Getting Gigs

Thank you Tina for posing this question.  I think 
it speaks to many of the issues we will have to 
deal with if this folk tradition is to continue to grow and to evolve.

I have been on both sides of this issue.  I know 
that there are some venues where I will probably 
never get booked to call.  This evolves from both 
petty politics and differing personal visions of 
what and whom the series is intended for.  Some 
of us are simply working toward different goals.

I have also booked bands and callers for small 
venues.  Like you I am also troubled by your 
programmer friend's assessment that the purpose 
of "tiny venues" is to provide a place for new 
callers to practice and develop their skills.  In 
my programming effort I worked very hard to 
overcome this perception.  When a caller views 
any dance as a small and insignificant gig they 
will tend to treat the dancers that way.  This is 
precisely the attitude small venues should work to exclude from their programs.

The "tiny venues" offer some of the most 
challenging gigs for callers.  Booking new 
callers in such venues, which often hold dances 
only once each month, can be deadly for the 
reputation of the series.  With only 10 or 11 
dances each year the memory of a bad night is 
difficult to overcome.  The small venues need to 
work much harder to insure that skilled and 
confident callers with a positive attitude are booked for every evening.

Contrast this with an urban series that holds 
dances weekly.  With 50 dances a year they can 
risk giving a few evenings to aspiring 
callers.  Next week will probably be quite 
different.  In addition the larger venues are, in 
fact, much easier to call successfully.  A new 
caller in a larger venue can marshal the support 
of the many regulars and integrate the newcomers 
into the community much more easily.  The large venues are the easy gigs.

It is ironic that many of our most "successful" 
and experienced callers are seldom ever booked 
for the smaller, and more challenging, 
venues.  Instead many of them are almost 
constantly calling for larger groups of 
experienced dancers.  This encourages sloppy 
calling, since the experienced dancers can adapt 
to imprecise calls and poor teaching.  I have 
seen nationally known callers who were inept at 
integrating lots of newcomers at a small 
venue.  If we really wanted to promote this dance 
form we would be putting our best callers and 
bands before new dancers whenever 
possible.  Perhaps some kind of stipend to send 
experienced callers to small venues would be in order.

In my programming I found that there were some 
callers I would avoid booking.  Some of these 
were experienced callers whom I felt were either 
not able, or were not inclined, to create the 
gracious and generous atmosphere that was a 
central part of the vision of our series.  I am 
sure that some of them are still resentful of 
being passed over.  For that I am sorry.  We 
needed callers who would treat everyone in the 
hall with a high level of courtesy and 
respect.  They needed to have the confidence to 
take full responsibility for any problems in the 
hall--and not do anything that could be 
interpreted as an indication that the caller 
holds the dancers responsible.  They also needed 
to have the skills for integrating newcomers 
seamlessly into the community with minimal teaching.

I occasionally booked new callers.  New callers 
were often much more open to suggestions and were 
more willing to modify their style to fit the 
vision of our series.  With a little coaching 
some new callers were able to meet our 
expectations.  The critical quality was having 
confidence in, and a high regard for, all of the 
dancers--whatever their skill level.

It is part of the curse of calling that we will 
often have to travel long distances to 
gigs.  Even the country's most loved callers and 
bands are less respected and appreciated in their hometown.

In order to gain some level of name recognition 
callers must promote themselves constantly.  The 
downside of this is that many callers become less 
able to take responsibility for problems in the 
hall because they don't want to be seen as 
incompetent
and so they blame the dancers.  We 
need to educate both callers and programmers to 
the fact that taking full responsibility for the 
hall is a mark of professionalism and 
confidence.  Blaming dancers will always make the 
caller's job more difficult and the evening less enjoyable for all.

Callers often try to distinguish themselves with 
memorable dance formations, figures, or 
medleys.  This, unfortunately, seems to work well 
in larger venues where experienced dancers will 
remember, with glee, the caller who tried that 
triple-progression medley with the crossover 
square in the center of the room--danced to a 
blues song--even if it took a half hour to teach 
and get it right.  This kind of thing is not 
appreciated so much at small venues.

