I agree with Alan. Last night I realized I had three Becket type  
dances in the evening - but each had a different sort of transition,  
and very different figures within them, so they were quite distinct.  
I don't think dancers care whether the dances are Becket or duple  
minors, and it is only if transitions and patterns are highly  
repetitive that people will notice. And again, there was the one  
shared calling night where the same dance was danced in the first  
half and again in the second, with quite different tunes, and only a  
few people noticed that it was "somewhat familiar".
Martha

On Dec 12, 2008, at 7:39 AM, callers-request at sharedweight.net wrote:

> Send Callers mailing list submissions to
> 	callers at sharedweight.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	callers-request at sharedweight.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	callers-owner at sharedweight.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Last call: Workshops in Gilmanton NH (gtwood at worldpath.net)
>    2. Beckets (gtwood at worldpath.net)
>    3. Re: Beckets (Chris Page)
>    4. Re: Beckets (Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing)
>    5. Re: Beckets (Laur)
>    6. Re: Beckets (Will Loving)
>    7. Re: Beckets (Jeff Kaufman)
>    8. house party squares (Jeff Kaufman)
>    9. Re: house party squares (Will Loving)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:29:46 -0500
> From: <gtwood at worldpath.net>
> Subject: [Callers] Last call: Workshops in Gilmanton NH
> To: callers at sharedweight.net
> Cc: musicians at sharedweight.net
> Message-ID: <RkqyG8PE.1229016586.1070780.gtwood at worldpath.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
> Hi Folks,
> Wanted to post one last reminder about callers and musicians
> workshops In Gilmanton NH. 12/13 4:00-5:30 PM.........
> pot luck dinner following the workshops
> Members of SWALLOWTAIL will be conducting the workshops
>
> Callers: Begginer Caller and Advanced Teaching Techniques
>
> Musicians: Taking toons to the next level/ playing for the dance!
>
> Than stick around to dance to Swallowtail!
> (sponcered in part by the Country Dance and Song Society)
>
> Details at: www.worldpath.net/~gtwood
> PHONE:
> 603-679-5448
>
> Day of Dance
> Gale:   603-817-9879
> Lynn:  603-926-9700
>
>
> Directions:
> Gilmanton NH Town Offices
> RT 107        (corner of RT 107 and RT 140)
> (across from the Gilmanton Corners Store)
>
> Hope to see you there!
> Thanks
> Gale
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:20:55 -0500
> From: <gtwood at worldpath.net>
> Subject: [Callers] Beckets
> To: callers at sharedweight.net
> Message-ID: <wLt3FyN1.1229023255.0528640.gtwood at worldpath.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
> Hay folks,
> Typically, how many Becket dances will you call in an
> evening?
> I seem to be on a Becket "kick" as of late, and don't wish to
> over do it.
>
> Thanks in advance Gale
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:01:26 -0800
> From: "Chris Page" <chriscpage at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Beckets
> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers at sharedweight.net>
> Message-ID:
> 	<9469896c0812111601k3072a06j7501d5fbcb76bfe9 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 12/11/08, gtwood at worldpath.net <gtwood at worldpath.net> wrote:
>>
>>  Hay folks,
>>  Typically, how many Becket dances will you call in an
>>  evening?
>>  I seem to be on a Becket "kick" as of late, and don't wish to
>>  over do it.
>
>
> Looking at my programs, it looks like in the last year of
> 15 contra dances, I've only called 18 Becket dances.
> (Last week I realized I hadn't introduced Becket when I
> got to the triple minor, and needed to use that term...)
>
> But this isn't intentional. For me, Becket vs. Improper is
> just a different way of starting the same dance. I don't
> see any deep difference between them. Still, there are
> a couple of factors that tilt me improper-wards:
>
> -When programming I seek dances that don't always
> end and start the same. Most Becket dances end with
> a partner swing.
>
> -Improper dances tend to be simpler than Becket dances,
> hence more of them get done.
>
> (This is because an improper choreography must reach three
> choreographic mileposts during the dance -- progressed,
> neighbor swung, and partner swung. Becket must reach two
> mileposts -- neighbor swung and partner swung; so there's
> more time in the dance to wander far, far away from these
> mileposts/stations.)
>
> (Drop the neighbor swing requirement and the above still holds.)
>
> -My use of other dance formations -- squares,
> four-face-fours, circle mixer, triplets, and so forth -- automatically
> decreases both the number of improper and Becket dances.
>
> -I think there's more good improper sequences out there than
> Becket ones, quite possibly because that's what more
> people have intentionally been trying to write. I have no data
> to support this, however.
>
> -Chris Page
> San Diego
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:40:47 -0800 (PST)
> From: Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing
> 	<winston at slac.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Beckets
> To: gtwood at worldpath.net
> Cc: callers at sharedweight.net
> Message-ID: <01N2Z0VAKUU4A08A4Q at SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii
>
> Gale wrote:
>
>> Hay folks,
>> Typically, how many Becket dances will you call in an
>> evening?
>> I seem to be on a Becket "kick" as of late, and don't wish to
>> over do it.
>
> I don't think dancers particularly care about Becket vs improper  
> per se.
> They care (to some degree *) about the dances seeming too similar, but
> I think what gives that impression is largely transitions (do they  
> all start
> the same?  do they all end the same?), distinctive figures (do they  
> all
> have Rory O'Moore balance-in-lines in them?), to some degree mood  
> (are they
> *all* slinky?  are they *all* rowdy?), not whether you have them  
> circle left 1
> place after they take hands four.
>
> If you aren't boring the dancers with sameness, I don't think you have
> to worry about the actual numbers.
>
> That said, I seem to call somewhere between 0 and 4 out of 10.
>
> -- Alan
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ====================================================================== 
> =========
>  Alan Winston --- WINSTON at SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
>  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:   
> 650/926-3056
>  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park  
> CA   94025
> ====================================================================== 
> =========
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:01:46 -0800 (PST)
> From: Laur <lcpgr at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Beckets
> To: callers at sharedweight.net
> Message-ID: <464728.92956.qm at web52901.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> I too enjoy Becket dances.? But when I think about the why of  
> incorporating them in my planning a dance, its more about variety  
> of flow, dance moves, and level of difficulty.? I personally find  
> dancing a night with 6 balance? the waves or 4 Rory O'Moors, or  
> worse,? the combination of them, very less enjoyable, regardless of  
> the band, caller, or dance partner(s).? And? I try? to? remember  
> this in planning a program for others.? Not all Beckets are  
> "difficult" so I use the "easier" Beckets to vary programs when I'm  
> working to enhance perspective and create variety and keep the more  
> experienced engaged in a dance evening.?? And I use? the the more  
> difficult, or engaging, Beckets to challenge or enrich.
>
> So I enjoy Beckets, and find that sometimes I? have to "hold  
> back".? And I also agree with what Alan has said.
>
> Laurie
> West Michigan/ Grand Rapids
>
> --- On Thu, 12/11/08, Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing  
> <winston at slac.stanford.edu> wrote:
> From: Alan Winston - SSRL Central Computing  
> <winston at slac.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Beckets
> To: gtwood at worldpath.net
> Cc: callers at sharedweight.net
> Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 6:40 PM
>
> Gale wrote:
>
>> Hay folks,
>> Typically, how many Becket dances will you call in an
>> evening?
>> I seem to be on a Becket "kick" as of late, and don't wish
> to
>> over do it.
>
> I don't think dancers particularly care about Becket vs improper  
> per se.
> They care (to some degree *) about the dances seeming too similar, but
> I think what gives that impression is largely transitions (do they  
> all start
> the same?  do they all end the same?), distinctive figures (do they  
> all
> have Rory O'Moore balance-in-lines in them?), to some degree mood  
> (are they
> *all* slinky?  are they *all* rowdy?), not whether you have them  
> circle left 1
> place after they take hands four.
>
> If you aren't boring the dancers with sameness, I don't think you have
> to worry about the actual numbers.
>
> That said, I seem to call somewhere between 0 and 4 out of 10.
>
> -- Alan
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ====================================================================== 
> =========
>  Alan Winston --- WINSTON at SSRL.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU
>  Disclaimer: I speak only for myself, not SLAC or SSRL   Phone:   
> 650/926-3056
>  Paper mail to: SSRL -- SLAC BIN 99, 2575 Sand Hill Rd, Menlo Park  
> CA   94025
> ====================================================================== 
> =========
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers at sharedweight.net
> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:17:57 -0500
> From: Will Loving <will at dedicationtechnologies.com>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Beckets
> To: "Caller's discussion list <callers at sharedweight.net>"
> 	<callers at sharedweight.net>
> Message-ID: <C567CEB5.2F541%will at dedicationtechnologies.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="US-ASCII"
>
> On the topic of becket dances, I have a sort of minor questions:
>
> The majority of beckets rotate left-flowing or clockwise (CW) but an
> increasing number are being written and danced which flow to the  
> right or
> counter-clockwise (CCW). To setup for teaching a becket dance, most  
> callers
> will simply say, "take hands four and circle one place to the left  
> to becket
> formation" regardless of the direction of flow.
>
> However, for a CCW dance, some callers will give the instruction to  
> "take
> hands four and circle one place to the right". Though this is  
> technically
> correct with regard to the flow of the dance it seems that, at  
> least to the
> dancers, it's not really necessary and they sometimes scratch their  
> heads
> about "circle to the right?".
>
> More recently, I've noticed that as becket dances have become more  
> common at
> least at Greenfield, MA dances (which is generally a very experienced
> crowd), the instructions are simply "this is a becket formation  
> dance, so
> stand with your partner beside you facing across the set to another  
> couple
> and take hands four".
>
> Thoughts anyone?
>
> Will Loving
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:03:16 -0500
> From: cbr at sccs.swarthmore.edu (Jeff Kaufman)
> Subject: Re: [Callers] Beckets
> To: Caller's discussion list <callers at sharedweight.net>
> Message-ID: <20081212140316.GB32046 at sccs.swarthmore.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 08:17:57AM -0500, Will Loving wrote:
>>
>> The majority of beckets rotate left-flowing or clockwise (CW) but an
>> increasing number are being written and danced which flow to the
>> right or counter-clockwise (CCW). To setup for teaching a becket
>> dance, most callers will simply say, "take hands four and circle one
>> place to the left to becket formation" regardless of the direction
>> of flow.
>>
>> However, for a CCW dance, some callers will give the instruction to
>> "take hands four and circle one place to the right". Though this is
>> technically correct with regard to the flow of the dance it seems
>> that, at least to the dancers, it's not really necessary and they
>> sometimes scratch their heads about "circle to the right?".
>>
>
> I should think whether to tell people to circle one place to the right
> for a CCW dance would depend on how important it is to the dancers to
> be going the direction they thought they would be going when they
> lined up.
>
> In my experience, people who were dancing when there were more unequal
> turn dances want to know if they are a one or a two.  People who
> started more recently often don't care.  So what I would say would
> depend on the crowd.
>
>
> If you really want to start an argument, write an improper dance that
> progresses backwards and ask people who are the ones and who are the
> twos.
>
> Jeff
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: Digital signature
> URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/ 
> 20081212/4707801b/attachment-0001.pgp>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:15:12 -0500
> From: cbr at sccs.swarthmore.edu (Jeff Kaufman)
> Subject: [Callers] house party squares
> To: callers at sharedweight.net
> Message-ID: <20081212141512.GC32046 at sccs.swarthmore.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I'm wondering if anyone has any squares that work well for house
> parties?
>
> Background: I've called contras a good bit, primarily at swarthmore
> college, and sometimes find myself in a situation where there are
> people who want to dance, good music, and space for a square but not a
> contra.  Generally the dancers are more familiar with contra dance
> than square dance, perhaps even people who sit out squares when
> they're called at the weekly dances.
>
> When this has happened to me, I've ended up just trying to call
> something, making it up as I go, which has worked ok, but not really
> very well.  I can generally keep them dancing and keep calling at the
> right times, but the resulting dance isn't usually very interesting.
> So I was thinking that the best solution would be to memorize a few
> suitable square dances.
>
> Thinking about what suitable means.  Any standard contra figure is ok.
> Nothing that I would have to walk through (simple is better than
> boring).  Nothing that is too picky about the music (singing squares).
>
> Does anyone have suggestions?
>
> Jeff
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 189 bytes
> Desc: Digital signature
> URL: <http://www.sharedweight.net/pipermail/callers/attachments/ 
> 20081212/1063f94c/attachment-0001.pgp>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:39:25 -0500
> From: Will Loving <will at dedicationtechnologies.com>
> Subject: Re: [Callers] house party squares
> To: "Caller's discussion list <callers at sharedweight.net>"
> 	<callers at sharedweight.net>
> Message-ID: <C567EFDD.2F556%will at dedicationtechnologies.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="ISO-8859-1"
>
> Jeff,
>
> If you have room for a square, you probably have room for a  
> quadruplet or
> triplet. Some four-on-four contras can be modified into a  
> quadruplet, but
> there are a number of good quads out there.
>
> A fun triplet for experienced dancers is David Smukler's "David's  
> Triplet
> #5" which features a hey for six.
>
> http://www.davidsmukler.syracusecountrydancers.org/DSS.html#trip5
>
> For Quads I would suggest the dances below by Gary Roodman as well  
> as those
> in the back section of Larry Jenning's "Give and Take". Also see my  
> list
> posted here back in October of 20 dances for 5-10 dancers.
>
> Will Loving
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Square Line Special
> By Gary Roodman (From his book "Calculated Figures")
>
> Type: Contra
> Formation: Quadruplet
> Music: ?Swinging on a Gate? or any 32-bar contra dance tune, 4 times
> through.
>
> A1 -----------
> (8) Long lines, forward and back
> (8) Go forward again and pass through and turn alone
>
> A2 -----------
> (4) Take Right Hand with partner across, balance
> (4) (in your group of four) pull partner by the Right, neighbor by  
> the left
> (8) Swing the next (partner on the ends, neighbor for the centers)
> (End the swing forming a square)
>
> B1 -----------
> (8) Head couples Right & Left through
> (8) Head couples ladies Chain
>
> B2 -----------
> (8) Head couples lead to the right, circle left once
> (8) Sides arch, heads duck under, separate, around one
> (form lines to start the dance again, your original partner will be  
> across
> from you)
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Rise and Run
> By Gary Roodman
>
> Type: Contra
> Formation: Quadruplet Becket
> Music: ?My Wife?s a Wanton Wee Thing? (or any 32-bar contra dance  
> tune - 4X
> through)
>
> A1 -----------
> (8) Star Right 1X (both sets of four)
> (8) Middle four Star Left 1X
>
> A2 -----------
> (16) Partner balance and swing
>
> B1 -----------
> (8) ?1st couples? Right and left through on the Right diagonal,  
> courtesy
> turn
> (4) ?2nd couples? Right and left through on Left diagonal, and  
> immediately
> turn as a couple to the right and (4) progress cw 1 position around  
> the set
>
> B2 -----------
> (8) Women Chain
> (8) Women Chain
> (for a mixer, substitute N Swing for second chain, or R&L for first  
> chain)
>
>
> Notes: How about 4X through with same partner and then make a  
> change which
> will cause you to change partners for 4X more? e.g. B2 could have  
> women
> chain across to swing N, or R&L and then women chain
>
>
> on 12/12/08 9:15 AM, Jeff Kaufman at cbr at sccs.swarthmore.edu wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering if anyone has any squares that work well for house
>> parties?
>>
>> Background: I've called contras a good bit, primarily at swarthmore
>> college, and sometimes find myself in a situation where there are
>> people who want to dance, good music, and space for a square but  
>> not a
>> contra.  Generally the dancers are more familiar with contra dance
>> than square dance, perhaps even people who sit out squares when
>> they're called at the weekly dances.
>>
>> When this has happened to me, I've ended up just trying to call
>> something, making it up as I go, which has worked ok, but not really
>> very well.  I can generally keep them dancing and keep calling at the
>> right times, but the resulting dance isn't usually very interesting.
>> So I was thinking that the best solution would be to memorize a few
>> suitable square dances.
>>
>> Thinking about what suitable means.  Any standard contra figure is  
>> ok.
>> Nothing that I would have to walk through (simple is better than
>> boring).  Nothing that is too picky about the music (singing  
>> squares).
>>
>> Does anyone have suggestions?
>>
>> Jeff
>> _______________________________________________
>> Callers mailing list
>> Callers at sharedweight.net
>> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
>
> -- 
>
> William M. Loving
> Dedication Technologies, Inc.
> 7 Coach Lane
> Amherst, MA 01002-3304   USA
> will at dedicationtechnologies.com
> Tel: +1 413 253-7223   (GMT ?5)
> Fax: +1 206 202-0476
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Callers mailing list
> Callers at sharedweight.net
> http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers
>
>
> End of Callers Digest, Vol 52, Issue 6
> **************************************