to say anything.\"
Really? Where have you been dancing? My experience is that dancers will stand around chatting until the caller has said \"Hands four\" a couple of times.", "timestamp": "1336164048"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212747235509973", "anchor": "fb-212747235509973", "service": "fb", "text": "I hate \"active/inactive\". It's misleading in most of the dances we do these days, and it suggests a hierarchy of importance that I think is entirely inappropriate. (I'll admit that, with rare exceptions, I also don't much like the dances for which the terminology *is* appropriate.)", "timestamp": "1336164179"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212748012176562", "anchor": "fb-212748012176562", "service": "fb", "text": "\"Proper\" and \"improper\" also come up when a caller attempts to help with end effects by telling people to wait out \"proper\" at one end and \"improper\" at the other, which I don't find especially helpful (and which means nothing to beginners).", "timestamp": "1336164281"}, {"author": "Dave", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212749732176390", "anchor": "fb-212749732176390", "service": "fb", "text": "Robert, I would say \"1s\" and \"2s\" more strongly imply the hierarchy you suggest the active/inactive terminology implies, and it does have the same rich history.", "timestamp": "1336164485"}, {"author": "Richard", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212754865509210", "anchor": "fb-212754865509210", "service": "fb", "text": "Hi Dave. You mentioned being interested in contra history. I think it's very unlikely that the terms proper and improper ever had any connection with \"propriety\"--though many people like to think so--any more than \"proper fractions\" did. I think it was just terminology indicating men and women on their \"own\" side, at a time when the majority of dances were choreographed in that formation.", "timestamp": "1336165065"}, {"author": "Richard", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212755898842440", "anchor": "fb-212755898842440", "service": "fb", "text": "Returning to (part of) Jeff's original post, in the majority of places where I dance contra, people do line up improper without being asked to do so (if they're taking hands four at all!) and often a month can go by without a single proper dance being called.", "timestamp": "1336165177"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212758848842145", "anchor": "fb-212758848842145", "service": "fb", "text": "@Robert: 'My experience is that dancers will stand around chatting until the caller has said \"Hands four\" a couple of times.'
Sometimes. But even then, all the caller is doing by saying \"hands four\" is indicating to the dancers that it's time to move on and they're ready to teach the dance. They're telling the dancers what needs to happen but not how to do it. And they're not saying the dancers should be improper, as Andrew likes to hear, instead the dancers just (correctly) assume that.", "timestamp": "1336165473"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=212760802175283", "anchor": "fb-212760802175283", "service": "fb", "text": "@Robert: What does it mean to \"wait out proper at one end and improper at the other\"? If you're waiting out at the bottom then both proper and improper will have the gent on the left and the lady on the right. At the top you can wait out proper or improper, though.", "timestamp": "1336165687"}, {"author": "Christopher", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213179218800108", "anchor": "fb-213179218800108", "service": "fb", "text": "I've noticed that orientation is tough for beginners. Being more symmetrical and consistent (the same orientation after a swing, etc), improper is easier.", "timestamp": "1336221671"}, {"author": "Susan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213182662133097", "anchor": "fb-213182662133097", "service": "fb", "text": "I think people have a right to learn the real terminology. Simplifying the calls can become too confusing. I like it when a caller names the move first and then instructs the steps. As for proper/ improper: without that distinction Lisa Greenleaf's description of our setup for one of last night's dances as \"indecent\" would've gone over like a lead balloon.", "timestamp": "1336222094"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213187462132617", "anchor": "fb-213187462132617", "service": "fb", "text": "@Susan: I see why it's good to use the real terminology when you teach something instead of just describing it. Saying \"ladies pull by right hands across the set and courtesy turn\" compared to \"ladies chain\" isn't as much more helpful to the newcomers as it is harmful to people who've danced before. But I'm talking about cases where the terminology in question (\"proper\", 1s/2s) describes things irrelevant to the dance at hand. (I have no problem with a caller saying \"hands four improper\" even when there are lots of new people. As long as they don't stop to explain it, the people who know what it means will understand and react while the newcomers will let it pass by like so much they're already not understanding.)
Teaching people about proper formation and 1s/2s for an improper equal-turn dance makes as much sense to me as having them identify their shadow for a dance with no shadow interaction.", "timestamp": "1336222735"}, {"author": "Susan", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213231752128188", "anchor": "fb-213231752128188", "service": "fb", "text": "@Jeff: I agree: we want to dance, not listen to a lecture. It's different if there's a 1/2 hour instruction for beginners before the dance begins. In the rhythm of sorting out the next dance, you want to be as efficient and clear as possible.", "timestamp": "1336227593"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213253442126019", "anchor": "fb-213253442126019", "service": "fb", "text": "I think it's wise, when you see that \"they've been doing it this way for 100 years,\" to think long and hard before you decide that a new way is better.", "timestamp": "1336230148"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213262558791774", "anchor": "fb-213262558791774", "service": "fb", "text": "@Andrew: Could you be more specific? What have people been doing for 100 years that I'm saying they should stop and do something new?", "timestamp": "1336231121"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213263705458326", "anchor": "fb-213263705458326", "service": "fb", "text": "@Dave: Well, \"1s\" and \"2s\" could be taken as describing relative distance from the top. To me \"active\" and \"inactive\" strongly suggests that one couple will be doing more dancing than the other.", "timestamp": "1336231243"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213266072124756", "anchor": "fb-213266072124756", "service": "fb", "text": "Further to Richard's point about the meanings of \"proper\" and \"improper\": an archaic meaning of \"proper\" is simply \"own\" -- this meaning still adheres to the French \"propre\" from which it derives, and shows up in the borrowed \"amour-propre\" = \"self-love\". Also (if you'll pardon the reference), J.R.R. Tolkien, writing in a deliberately archaic style, has a character say that some of the Rings of Power \"had each its proper gem\".", "timestamp": "1336231489"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213269182124445", "anchor": "fb-213269182124445", "service": "fb", "text": "@Jeff: \"standing out proper, etc.\": I've heard callers say this when actually describing the normal waiting-out position (after crossing over) -- i.e., \"improper at the top, proper at the bottom\" -- but probably only in cases (such as some Becket dances) where you might not have to cross over to get into that position. I'm not sure that I've heard it with reference to the opposite (less common) position, and in any case it's a while since I've heard this usage, possibly because of the very reasons I cited when I first mentioned it. (I do sometimes wish, in the case of dances where you're in-and-out at the end, that the caller would give a hint about when to cross over.)", "timestamp": "1336231837"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213273322124031", "anchor": "fb-213273322124031", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, firstly, I don't mean \"don't change things, because we've always done them this way.\" I literally mean that when you come upon customs or practices that seem odd or wrong to you, think hard about whether they are really wrong. I meant my comment in general, but I think it applies in contra dance calling and dancing to many practices of new and young dancers. In this case, I was talking about the practice of lining up proper by default, and having the caller always say \"ones cross over.\"
If you want further examples, there are a few new fads in contra dancing that I find disruptive, like dips, or twirls at the wrong times, and others. These are favored by young dancers and they seem to think that older more experienced dancers don't do them because they aren't cool and creative, where truth is, while they might be cool and creative to watch and to do as a couple, they are disruptive and sometimes dangerous to dancers around you, so they \"just don't work\" in the set dance context (which contra dancing is, it's not just couple dancing) and that's why experienced dancers don't do them. But young dancers don't usually have this insight. So in a more general way, that's what I mean by \"they way people have been doing it for 100 years.\" I'm not saying we should dance like we did 100 years ago, I said we should think long and hard before changing things, to see if there's a good reason that they are as they are.", "timestamp": "1336232287"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213289962122367", "anchor": "fb-213289962122367", "service": "fb", "text": "Andrew: 'the practice of lining up proper by default, and having the caller always say \"ones cross over.\"'
That's nowhere near 100 years old. Improper being the default is maybe 30 years old?
\"twirls at the wrong times\"
I'm not sure what you mean by the wrong times. Any time one isn't called?
There were basically no twirls at all in contra dancing 100 years ago, as far as I know. Even 50 years ago there were almost none.", "timestamp": "1336233492"}, {"author": "opted out", "source_link": "#", "anchor": "unknown", "service": "unknown", "text": "this user has requested that their comments not be shown here", "timestamp": "1336235527"}, {"author": "Taviy", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213309198787110", "anchor": "fb-213309198787110", "service": "fb", "text": "ok, so my 5 cents worth... efficiency: if we're talking about rank beginners, orientation is an issue. It's much easier to line them up proper to begin, giving them a basic reference point from which to form hands-four improper (and works quite well if using the promenade-into-longways-sets method to segue from beginner circle to a first contra. One does not need to CALL it proper to do that though. If the dancers get the idea of their relative position from it osmotically, that's quite enough.
1s/2s vs. actives/inactives: to me, there's a VERY specific reason for using either set of terms which varies from dance to dance. For a dance which is very uneven (eg, Chorus Jig), \"actives\" is an appropriate and useful term; in an \"alternating corners\" type dance, however, using actives/inactives would be incredibly misleading. In modern \"all couples active\" dancing, the main point of 1s/2s terminology is related to direction of progression, and the efficiency of saying \"hands four, ones cross\" rather than \"couples with your backs to the band, trade places in your partner pair\" every time. (The latter is a great bit of language, modeled after Nils, but superseded as an evening progresses by establishing the \"1s go down 2s go up\" paradigm.)
Though often \"hands four ones cross\" is mostly just a place-marker, as Jeff said, in my experience, a caller would be foolish to overly rely on the dancers to form hands four from the top and cross accordingly (especially at festivals, in Concord...). I see good reasons to retain and teach ALL those terms, when appropriate - and i do call proper dances (in either of two distinctly different contexts - the \"one night stand\" where whole set dances are useful, and there really isn't time to orient everyone to the moves and build improper, actives cross, etc, AND in situations where most of the dancers are experienced, but usually not in the context of a mixed-level early evening). That doesn't negate Jeff's overall point, which is a good one: we should, as callers, be careful to use the most appropriate terms, and to use them only as necessary. Economizing on terms is important, and helps to keep beginners from getting overwhelmed. There may be no real reason to specifically TEACH proper in a given context, but that doesn't negate the formation's usefulness in surreptitiously providing a concrete orientation tool for new dancers.", "timestamp": "1336235692"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213322428785787", "anchor": "fb-213322428785787", "service": "fb", "text": "I might make a guess that Andy is talking about twirls on the 8th beat of an 8-beat phrase (or any twirl that results in your being late for the next move), twirls where there's no room to twirl, etc.", "timestamp": "1336236972"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213326072118756", "anchor": "fb-213326072118756", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff - re lining up proper by default, lining up proper by default (as a start point) is still the rule to this day. What is has changed (and not recently) is that most dances are not done in proper formation. When I started contra dancing (more than 30 years ago), improper was already the most common formation, though chestnuts in proper formation (and they were already old fashioned then) were done more frequently, and so most dancers were accustomed to them. These days, most young dancers are not familiar with proper dances or chestnuts, and some of the quirky formations in these old dances confuse new dancers who aren't familiar with them, as in Money Musk.", "timestamp": "1336237320"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213337395450957", "anchor": "fb-213337395450957", "service": "fb", "text": "@Robert: The problem with twirling when there's too little time isn't one of being overly willing to disregard tradition. It's one of different priorities or values: improvisation and play over timing. Many experienced dancers think of timing as crucial, especially in the Boston area, but it's not that way everywhere (Asheville) and probably wasn't that way historically.
In other words, by twirling at all you're breaking from the dance as done historically, but few people have an issue with that when it's done safely and one time. It becomes controversial when newer dancers who don't have full mastery of the dance advance unevenly, picking up the flourishes before they have everything else down.
Look at swinging faster than you can control fully. This is, if anything, quite traditional. People have been doing it for a long time. But experienced dancers don't like it when new dancers do it because it's too hard for them to do perfectly yet. Whereas many newer dancers like to swing really fast because the fun of it is even partly in the feeling of lessend control.", "timestamp": "1336237850"}, {"author": "Jeff Kaufman", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213342802117083", "anchor": "fb-213342802117083", "service": "fb", "text": "@Andrew: \"lining up proper by default (as a start point) is still the rule to this day.\"
True. People take hands with their partner with the lady on the right and walk into line, making hands four and crossing over from there. I'm not saying people should line up some other way (though taking hands four and crossing without being told is nice). I'm just saying the caller doesn't need to name the \"each gender on their own side\" formation and doesn't need to point out who are the 1s and 2s (unless, of course, the dance requires it).
\"When I started contra dancing (more than 30 years ago), improper was already the most common formation\"
When did improper become the more common formation? Probably different times in different places, but let's say Boston.", "timestamp": "1336238209"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213350705449626", "anchor": "fb-213350705449626", "service": "fb", "text": "This thread was about \"im/proper,\" sorry to hijack it, but since you asked...
Re \"the wrong time for a twirl,\" I intend a double meaning to some extent. Somewhat, I mean with the wrong timing, usually that the couple is late starting the next figure. Finishing early is also a problem, since there is a mechanical element to a contra dance, with the dancers as elements in a clockwork, and it is best for the works to run (flow) smoothly, and when elements arrive too soon, it is as detrimental as being too late. In general, \"too soon\" is bad aesthetically, where too late can be more disruptive to other dancers.
But primarily, when I said \"wrong time to twirl\" I don't mean that it's always wrong to twirl or that we should only twirl when the caller says so (and callers rarely call twirl, unless they say California first). I'd say that the main example of a wrong time to twirl would be, especially when twirling out of a swing, when the man twirls the woman in the direction opposite to the figure after the swing - usually with the woman travelling right (as is natural when she opens from a swing) when she should be moving left. The most common figures that have this problem are circle left, and other figures that move to the left, like a becket where the couple progresses to the left after a swing. When the call is swing followed by circle left, and a neighbor gent gets slammed by a woman where her partner is not careful about when and where he reels her out with a twirl after his swing. The call is swing and circle left. There is nothing in those figures about the woman traveling with high speed and force against the flow of the circle left, and it's disruptive for neighbors who are dancing to the music and the call to have to worry about getting clobbered. Also a problem is that fact that the twirling woman is often disoriented by the twirl. It's another case of dancers being in tune with their partners but out of tune with the rest of the set and neighboring sets.
As an example of good time to twirl, I'd say twirling is fine on (or before) a right and left through or ladies chain, as long as you mind your space and time. I'm not against twirling, I enjoy twirling, and I'm pretty sure I can twirl in the woman's role better (faster, smoother, more accurately) than the average woman. But I'm careful to pick my spots, where I won't disrupt the flow of the dance in the sets.", "timestamp": "1336239061"}, {"author": "Andrew", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213358335448863", "anchor": "fb-213358335448863", "service": "fb", "text": "Jeff, I think your question \"When did improper become the more common formation?\" is interesting, and I don't know the answer. Ask folks who have been dancing or calling or playing longer than I've been on the scene. Most of the old-timers I know are from the NH dances - Dudley Laufman, David Millstone, Sylvia Miskoe, Bob McQuillen. I bet they'd know.", "timestamp": "1336239752"}, {"author": "Robert", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=213464908771539", "anchor": "fb-213464908771539", "service": "fb", "text": "Among the \"wrong times to twirl\" I would add \"anytime the woman doesn't actually *want* to twirl\", but that's a different conversation (which I'm pretty sure we've had already). (And I'm among the people who often finds the twirl out of the swing disorienting, although not as much as I did when I fist encountered it.)", "timestamp": "1336251800"}, {"author": "Daniel", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=214436608674369", "anchor": "fb-214436608674369", "service": "fb", "text": "On the original topic: I find the \"ones cross over\" call sort of out-of-place sometimes, precisely BECAUSE I never learned proper formation as the starting point. I start in a line where the genders' positions are semi-random until the hands four gets to me, and so whether I have to cross over when it reaches me is completely unrelated to whether I'm a 1 or 2. And it did confuse me, when I was new, to be told to cross over when I didn't know which side I theoretically should have started on. Leaders left, followers right (when facing according to the hands four) probably would have been far more useful to me when I was starting.
Re: \"wrong times to twirl\", any time that makes you late is the most obvious, but there are a few other times when it can be disruptive to the flow of the dance, IMO. One is in a pull-by or similar where the person needs to stay facing the direction she pulled by -- a twirl often puts her facing back the way she came, and she has to correct for it before doing the next move. The other is right before she needs to have direct contact with someone else. For instance, there's one dance where we circle, then zig-zag as couples past one couple, and then another. If you twirl your neighbor at the end of the circle, I can't effectively lead my partner to zig-zag with me, because you've forced her to break contact with me right before that contact is needed. I danced this dance once with a beginner partner who really needed me to pull her with me, and if I couldn't lead her in this way because a neighbor twirled her at the \"wrong time\", she'd be confused.", "timestamp": "1336375153"}, {"author": "Kiran", "source_link": "https://www.facebook.com/jefftk/posts/212584512192912?comment_id=217675841683779", "anchor": "fb-217675841683779", "service": "fb", "text": "I personally feel that introducing terminology (as opposed to description) should be done only when it's both necessary and efficient. For example, Larry Jennings proposed in _Give & Take_ that callers could eliminate a dozen or so named calls that require explanation by introducing the phrase \"twirl to swap.\" Since you have to teach the meaning of the names anyway, why not just use a description instead.
It occurs to me that the words Nils uses (which I believe are not original to him) can be generalized to \"Take hands in groups of four, and men, put your partner on your right; women, you should be to the right of your partner in your group of four.\" This would allow you to get rid of not just \"proper/improper\" but \"crossing over\" and \"Becket\" (the latter by simply specifying that dancers adjust their foursome so that partners are on the side.)
(BTW, Larry proposed that it would be more efficient to tell dancers to cross over first, and then take hands four, so they didn't immediately release hands to cross over. I have no strong feelings about this stuff except to say, as Larry would, that you should choose the method that's most efficient for *you personally* as a caller, and (!!) the way you figure out which methods work best is through observation rather than guesswork. If you're the caller, obviously this means studying recordings of your gigs.)
(Jeff Keller has proposed, as a way of saving even more time, since most of the dances we encounter are equal, that couples should all take hands four at once, and the couples left out should just go to the ends of the set and form foursomes. I doubt anyone could persuade dancers to try this, but I do think it might work better than the endless propagation from top to bottom that we have now.)", "timestamp": "1336819008"}]}