Please do not bring a "new dance" to small venues 
in order to "try it out" before you debut it at a 
big festival.  You have it backwards.  The 
festivals are where you should try out new dances 
to see how they work--and festivals should 
encourage this.  Once you have the kinks worked 
out in that more tolerant venue you can introduce 
it at a small venue
but please not before.

New callers have an advantage in being more 
flexible and open to suggestion.  You can also 
increase your calling gigs by avoiding some of 
the big festivals and making yourself available 
during those times when most other callers are 
out of town.  On the whole, however, getting gigs 
is a continuing effort.  Like anything the more 
you call--all other things being equal--the better you get.  Good luck!

I also apologize for the length of this post.  Good topic!

Greg McKenzie







*****

At 11:25 PM 8/17/2008, you wrote:
>Hi folks ­
>
>I seem to have hit an interesting wall in my newish calling
>career, and would love to know your thoughts and strategies
>about how best to deal with it.  I’ve been calling contra
>for two years, the first year learning through guest spots,
>classes, and half-dances. Since last November I’ve called
>full dances, averaging 2-3 dances/month, mostly contras
>with a few barn dances.
>
>My problem is this:  I’m having trouble getting a couple of
>our local programmers to book me.
>
>In their defense, we do have a lot of good callers around
>here vying for the few slots. And one of our local
>programmers is trying to run a consistently high-powered
>dance, booking many world-class callers and bands.  I have
>never asked her about calling that dance, and in fact
>aspire to become a caller she seeks out some day in the
>future.
>
>But the other dances are a different story. The one that
>prompted me to reach out to you here is a medium-sized
>hometown type dance featuring lots of different callers and
>bands.  I dance there often; it’s one of my home venues.  I
>have called one half-dance there, to great reviews from
>both the dancers and the other caller. The band said they
>enjoyed working with me too.  Unfortunately, the programmer
>was away at a camp that evening. He has only seen me call
>guest spots ­ all of which he says he thoroughly enjoyed ­
>but only one full evening elsewhere, and here’s the rub:
>wit wasn’t my best evening.  It was a special 4-hour dance,
>the longest gig I’ve ever done solo. I made a few minor
>mistakes. And the band was a primarily English band ­ which
>meant very nice music, but mild, not at all zesty.
>
>The programmer in question is a friend of mine in the
>dancing community. We’re fond of each other as both dance
>partners and people. When I realized he might not be asking
>me to call his dance because he doesn’t think I’m a good
>enough caller, it felt devastating.  But I got up the guts
>to approach him at the end of last night’s dance after the
>fiddler, notorious for his curmudgeonly pickiness, asked
>when I was calling next and announced that he and his
>girlfriend are my ‘biggest fans’.  (I was quite floored,
>and grateful. An ego boost can do wonders at moments like
>that.)  So I approached the programmer.  “Can I ask you a
>question?” I asked. “I don’t know if I want to answer,” he
>replied, looking very nervous and obviously knowing what
>was coming. “Well, I’m gonna ask it anyway,” I told him,
>and took his arm as we walked away from the others in the
>room.   “If, as I now suspect, you don’t like the way I
>call, what is it about it you don’t like so I can work on
>improving that?”  He looked relieved then, and was kind
>enough to respond very honestly.
>
>He named a number of things he hadn’t liked about the one
>full dance he’d been at. He gave the hairy eyeball to my
>inclusion of a particular mixer.  He also said at one point
>in a contra, one knot of folks was having trouble and I
>came down on the floor to help them, but that left the rest
>of them floundering awhile with no prompting. His memory
>was astounding ­ I don’t remember that at all. Perhaps I
>didn’t think anything of it at the time, or perhaps I was
>even proud of myself for being able to then get back up on
>the stool and call to everyone correctly after helping like
>that. I definitely still have a LOT to learn.  I believe
>the biggest mistake he pointed out (and rightly) was that I
>didn’t seem perfectly familiar with how to teach one of the
>dances, and dancers had to ask a question to clarify. It’s
>likely true: I try to call one dance that’s new to me each
>evening, in order to expand my repertoire, and every time I
>call one I seem to learn some new nuance about how to lead
>it better.
>
>He said he therefore thinks I need more practice. I
>heartily agreed with that, and then pointed out that the
>way to get it is by having gigs that allow me to do more
>calling!  He then said that that’s what the tiny venues are
>for.
>
>But I feel troubled by this answer. I’ve been calling those
>venues, and will gladly continue to.  However, it seems to
>me that if a caller is only exposed to small halls
>half-full of beginners, s/he will learn to call to that
>level very well, but not to call dances appropriate for
>more advanced dancers. How will I ever gain that skill if
>I’m not given the chance to try it? It’s a catch-22.  These
>venues also often book very inexperienced bands, who don’t
>know what I’m talking about when I try to discuss pairing
>dances/tunes. So I have ideas of how I’d like to become a
>better caller, but these circumstances are keeping me from
>achieving that.
>
>I also strongly believe that it’s every dance
>organization’s responsibility to foster new talent, if they
>want the group to stay alive. My local group has acted on
>this seriously in the past, in fact giving me and others
>matching scholarships to go to CDSS camp’s calling classes.
>(In my case, perhaps they figured out I wasn’t going to go
>away, so it was in their best interest to help me learn to
>do it better. <g>)  What’s happening now, though, is that
>I’ve hit some sort of glass ceiling. I’m like in my calling
>adolescence: no longer the cute beginner but also not yet a
>rock star. If given the opportunity to call at a more
>high-powered gig, I will not be perfect at it, no. But I
>will get better and better, given the chance.
>
>Hearing some programmers talk about callers and bands, I
>have the sense now that a problematic gig like the one
>Chris described in his recent ‘growth’ post could be a
>death sentence around here. That caller might never be
>invited back.
>
>My experience of hitting a wall didn’t only happen that one
>time. Earlier this month, trying to be proactive, I
>inquired about potentially calling at a venue a bit more
>than one hour from my home, another medium-sized/level
>dance I’ve danced at many times in the past but not
>recently. That programmer asked the very good question,
>‘what sort of program do you do, and is it suitable for our
>dancers?’ I sent him a sample program I successfully called
>at a similar venue, along with an offer to discuss his
>current community’s particular dance level and to craft my
>program accordingly. I have not heard back.  Some say that
>he likes to call most of the dances there himself, so may
>be reluctant to share.
>
>It feels so disheartening to be kept out, I’m now
>considering whether it’s worth it to continue trying to
>call. Really, it’s been through frequent repetition that my
>skills have improved so far. I’ve popped a new level of
>understanding in terms of how to envision the moves in
>space, how to teach geometrically and in terms of people
>the dancers will encounter, and how to really work with the
>band to create a synergistic ball o’ fire.  These skills
>have recently grown exponentially. I enjoy doing it, and
>have gotten some excellent positive feedback from dancers,
>bands, and other programmers ­ some of it even in writing,
>so I can prove it.  But if I have to fight to get one gig
>every few months, I never will get better.  I’ll forget the
>nuances of how to do it.  Instead of building on each
>other, every dance evening will be a singular struggle. And
>I doubt it’s worth it. I love giving to the dance community
>through calling, but also love dancing ­ and that I feel
>unquestioningly welcomed to do.
>
>Thoughts? Strategies? Commiseration?  How to best handle
>this situation?  Is there a way to encourage programmers to
>nurture local talent?  How did you manage to wrangle
>getting gigs that allowed your skills to continually grow?
>
>
>Sorry for the length of this post and the ‘woe is me’ tone.
>  But I figured some detail might help in this case, and I’m
>really feeling at a loss.
>
>Thank you, comrades, for any insight you might offer.
>
>Tina Fields
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Callers mailing list
>Callers at sharedweight.net
>http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers