This historic contra dance became one of my favorites shortly after first learning it about three years ago, and found an especially warm place in my heart once I began learning the history behind it! A few of my favorite aspects of this dance are as follows:
1. The opening "wave" step! So far as I know, this step is unique to Hull's Victory. The 1st couple does half a right hand turn, joining left hands with the 2nd couple to form a line of four; the line then does a balance forward and back, making a neat little wave pattern on the dance floor. The wave motion is repeated after a left hand turn on the ends and a right hand turn for the 1s in the center. This opening portion of the dance is a lot of fun to do; the forward motion corresponds perfectly to the energy of the music, propelling the turns around and giving a satisfying emphasis to the balance.
2. The buzz step swing! Just about every contra dance I have done includes at least one of these, so the swing is definitely not a defining characteristic of Hull's Victory. Still, a good steady swing can be a lot of fun, especially when paired with such sprightly music as is used for this dance!
3. Dancing it as a 1st couple! Now, in most English and contra dances the 1s are referred to as the "active couple", due to the slightly longer amount of time and/or the greater level of complexity given to the 1st position. However, I know of no other dance in which the 1st couple is given such a decided preference - in Hull's Victory, the 1s really do have all the fun! They turn, they swing, they go down and up the center, and participate in everything the 2s do as well. The 1s are in constant motion, even though the 2s are forced into idleness for half the dance!
Of course, this advantage is turned on its head whenever the 1st couple reaches the bottom end of the set, at which point the former 1s must turn and make their way back up the set as very inactive 2s - a fitting penance for having dominated the dance previously! The moral? If you're going to be selfish, do it all the way - make sure you get in at the very top of the line, and hope the music ends before you reach the bottom! ;)
The dance instructions for Hull's Victory were included on page 83 of Elias Howe's American Dancing Master, a guidebook to ballroom dancing that was published forty years after the Constitution encountered the Guerriere. The brief paragraph given to this dance does not contain much information, merely a listing of the steps with little to no indication of how much time should be given to each of them. Still, I love this paragraph because it describes the very dance that we still enjoy even a century and a half later! (As a related side note, the entire Dancing Master has been scanned and shared online; the beginning several pages especially make for an entertaining read!)
A useful set of precise dance calls can be found on the Hull's Victory page at Stately Steps. These instructions are presented in a much more orderly format, with the steps given in connection with the length of time allotted for each. Also, this page includes a video compilation of Hull's Victory being danced on several different occasions in various settings. To my mind, if you can not be at a dance, the next best thing is to watch well-recorded dancing videos!
Hope you enjoyed my informal, uninformative rambling... and have a great day!
Wednesday, August 20, 2014
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
Happy Hull's Victory Day!
Sure, you won't find it printed on your calendar; not many people will stop you on the street and wish you "pleasant dancing"; and I can't imagine that anyone will get a day off work in honor of the occasion. Still, it is Hull's Victory Day nonetheless - so have a happy one!
It has now been 202 years since the day on which the battle between the USS Constitution and the HMS Guerriere was fought; 202 years since Captain Isaac Hull and his crew proved their skill in battle; 202 years since the naval victory that gave heart to the Americans in the War of 1812. But you can read all about that here; no need for me to go over all the same details again, especially since this blog has so little material anyway. Something new must be posted in honor of the day... I have a few selections in the draft folder to choose from, but none of them are anything like completed at present. How about... oh, I know! Today you can have a poem, tomorrow a dance analysis, Thursday a music feature, and Friday another related post yet to be determined - a full week of Hull's Victory-themed posting! (All of you who know me are nodding your heads sarcastically at this point... no, really, I mean it this time!)
I first came across this poem a few years ago while reading The Patriot's Handbook, a compilation of patriotic songs, historic speeches, and notable documents from throughout America's history. At the time, I didn't think much about the poem - I just read it briefly and moved on. Once I actually learned about sea battle that inspired this poem, though, it quickly became a favorite of mine!
First Fruits in 1812
It has now been 202 years since the day on which the battle between the USS Constitution and the HMS Guerriere was fought; 202 years since Captain Isaac Hull and his crew proved their skill in battle; 202 years since the naval victory that gave heart to the Americans in the War of 1812. But you can read all about that here; no need for me to go over all the same details again, especially since this blog has so little material anyway. Something new must be posted in honor of the day... I have a few selections in the draft folder to choose from, but none of them are anything like completed at present. How about... oh, I know! Today you can have a poem, tomorrow a dance analysis, Thursday a music feature, and Friday another related post yet to be determined - a full week of Hull's Victory-themed posting! (All of you who know me are nodding your heads sarcastically at this point... no, really, I mean it this time!)
I first came across this poem a few years ago while reading The Patriot's Handbook, a compilation of patriotic songs, historic speeches, and notable documents from throughout America's history. At the time, I didn't think much about the poem - I just read it briefly and moved on. Once I actually learned about sea battle that inspired this poem, though, it quickly became a favorite of mine!
First Fruits in 1812
By Wallace Rice
What is that a-billowing there
Like a thunderhead in air?
Why should such a sight be whitening the seas;
That’s a Yankee man-o’-war,
And three things she’s seeking for:
For a prize, and for a battle, and a breeze.
When the war blew o’er the sea
Out went Hull and out went we
In the Constitution, looking for the foe;
But five British ships came down—
And we got to Boston-town
By a mighty narrow margin, you must know!
Captain Hull can’t fight their fleet,
But he fairly aches to meet
Quite the prettiest British ship of all there were;
So he stands again to sea
In the hope that on his lee
He’ll catch Dacres and his pretty Guerriere.
‘Tis an August afternoon
Not a day too late or soon,
When we raise a ship whose lettered mainsail reads:
All who meet me have a care,
I am England’s Guerriere;
So Hull gaily clears for action as he speeds.
Cheery bells had chanted five
On the happiest day alive
When we Yankees dance to quarters at his call;
While the British bang away
With their broadsides’ screech and bray;
But the Constitution never fires a ball.
We send up three times to ask
If we sha’n’t begin our task?
Captain Hull sends back each time the answer No;
Till to half a pistol shot
The two frigates he had brought,
Then he whispers, Lay along! And we let go.
Twice our broadside lights and lifts,
And the Briton, crippled, drifts
With her mizzen dangling hopeless at her poop;
Laughs a Yankee, She’s a brig!
Says our Captain, “That’s too big;
Try another, so we’ll have her for a sloop!”
We huzzah, and fire again,
Lay aboard of her like men,
And, like men, they beat us off, and try in turn;
But we drive bold Dacres back
With our muskets’ snap and crack
All the while our crashing broadsides boom and burn.
‘Tis but half an hour, bare,
When that pretty Guerriere
Not a stick calls hers aloft or hers alow,
Save the mizzen’s shattered mast,
Where her “meteor flag” is nailed fast
Till, a fallen star, we quench its ruddy glow.
Dacres, injured, o’er our side
Slowly bears his sword of pride,
Holds it out, as Hull stands there in his renown;
No, no! Says th’ American,
Never, from so brave a man:
But I see you’re wounded, let me help you down.
All that night we work in vain
Keeping her upon the main,
But we’ve hulled her far too often, and at last
In a blaze of fire there
Dies the pretty Guerriere;
While away we cheerly sail upon the blast.
Oh, the breeze that blows so free!
Oh, the prize beneath the sea!
Oh, the battle! Was there ever better won?
Still the happy Yankee cheers
Are a-ringing in our ears
From old Boston, glorying in what we’ve done.
What is that a-billowing there
Like a thunderhead in air?
Why should such a sight be whitening the seas?
That’s Old Ir’nsides, trim and taut,
And she’s found the things she sought:
Found a prize, a bully battle, and a breeze!
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
The Dancing and the Dreaming ~ a Viking love song
NOTICE: This post relies heavily on the story found within the movie How to Train Your Dragon 2, and no effort has been made to ensure its readability for those not familiar with HtTYD and HtTYD2. Those who have not seen both movies will not be able to fully appreciate the subject of this post, and those who read this post before watching HtTYD2 will lose a great deal of the impact of the featured scene when they do watch it. If you have not yet seen this excellent movie, it would be wise to do so before reading the remainder of this post. I highly recommend the movie. You need to see it. You will love it. Go watch it. Now. This post will still be here when you get back. :)
Ah, hello again. Have you seen it? Good. You may now continue reading. :)
I recently had the opportunity to watch How to Train Your Dragon 2 at the theater. Contrary to my expectations, it was not a disgrace to the first, and (unlike so many sequels) it did not act as a pathetic parasite to the success of the original; in fact, it far exceeded the first movie in several regards! Though there were many excellent portions of the story, one of the most beautiful scenes is the one in which Stoick and Valka (Hiccup's father and mother) are finally reunited after a separation of nearly twenty years.
To give a bit of the background story: twenty years before the events depicted in HtTYD2, Valka had been carried away by a dragon, leaving her husband and baby boy in Berk to mourn her loss. She was taken to a far-off location where she lived among the dragons, rescued the injured, observed them, made friends with them, and learned to appreciate their incredible capabilities. In all this time, Valka did not return to her home and family. Apparently she believed Stoick and the people of Berk to be incapable of seeing a need for peace, and thought that they would all just be better off without her.
Meanwhile, Stoick continued in his role as chief of Berk and raised his son Hiccup. In the events portrayed in HtTYD, Stoick went through a change of view that resulted in the peaceful incorporation of dragons into everyday life. He never forgot his beloved wife Val; though he believed her to be dead and had no hope of meeting her again, he cherished her memory and remembered her fondly.
At the beginning of this particular scene in How to Train Your Dragon 2, Stoick has made his way to the dragon sanctuary in order to find his son and take him back home to Berk. He has no thought of finding anyone here except Hiccup, and perhaps a villain or two. Valka, on the other hand, knows that Stoick is alive and well; furthermore, she can hear him coming around the corner and is expecting to meet him momentarily.
Valka begins in a position of defensive isolation, standing aloof in the center of the frozen cavern. She knows that she has wronged her husband by staying away from him for all these years. She realizes that she did not fulfill her role as a mother to their son. She expects Stoick to be bitter, angry, blustering, irate, questioning, resentful.
But what is Stoick's first action upon seeing his long-lost wife? He walks slowly towards her in amazement... gazes into her eyes with love and tenderness shining from his... gently touches her face, and whispers "you're as beautiful as on the day I lost you."
Val's face softens from defiance and fear to humility and peace, and a silent tear slides down her cheek as she realizes that she is finally where she belongs.
The next portion of the reunion scene takes place a few moments afterwards, in the warmer environment of a home-like room in which Valka is preparing a meal for her newly-arrived guests. Her cooking does not entirely succeed, as she is rather preoccupied by her happiness at suddenly being with Stoick again. He, meanwhile, is entirely oblivious to all but the sight of his beloved Val, so unexpectedly restored to him once more.
As though in a second courtship, Stoick softly whistles a tune for his bride. The melody is that of a Viking love song, one which they used to sing together many years before. Val pauses, stands still in recognition, and listens intently as her husband begins to sing their song to her.
"I'll swim and sail on savage seas/with ne'er a fear of drowning/And gladly ride the waves of life/if you will marry me.
No scorching sun nor freezing cold/will stop me on my journey/If you will promise me your heart -"
It is an enchanting tune and a beautiful song, complete with Viking-style expressions of love and devotion. Stoick's voice fades away; he is overcome by emotion, unable to continue. Valka completes the stanza in a tone of voice that seems to be remembering a distant dream, as she indicates that she still does and will "love him to eternity." Val continues the song with the maiden's reply to the declaration of love, now in a voice that is increasingly expressive of gladsome belonging:
"My dearest one, my darling dear/your mighty words astound me/But I've no need of mighty deeds/when I feel your arms around me."
Their mutual affection declared, Stoick and Val sing the next section of musical dialogue. Here, the man declares his desire to bestow beautiful things on his dear one and to protect her from all harm, while the maiden protests that she truly wants nothing more than to be with her love, always and forevermore.
With a change of key and increase of tempo, in a burst of joyous enthusiasm both Stoick and Val sing the final two verses in unison, smiling, spinning, laughing, and dancing all the while - "To love, to kiss, to sweetly hold/for the dancing and the dreaming/Through all life's toils and delights/I'll keep your love beside me. I'll swim and sail on savage seas/with ne'er a fear of drowning/And gladly ride the waves of life/if you will marry me!"
Upon the completion of their special song, Stoick asks Val to return to their home, to again be his bride, to share the remainder of their lives together. With her eyes full of joy (mingled somewhat with wonderment, her face expressing "can this indeed be true?"), she gladly accepts - and the reunited family begins their new life together!
I absolutely love this scene! It portrays the humbling of hearts, the healing of hurts, the rededication of a previously pledged commitment, and the restoration of a relationship that had been severed. It also depicts a beautiful romance between a husband and wife still thoroughly in love with and devoted to each other. It is not a scene to be commonly found in movies, which gives it all the more value.
I’ll swim and sail on savage seas
But I would bring you rings of gold
I’d even sing you poetry
And I would keep you from all harm
If you would stay beside me
And gladly ride the waves of life
If you will marry me!
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ah, hello again. Have you seen it? Good. You may now continue reading. :)
I recently had the opportunity to watch How to Train Your Dragon 2 at the theater. Contrary to my expectations, it was not a disgrace to the first, and (unlike so many sequels) it did not act as a pathetic parasite to the success of the original; in fact, it far exceeded the first movie in several regards! Though there were many excellent portions of the story, one of the most beautiful scenes is the one in which Stoick and Valka (Hiccup's father and mother) are finally reunited after a separation of nearly twenty years.
To give a bit of the background story: twenty years before the events depicted in HtTYD2, Valka had been carried away by a dragon, leaving her husband and baby boy in Berk to mourn her loss. She was taken to a far-off location where she lived among the dragons, rescued the injured, observed them, made friends with them, and learned to appreciate their incredible capabilities. In all this time, Valka did not return to her home and family. Apparently she believed Stoick and the people of Berk to be incapable of seeing a need for peace, and thought that they would all just be better off without her.
Meanwhile, Stoick continued in his role as chief of Berk and raised his son Hiccup. In the events portrayed in HtTYD, Stoick went through a change of view that resulted in the peaceful incorporation of dragons into everyday life. He never forgot his beloved wife Val; though he believed her to be dead and had no hope of meeting her again, he cherished her memory and remembered her fondly.
At the beginning of this particular scene in How to Train Your Dragon 2, Stoick has made his way to the dragon sanctuary in order to find his son and take him back home to Berk. He has no thought of finding anyone here except Hiccup, and perhaps a villain or two. Valka, on the other hand, knows that Stoick is alive and well; furthermore, she can hear him coming around the corner and is expecting to meet him momentarily.
Valka begins in a position of defensive isolation, standing aloof in the center of the frozen cavern. She knows that she has wronged her husband by staying away from him for all these years. She realizes that she did not fulfill her role as a mother to their son. She expects Stoick to be bitter, angry, blustering, irate, questioning, resentful.
But what is Stoick's first action upon seeing his long-lost wife? He walks slowly towards her in amazement... gazes into her eyes with love and tenderness shining from his... gently touches her face, and whispers "you're as beautiful as on the day I lost you."
Val's face softens from defiance and fear to humility and peace, and a silent tear slides down her cheek as she realizes that she is finally where she belongs.
The next portion of the reunion scene takes place a few moments afterwards, in the warmer environment of a home-like room in which Valka is preparing a meal for her newly-arrived guests. Her cooking does not entirely succeed, as she is rather preoccupied by her happiness at suddenly being with Stoick again. He, meanwhile, is entirely oblivious to all but the sight of his beloved Val, so unexpectedly restored to him once more.
As though in a second courtship, Stoick softly whistles a tune for his bride. The melody is that of a Viking love song, one which they used to sing together many years before. Val pauses, stands still in recognition, and listens intently as her husband begins to sing their song to her.
"I'll swim and sail on savage seas/with ne'er a fear of drowning/And gladly ride the waves of life/if you will marry me.
No scorching sun nor freezing cold/will stop me on my journey/If you will promise me your heart -"
It is an enchanting tune and a beautiful song, complete with Viking-style expressions of love and devotion. Stoick's voice fades away; he is overcome by emotion, unable to continue. Valka completes the stanza in a tone of voice that seems to be remembering a distant dream, as she indicates that she still does and will "love him to eternity." Val continues the song with the maiden's reply to the declaration of love, now in a voice that is increasingly expressive of gladsome belonging:
"My dearest one, my darling dear/your mighty words astound me/But I've no need of mighty deeds/when I feel your arms around me."
Their mutual affection declared, Stoick and Val sing the next section of musical dialogue. Here, the man declares his desire to bestow beautiful things on his dear one and to protect her from all harm, while the maiden protests that she truly wants nothing more than to be with her love, always and forevermore.
With a change of key and increase of tempo, in a burst of joyous enthusiasm both Stoick and Val sing the final two verses in unison, smiling, spinning, laughing, and dancing all the while - "To love, to kiss, to sweetly hold/for the dancing and the dreaming/Through all life's toils and delights/I'll keep your love beside me. I'll swim and sail on savage seas/with ne'er a fear of drowning/And gladly ride the waves of life/if you will marry me!"
Upon the completion of their special song, Stoick asks Val to return to their home, to again be his bride, to share the remainder of their lives together. With her eyes full of joy (mingled somewhat with wonderment, her face expressing "can this indeed be true?"), she gladly accepts - and the reunited family begins their new life together!
I absolutely love this scene! It portrays the humbling of hearts, the healing of hurts, the rededication of a previously pledged commitment, and the restoration of a relationship that had been severed. It also depicts a beautiful romance between a husband and wife still thoroughly in love with and devoted to each other. It is not a scene to be commonly found in movies, which gives it all the more value.
I'm not even going to attempt to analyze the music itself. It defies description such as in my power.
How can a single melody be so gently beautiful and thrillingly enthusiastic? The melody is simply captivating,
and the instruments on which it is played are absolutely delightful. You'll just have to listen to this one for yourself!
(Though of course you already have - assuming you've watched the movie!)
The "video" above will play Track 11 from the How to Train Your Dragon 2 soundtrack by John Powell,
appropriately titled "The Dancing and the Dreaming".
How can a single melody be so gently beautiful and thrillingly enthusiastic? The melody is simply captivating,
and the instruments on which it is played are absolutely delightful. You'll just have to listen to this one for yourself!
(Though of course you already have - assuming you've watched the movie!)
The "video" above will play Track 11 from the How to Train Your Dragon 2 soundtrack by John Powell,
appropriately titled "The Dancing and the Dreaming".
Lyrics are included below (minus Gobber's interruptions, hee hee);
Stoick's parts are in red, Val's in blue, and the duo in purple.
Stoick's parts are in red, Val's in blue, and the duo in purple.
With ne’er a fear of drowning
And gladly ride the waves of life
If you will marry me
No scorching sun nor freezing cold
Will stop me on my journey
If you will promise me your heart
And love me for eternity
My dearest one, my darling dear
My dearest one, my darling dear
Your mighty words astound me
But I’ve no need of mighty deeds
When I feel your arms around me
But I would bring you rings of gold
I’d even sing you poetry
And I would keep you from all harm
If you would stay beside me
I have no use for rings of gold
I care not for your poetry
I only want your hand to hold
I only want you near me
To love, to kiss, to sweetly hold
For the dancing and the dreaming
Through all life’s toils and delights
I’ll keep your love beside me
I’ll swim and sail on savage seas
With ne’er a fear of drowningAnd gladly ride the waves of life
If you will marry me!
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Reflections of Truth Part 2 ~ Discussing Discord
In continuation of the "reflections of truth" theme:
Towards the end of last week's post, in considering pieces of music that are severely discordant in tone, I asked whether such songs are capable of portraying reality, of reflecting truth, of glorifying God. My answer thus far to this is a qualified affirmative - by which I mean, yes, but only to a point and always within a specific context.
Let us take, for an example, the song From the Air by Laurie Anderson. This happens to be both the first and the only discordant song I can remember hearing. Though I have listened to it only once, it made a deep impression on me, such that if I had heard another of a similar style I surely would have remembered it.
This song had to do with the mechanical failure of an airplane, its rapid fall to the ground, and the impending doom of the passengers. It was strangely interesting in that it had two totally separate melody lines going on at the same time. Though the notes would line up quite nicely in vertical columns on a page of sheet music, anything like tonal harmony between the two was nonexistent. The clash of sounds is not easily describable. When layered with the disconnected, imperturbable voice of the narrator/captain, the effect was tremendous. The repeated conflicting notes got inside my head, impossible to be shut out, which was extremely tension producing; the relentless yet deathly calm voice was chilling, unnerving, and tied my stomach in knots; the mood of the piece was complete meaninglessness and despair; the entire song was thoroughly unsettling.
The really odd thing was just how mesmerizing this piece was, in spite of being so mentally disturbing. Listening to it was like being in a bad dream and groggily having to choose between waking in the early morning or settling back into sleep. On one hand, I wished for it to go away, wanted it to get out of my head, was going to skip to another song - anything to get the horrible noise to stop. On the other hand, there was a degree of fascination mixed with the fear. I wished to see the nightmare through in order to see the conclusion, thinking "surely it must make a turn for the better somewhere." I couldn't stand the song, but felt powerless to do anything about it. Thankfully, Dad switched the Pandora station, and for the remainder of the drive we listened to classical music with greatly renewed appreciation. :)
It is worth noting that From the Air had this unsettling effect on me even with the otherwise entirely cheerful environment. I was riding along in the car, on a beautiful sunny day, with my family in the car - how could anything be disturbing in a setting like that? Besides which, it wasn't as though I was a wee little one hearing it - I was eighteen years old, yet I was still about to implode or fall to pieces with the stress of listening to the thing! It really leaves me wondering... how in the world did it do that? Exactly what combination of musical intervals do you have to use for such an entirely unsettling sound? I really must find the sheet music for this song in order to analyze it effectively... then again, maybe not. :}
Now we come to the question. Can such discord accurately portray reality, reflect God's truth, and bring glory to Him?
I think that discordant songs do indeed portray a certain aspect of reality. For example, in From the Air, the mood being conveyed to the listener is one of anxiety, stress, and feeling "on edge". The message of the lyrics is one of hopelessness, meaninglessness, dispassionate fatalistic emptiness. These moods and messages are indeed a part of reality - many people feel and believe them their whole lives. However, people who are living in a world of despair and emptiness are doing so only because they do not know the freedom of a renewed life in Christ.
The thing is that we, as humans created in the image of God, were simply not made to live in despair. All people will go through periods of darkness in their lives, but those who know God will be set free by His light. Anxiety, fear, death, and severe tragedy do indeed exist in our world; yet, in the end, there is life after death, joy after mourning, healing after brokenness, restoration after desolation, rebuilding of relationship after separation. To present only the fallen side of things is to forget that there is a God who is mighty to save. To cut God out of the picture is to cut out the fullness and completion of reality. It is not a portrayal of the truth.
I do think that discordant songs can be used to effectively demonstrate the contrast between the earthly and the heavenly perspectives - to illustrate the dire situation of fallen people in their desperate condition of emptiness, then to look again to the fulfillment of a joyous life in a restored relationship with God. However, to remain in a world of darkness is neither edifying to one's self nor glorifying to God. Don't linger in the low places, don't wallow in sin, don't become enslaved to despair - always end with a return to God, who is the ultimate source of meaning, hope, life, truth, and beauty.
Final note: typically I would include the lyrics to a song at the end of its post. However, in this case I found them too distressing to include on my blog. Actually, there is nothing particularly wrong about the lyrics... it's not as though they contain profanity or inappropriate themes... it is just that I find them rather eerie, all things considered, and don't want to re-read them on my own page. A quick Google search should pull up the lyrics and song for you if you're interested.
Towards the end of last week's post, in considering pieces of music that are severely discordant in tone, I asked whether such songs are capable of portraying reality, of reflecting truth, of glorifying God. My answer thus far to this is a qualified affirmative - by which I mean, yes, but only to a point and always within a specific context.
Let us take, for an example, the song From the Air by Laurie Anderson. This happens to be both the first and the only discordant song I can remember hearing. Though I have listened to it only once, it made a deep impression on me, such that if I had heard another of a similar style I surely would have remembered it.
This song had to do with the mechanical failure of an airplane, its rapid fall to the ground, and the impending doom of the passengers. It was strangely interesting in that it had two totally separate melody lines going on at the same time. Though the notes would line up quite nicely in vertical columns on a page of sheet music, anything like tonal harmony between the two was nonexistent. The clash of sounds is not easily describable. When layered with the disconnected, imperturbable voice of the narrator/captain, the effect was tremendous. The repeated conflicting notes got inside my head, impossible to be shut out, which was extremely tension producing; the relentless yet deathly calm voice was chilling, unnerving, and tied my stomach in knots; the mood of the piece was complete meaninglessness and despair; the entire song was thoroughly unsettling.
The really odd thing was just how mesmerizing this piece was, in spite of being so mentally disturbing. Listening to it was like being in a bad dream and groggily having to choose between waking in the early morning or settling back into sleep. On one hand, I wished for it to go away, wanted it to get out of my head, was going to skip to another song - anything to get the horrible noise to stop. On the other hand, there was a degree of fascination mixed with the fear. I wished to see the nightmare through in order to see the conclusion, thinking "surely it must make a turn for the better somewhere." I couldn't stand the song, but felt powerless to do anything about it. Thankfully, Dad switched the Pandora station, and for the remainder of the drive we listened to classical music with greatly renewed appreciation. :)
It is worth noting that From the Air had this unsettling effect on me even with the otherwise entirely cheerful environment. I was riding along in the car, on a beautiful sunny day, with my family in the car - how could anything be disturbing in a setting like that? Besides which, it wasn't as though I was a wee little one hearing it - I was eighteen years old, yet I was still about to implode or fall to pieces with the stress of listening to the thing! It really leaves me wondering... how in the world did it do that? Exactly what combination of musical intervals do you have to use for such an entirely unsettling sound? I really must find the sheet music for this song in order to analyze it effectively... then again, maybe not. :}
Now we come to the question. Can such discord accurately portray reality, reflect God's truth, and bring glory to Him?
I think that discordant songs do indeed portray a certain aspect of reality. For example, in From the Air, the mood being conveyed to the listener is one of anxiety, stress, and feeling "on edge". The message of the lyrics is one of hopelessness, meaninglessness, dispassionate fatalistic emptiness. These moods and messages are indeed a part of reality - many people feel and believe them their whole lives. However, people who are living in a world of despair and emptiness are doing so only because they do not know the freedom of a renewed life in Christ.
The thing is that we, as humans created in the image of God, were simply not made to live in despair. All people will go through periods of darkness in their lives, but those who know God will be set free by His light. Anxiety, fear, death, and severe tragedy do indeed exist in our world; yet, in the end, there is life after death, joy after mourning, healing after brokenness, restoration after desolation, rebuilding of relationship after separation. To present only the fallen side of things is to forget that there is a God who is mighty to save. To cut God out of the picture is to cut out the fullness and completion of reality. It is not a portrayal of the truth.
I do think that discordant songs can be used to effectively demonstrate the contrast between the earthly and the heavenly perspectives - to illustrate the dire situation of fallen people in their desperate condition of emptiness, then to look again to the fulfillment of a joyous life in a restored relationship with God. However, to remain in a world of darkness is neither edifying to one's self nor glorifying to God. Don't linger in the low places, don't wallow in sin, don't become enslaved to despair - always end with a return to God, who is the ultimate source of meaning, hope, life, truth, and beauty.
"Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just,
whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable,
if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things."
- Philippians 4:8
Final note: typically I would include the lyrics to a song at the end of its post. However, in this case I found them too distressing to include on my blog. Actually, there is nothing particularly wrong about the lyrics... it's not as though they contain profanity or inappropriate themes... it is just that I find them rather eerie, all things considered, and don't want to re-read them on my own page. A quick Google search should pull up the lyrics and song for you if you're interested.
Tuesday, July 8, 2014
Reflections of Truth
Wow. It's already been 367 days since the historic evening on which I first published a blog post. Time does fly!
At least I have something to show for it... six followers (including me), nine comments (including mine),
and sixteen posts (including this one and those in the draft stage). Whoo-hoo! ;)
Well, guess it's about time I started churning out some worthwhile material to fill this corner of the internet... here goes!
Recently I was wondering, "what exactly is the value of music? of dancing? of any art form at all? Sure, they're highly enjoyable, and I certainly love them - but aren't they pretty pointless, except as a form of entertainment? Is there any real value to be found in either?"
This question may seem superfluous to some, viewing it as an unnecessary philosophical discussion without any real bearing on the subject at hand; however, I think it is an important question worthy of consideration, as the answer is essential to how we create, appreciate, and think about art of any kind. It is so essential, in fact, that since beginning to think about this subject, I have been unable to get any of my other posts out of draft without touching on this topic at least briefly.
In an attempt to answer the underlying question of "what is the value of art," I scribbled down a train of thought consisting of a series of statements, queries, and responses, shown in part as follows:
Art conveys emotion, thought, and meaning - it is an expression of a worldview.
The expression of a right worldview is a reflection of the truth.
Knowledge of the truth comes from and through God, who is the Author and Source of all truth.
Reflecting and spreading God's truth is glorifying to Him.
Therefore, art which expresses and shares God's truth is glorifying to Him.
Such art is indeed important!
Having convinced myself of the value of God-honoring art, I continued the train of thought into the specific field of music:
Is all music capable of reflecting truth? For example, can instrumentals present a given worldview, or do they require the addition of the written, the spoken, and/or the seen?
Songs are poetry and melody combined - two art forms together. Thus, it seems that music with words can convey meaning and reflect truth more directly, more pointedly, and more fully than that without.
However, music without words can still reflect truth by presenting order, design, intentionality, complexity, and beauty - in other words, by presenting reality from a right perspective.
Now, some pieces of music are written with a haphazard, disorganized style of sound - can these pieces accurately portray reality?
Others pieces are severely discordant in tone - can they reflect truth?
Many songs have magnificent melodies with excellently-orchestrated harmonies, yet the lyrics are expressive of worldviews that are in direct opposition to the truth of the Lord. Can a Christian gain anything from such songs?
While I do not claim to have the definitive authoritative answers to any of these questions, I do have many thoughts on them, and will be devoting the next several posts to more detailed investigations along these lines.
Have a joyous day!
~Zoë
At least I have something to show for it... six followers (including me), nine comments (including mine),
and sixteen posts (including this one and those in the draft stage). Whoo-hoo! ;)
Well, guess it's about time I started churning out some worthwhile material to fill this corner of the internet... here goes!
Recently I was wondering, "what exactly is the value of music? of dancing? of any art form at all? Sure, they're highly enjoyable, and I certainly love them - but aren't they pretty pointless, except as a form of entertainment? Is there any real value to be found in either?"
This question may seem superfluous to some, viewing it as an unnecessary philosophical discussion without any real bearing on the subject at hand; however, I think it is an important question worthy of consideration, as the answer is essential to how we create, appreciate, and think about art of any kind. It is so essential, in fact, that since beginning to think about this subject, I have been unable to get any of my other posts out of draft without touching on this topic at least briefly.
In an attempt to answer the underlying question of "what is the value of art," I scribbled down a train of thought consisting of a series of statements, queries, and responses, shown in part as follows:
Art conveys emotion, thought, and meaning - it is an expression of a worldview.
The expression of a right worldview is a reflection of the truth.
Knowledge of the truth comes from and through God, who is the Author and Source of all truth.
Reflecting and spreading God's truth is glorifying to Him.
Therefore, art which expresses and shares God's truth is glorifying to Him.
Such art is indeed important!
Having convinced myself of the value of God-honoring art, I continued the train of thought into the specific field of music:
Is all music capable of reflecting truth? For example, can instrumentals present a given worldview, or do they require the addition of the written, the spoken, and/or the seen?
Songs are poetry and melody combined - two art forms together. Thus, it seems that music with words can convey meaning and reflect truth more directly, more pointedly, and more fully than that without.
However, music without words can still reflect truth by presenting order, design, intentionality, complexity, and beauty - in other words, by presenting reality from a right perspective.
Now, some pieces of music are written with a haphazard, disorganized style of sound - can these pieces accurately portray reality?
Others pieces are severely discordant in tone - can they reflect truth?
Many songs have magnificent melodies with excellently-orchestrated harmonies, yet the lyrics are expressive of worldviews that are in direct opposition to the truth of the Lord. Can a Christian gain anything from such songs?
While I do not claim to have the definitive authoritative answers to any of these questions, I do have many thoughts on them, and will be devoting the next several posts to more detailed investigations along these lines.
Have a joyous day!
~Zoë
Tuesday, June 17, 2014
Flowers of Edinburgh - the Expanded Edition
In last week's dance analysis post, as you may remember, I wrote of the utter boringness of Flowers of Edinburgh. I found fault with the severely limited number of steps , the all-too-easy and predictable layout of the steps, and the complete impossibility of carrying on a conversation while dancing it. I also mentioned that I was experimenting with expanding on the basic theme of the dance to give it some degree of challenge, making it worthwhile as a mind puzzle if not as an opportunity for socializing. The spring of inspiration has been drained, the drawing board has been filled, the possibilities have been explored. Having done all I can for the time being, I present for your evaluation and revision, Flowers of Edinburgh - the Expanded Edition! (Note: not all of the information given in this post is absolutely necessary. However, most of it is relevant.)
Flowers of Edinburgh - the Expanded Edition
Dance formation: triple minor longways
Music: 2/4 timing, Major key
A1: 1st couple skip a figure eight down through the 2nd and 3rd couples
A2: 3rd couple skip a figure eight up through the 2nd and 1st couples
B1: 2nd couple heys for three with other couples, 2nd lady up and 2nd man down
B2: While all two hand turning, perform a pousette progression
The goal in rewriting this dance was to add a level of difficulty and a layer of interest to a rather insipid and insignificant dance. Having recently been made aware of the triple minor formation, I immediately selected that as the beginning point for the expansion. After all, the more people there are involved, the more people there are needing to be aware of what's going on and performing their part!
The beginning of this variation is fairly similar to that of the original in that both begin with figure eights. However, while the original starts with only one person at a time doing the figure eight, in this version everything is done with at least two people at a time. The first couple jumps right in to the figure eight together, crossing in the middle with the lady going first as usual. They separate; the lady passes the 3rd man by the right shoulder, goes around the back of both men, and passes the 2nd man on his left to meet her partner and cross in the middle again before completing the figure eight on the ladies' side and returning to her original place. Meanwhile, the 1st man is doing the same thing, with a few minor differences due to his coming from the opposite side.
In the second part of the A music, the 3rd couple skips the same type of figure eight up through the group - crossing in the middle, looping around one side, crossing again, and looping around their own side to end in place.
The beginning of the B music marks a slight change; the 2nd couple, rather than doing the same thing the others have done, instead begin two separate hey for threes. These are essentially expanded figure eights themselves, and thus are entirely in keeping with the style of the original dance. As said before, the 2nd lady skips up and passes the 1st man by the left shoulder to begin her hey for three with the 1st couple; the 2nd man does likewise, moving down and passing the 3rd lady by the left to start off his hey for three with the 3rd couple. With the heys completed, everyone ends in their home place.
For the all-important progression, everyone will begin by taking both hands with their partner and two hand turning to the right (clockwise). The 1st and 2nd couples will change places counterclockwise, still two hand turning, moving in opposite directions (1st couple to the man's side, 2nd to the lady's) in order to avoid collisions; meanwhile, the 3rd couple may two hand turn in place. With the 2nd couple in their progressed position, they merely two hand turn in place while the 1st and 3rd couples make their exchange. This is done in a similar manner to the first, except that this time the movement will be clockwise, with the 1st couple heading to the lady's side and the 3rd moving to the man's. This entire portion will resemble the sort of pousette in the "heddle" portion of the Danish dance Weaving. As I do not know what this move is properly titled, I am calling it a pousette progression.
Clear as mud, no? :)
Now, with regards to the ends. This is where things get tricky, and I'm going to admit right away that I am fairly lost in this area. Having danced only one triple minor thus far, I do not have enough experience to know the following for sure, but I believe that most (if not all) triple minors have the 1s progress down only one place, not two. This means that the 2s and 3s must switch roles each round. I myself find this aspect rather difficult to keep track of, and even slightly irritating at times. Therefore, I wanted to write this version in such a way that the 2s will remain 2s and the 3s will remain 3s all the way up the set. This has been accomplished by the pousette progression. However, this arrangement does bring up another issue: what about the people who are out on the ends?
Supposing we start with nine couples, there will be three sets dancing for the first round. The 1s all progress down two places, leaving one 1st couple out at the bottom and a 2 and 3 out at the top. This is fine; it is to be expected. On the second round, we have two sets dancing while the three aforementioned couples are catching their breath or chatting briefly or something of that sort. All is well. The 1s progress down two places again, leaving two couples out at the bottom - but now there are four couples out at the top. Obviously, three of these couples will be able to begin dancing for the third round, but it will not be the three closest to the top. The couple that was previously the 3rd will enter as a 1st, leaving the couple at the top (formerly a 2) to wait for a second round of the music before joining in again. This is not necessarily a problem, but could potentially lead to some confusion, since the common expectation is to wait out one round before jumping right back in again. Now, then, there are two sets dancing the third round; the 1s progress down two places, sending a 1st couple to join the two former 1s at the bottom, thus completing their set, and sending a 2 and a 3 to the top to complete the set of the former 2. All three sets are now dancing the fourth round, as any mathematician (or dancer!) would expect!
Now, this is going to sound really odd... but... even though I've just written this modified dance... I've already thought of an embellishment. :) It occurred to me, why have the groups of two couples out at the top just stand there? If we're going to complicate things, why not go all the way? So, I wrote up a plan for what could be done if the inactive foursome is desirous of still more motion! It is essentially irrelevant to the workings of the remainder of the dance, and thus is optional - to do it or not is determined by the foursome themselves.
A1: 1st couple skips a figure eight down through the 2nd couple, ending in place
A2: 2nd couple skips a figure eight up through the 1st couple, ending in place
B1: Beginning with partner, four changes of a circular hey (rights and lefts without hands)
B2: Couples two hand turn around each other counterclockwise, ending in place
When done this way, I suppose the dance would be called Flowers of Edinburgh - the Extended Expanded Edition!
So - what do you think? Is this an improvement over the original Flowers of Edinburgh? Do you have ideas on how this could be further altered to make it still better? Please comment with feedback - I'd love to hear it!
Also, if any of you wish to try this thing out and see if it actually works with real people, that would be great! Thus far all the testing has been on paper, and I'm interested in finding out if it's actually doable! :)
Finally, for the sake of including a picture of some sort - and because I myself am fond of "behind the scenes" sorts of things - here's the "drawing board" paper I wrote up while arranging this dance. Like nearly everything I write, it is in extremely small print and far too wordy... :)
Flowers of Edinburgh - the Expanded Edition
Dance formation: triple minor longways
Music: 2/4 timing, Major key
A1: 1st couple skip a figure eight down through the 2nd and 3rd couples
A2: 3rd couple skip a figure eight up through the 2nd and 1st couples
B1: 2nd couple heys for three with other couples, 2nd lady up and 2nd man down
B2: While all two hand turning, perform a pousette progression
The goal in rewriting this dance was to add a level of difficulty and a layer of interest to a rather insipid and insignificant dance. Having recently been made aware of the triple minor formation, I immediately selected that as the beginning point for the expansion. After all, the more people there are involved, the more people there are needing to be aware of what's going on and performing their part!
The beginning of this variation is fairly similar to that of the original in that both begin with figure eights. However, while the original starts with only one person at a time doing the figure eight, in this version everything is done with at least two people at a time. The first couple jumps right in to the figure eight together, crossing in the middle with the lady going first as usual. They separate; the lady passes the 3rd man by the right shoulder, goes around the back of both men, and passes the 2nd man on his left to meet her partner and cross in the middle again before completing the figure eight on the ladies' side and returning to her original place. Meanwhile, the 1st man is doing the same thing, with a few minor differences due to his coming from the opposite side.
In the second part of the A music, the 3rd couple skips the same type of figure eight up through the group - crossing in the middle, looping around one side, crossing again, and looping around their own side to end in place.
The beginning of the B music marks a slight change; the 2nd couple, rather than doing the same thing the others have done, instead begin two separate hey for threes. These are essentially expanded figure eights themselves, and thus are entirely in keeping with the style of the original dance. As said before, the 2nd lady skips up and passes the 1st man by the left shoulder to begin her hey for three with the 1st couple; the 2nd man does likewise, moving down and passing the 3rd lady by the left to start off his hey for three with the 3rd couple. With the heys completed, everyone ends in their home place.
For the all-important progression, everyone will begin by taking both hands with their partner and two hand turning to the right (clockwise). The 1st and 2nd couples will change places counterclockwise, still two hand turning, moving in opposite directions (1st couple to the man's side, 2nd to the lady's) in order to avoid collisions; meanwhile, the 3rd couple may two hand turn in place. With the 2nd couple in their progressed position, they merely two hand turn in place while the 1st and 3rd couples make their exchange. This is done in a similar manner to the first, except that this time the movement will be clockwise, with the 1st couple heading to the lady's side and the 3rd moving to the man's. This entire portion will resemble the sort of pousette in the "heddle" portion of the Danish dance Weaving. As I do not know what this move is properly titled, I am calling it a pousette progression.
Clear as mud, no? :)
Now, with regards to the ends. This is where things get tricky, and I'm going to admit right away that I am fairly lost in this area. Having danced only one triple minor thus far, I do not have enough experience to know the following for sure, but I believe that most (if not all) triple minors have the 1s progress down only one place, not two. This means that the 2s and 3s must switch roles each round. I myself find this aspect rather difficult to keep track of, and even slightly irritating at times. Therefore, I wanted to write this version in such a way that the 2s will remain 2s and the 3s will remain 3s all the way up the set. This has been accomplished by the pousette progression. However, this arrangement does bring up another issue: what about the people who are out on the ends?
Supposing we start with nine couples, there will be three sets dancing for the first round. The 1s all progress down two places, leaving one 1st couple out at the bottom and a 2 and 3 out at the top. This is fine; it is to be expected. On the second round, we have two sets dancing while the three aforementioned couples are catching their breath or chatting briefly or something of that sort. All is well. The 1s progress down two places again, leaving two couples out at the bottom - but now there are four couples out at the top. Obviously, three of these couples will be able to begin dancing for the third round, but it will not be the three closest to the top. The couple that was previously the 3rd will enter as a 1st, leaving the couple at the top (formerly a 2) to wait for a second round of the music before joining in again. This is not necessarily a problem, but could potentially lead to some confusion, since the common expectation is to wait out one round before jumping right back in again. Now, then, there are two sets dancing the third round; the 1s progress down two places, sending a 1st couple to join the two former 1s at the bottom, thus completing their set, and sending a 2 and a 3 to the top to complete the set of the former 2. All three sets are now dancing the fourth round, as any mathematician (or dancer!) would expect!
Now, this is going to sound really odd... but... even though I've just written this modified dance... I've already thought of an embellishment. :) It occurred to me, why have the groups of two couples out at the top just stand there? If we're going to complicate things, why not go all the way? So, I wrote up a plan for what could be done if the inactive foursome is desirous of still more motion! It is essentially irrelevant to the workings of the remainder of the dance, and thus is optional - to do it or not is determined by the foursome themselves.
A1: 1st couple skips a figure eight down through the 2nd couple, ending in place
A2: 2nd couple skips a figure eight up through the 1st couple, ending in place
B1: Beginning with partner, four changes of a circular hey (rights and lefts without hands)
B2: Couples two hand turn around each other counterclockwise, ending in place
When done this way, I suppose the dance would be called Flowers of Edinburgh - the Extended Expanded Edition!
So - what do you think? Is this an improvement over the original Flowers of Edinburgh? Do you have ideas on how this could be further altered to make it still better? Please comment with feedback - I'd love to hear it!
Also, if any of you wish to try this thing out and see if it actually works with real people, that would be great! Thus far all the testing has been on paper, and I'm interested in finding out if it's actually doable! :)
Finally, for the sake of including a picture of some sort - and because I myself am fond of "behind the scenes" sorts of things - here's the "drawing board" paper I wrote up while arranging this dance. Like nearly everything I write, it is in extremely small print and far too wordy... :)
These little 8-by-5-inch pages don't even take into account the computation involved for the whole "what happens on the ends" issue, which was only resolved by drawing several hundred little figures in progression diagrams all over a 17-by-21-inch sheet of paper! :)
Thursday, June 12, 2014
A Collection of Critiques
A few months ago, several members of our family participated in a thoroughly pleasant evening of English Country Dancing with a room full of friends and acquaintances. Typically what happens after such an event is that I go home and write up half a dozen pages concerning said event in my journal. These pages are usually lists and descriptions of who was in attendance, which dances were done, what interesting conversations were had, what new things were learned, etc., etc. However, the journal entries pertaining to that particular evening in April, while including portions along those themes, took on a rather different character from the standard. This time, my overview was focused primarily on the composition of the dances we had done that evening - measuring the enjoyableness of some as compared to others, considering the aspects of each, and drawing conclusions as to what contributes to a well written dance. This post is basically an extended version of the dance analysis I began that evening.
(journal excerpts and dance titles in italics)
The first dance of the evening was The Circassian Circle, which is an excellent dance for starting with, as it gets everybody going with simple steps and a highly adjustable activity level - a perfect warm up! Being a mixer, it also allows for the greeting of many people within a short amount of time, which is another desirable quality in a first dance of any event.
Up next was Flowers of Edinburgh, the ultimate dance for all those who love skipping in figure eights. :)
It was somewhere around the middle of the dance when it struck me just how BORING Flowers of Edinburgh is - at least for one who has been doing it for three years (or somewhere thereabouts) - and I began wondering how it might be elaborated on to make it more interesting. So far I have been considering rewriting it as a triple minor, either elaborating the figure eights somehow or using a mirrored hey somewhere. It will take some more thought and a bit of scribbling little "proof of concept" illustrations, but surely something could be done...
It is my firm belief that if it is not possible to carry on a conversation with one's partner during a dance, that dance had better have really neat steps and at least some degree of challenge to it! Flowers of Edinburgh only uses two steps (figure eights and two-hand turns), yet somehow manages to completely block out the possibility of having a connected dialogue with one's partner - or with anyone else, for that matter!
Though I have not come up with a way to fix the conversation block without abandoning the character of the dance altogether, I have been experimenting with expanding on the basic theme to make the dance at least somewhat more challenging. Once the layout is solidified, perhaps I'll post the calls here for your review and further revision.
Yellow Stockings was next, if I remember correctly. Now here is a dance that was just not well thought out! I'm all for a balance of partner/neighbor/corner interaction, but this one just doesn't have a balance - scarcely even a mixture! This is a dance for the corners, and no mistake! (Though that is a mistake, and a major one...)
Supposing you are the second lady. You two-hand turn your corner for twelve counts, watch your partner two-hand turn your neighbor for twelve, stand still for another interval of the same duration, and finish out with rights and lefts. In the full course of the dance, you only interact with your partner for six counts! Yes, the first couple has twice that, due to the six counts allotted to the brief sashay down and up... but really! It is ridiculous to go to the effort of finding a partner, lining up in the longways sets, taking hands four, etc., etc., only to spend the greater part of the time with a bunch of corners! Dances are usually written so that one actually gets to do something with the person they asked... I can't imagine why this one wasn't!
The best part of Yellow Stockings is undoubtedly the music. Ah, how I love it! I still think it would be neat to dance The Hole in the Wall to this recording. Totally different in feel, of course... but neat!
Then there was Bare Necessities - I love that dance! Mainly for the music, of course... :) The dance itself is flowing and elegant, and is in the less-than-usual set-up of three couples in a circle; also, though the steps are fairly common, the progression is interesting and requires a bit of thought and good timing to execute well.
One dancer in our set of six remarked that Bare Necessities would look nice from above - this threw me into a whole new strain of dance analysis! At first I thought, "leave it to a videographer to talk about a dance in terms of what it would look like in a top-down shot!" Immediately afterwards, however, I began to realize just how right he was in this assessment. A star for three? Grand rights and lefts ending in a twirl? Waltzing? A gypsy once and a half around, and a graceful step backwards for a starburst progression? Of course! What could possibly be better for an aerial view? He was absolutely right in his observation! Still, I must admit that this thought would never have come to me... my thoughts are usually elsewhere... for example, at the moment in question I myself was overwhelmed by the beauty of the swelling strings in the recording; indeed, so bursting with delight was I that, in a rare expression of feeling, I came close to smiling!
Juice of Barley... this one, I think, would not look good from above. It certainly didn't look nice from the top of the line when we made it there - it was so lopsided-looking during the "weave through" portions! Everybody bunched over on one side, people having to turn sideways in an effort to not collide with the people they were going between... also, the lines themselves weren't straight. Ugh.
Still, the music was great! One of the finest improvised renditions by Bare Necessities, though perhaps not one of their crispest recordings.
Later in the evening we danced Auretti's Dutch Skipper, another longways for as many as will in 6/8 timing. This dance is fairly basic, by which I mean there is nothing extraordinary or surprising about it. As such, however, it provides a good illustration of the "typical" English Country Dance.
The first couple steps down the set, then casts up to place for a two hand turn. This sequence is then performed by the second couple from the opposite direction. Next, there is a two hand turn for the first corners, followed by the same for the second. Partners face again, maintaining friendly eye contact for the set twice, and the round is completed with three changes of a circular hey to progress. All the while, everyone is moving in time with the calmly joyful music so proficiently performed by Bare Necessities on piano, violin, and flute. The result is a thoroughly pleasing dancing experience!
An interesting segment of the evening came when we all attempted to learn The Young Widow, a longways dance in triple minor formation - sets of three couples down the line as opposed to the more typical sets of two. Since none of us were very familiar with this formation (and some of us not at all!), it took awhile to figure out what exactly was supposed to happen and make it actually work out with some measure of style. In the end, everything worked out.
The final two dance experiences of the evening were dancing The Scottish and beginning to learn The Laendler! The former was thoroughly delightful, as always, and the latter only somewhat less so because I had no idea what I was doing! Ah well... both were excellent!
Though I've been harsh on many of the dances we did that evening, let me hasten to say that it truly was a delightful time - indeed, 'twas one of the top three dance events I've ever attended! The conversations were pleasant, the people-watching was entertaining, and the dancing was grand! I just happen to like picking things apart, and thought I'd share some of my opinionated analyses. :)
(journal excerpts and dance titles in italics)
The first dance of the evening was The Circassian Circle, which is an excellent dance for starting with, as it gets everybody going with simple steps and a highly adjustable activity level - a perfect warm up! Being a mixer, it also allows for the greeting of many people within a short amount of time, which is another desirable quality in a first dance of any event.
Up next was Flowers of Edinburgh, the ultimate dance for all those who love skipping in figure eights. :)
It was somewhere around the middle of the dance when it struck me just how BORING Flowers of Edinburgh is - at least for one who has been doing it for three years (or somewhere thereabouts) - and I began wondering how it might be elaborated on to make it more interesting. So far I have been considering rewriting it as a triple minor, either elaborating the figure eights somehow or using a mirrored hey somewhere. It will take some more thought and a bit of scribbling little "proof of concept" illustrations, but surely something could be done...
It is my firm belief that if it is not possible to carry on a conversation with one's partner during a dance, that dance had better have really neat steps and at least some degree of challenge to it! Flowers of Edinburgh only uses two steps (figure eights and two-hand turns), yet somehow manages to completely block out the possibility of having a connected dialogue with one's partner - or with anyone else, for that matter!
Though I have not come up with a way to fix the conversation block without abandoning the character of the dance altogether, I have been experimenting with expanding on the basic theme to make the dance at least somewhat more challenging. Once the layout is solidified, perhaps I'll post the calls here for your review and further revision.
Yellow Stockings was next, if I remember correctly. Now here is a dance that was just not well thought out! I'm all for a balance of partner/neighbor/corner interaction, but this one just doesn't have a balance - scarcely even a mixture! This is a dance for the corners, and no mistake! (Though that is a mistake, and a major one...)
Supposing you are the second lady. You two-hand turn your corner for twelve counts, watch your partner two-hand turn your neighbor for twelve, stand still for another interval of the same duration, and finish out with rights and lefts. In the full course of the dance, you only interact with your partner for six counts! Yes, the first couple has twice that, due to the six counts allotted to the brief sashay down and up... but really! It is ridiculous to go to the effort of finding a partner, lining up in the longways sets, taking hands four, etc., etc., only to spend the greater part of the time with a bunch of corners! Dances are usually written so that one actually gets to do something with the person they asked... I can't imagine why this one wasn't!
The best part of Yellow Stockings is undoubtedly the music. Ah, how I love it! I still think it would be neat to dance The Hole in the Wall to this recording. Totally different in feel, of course... but neat!
Then there was Bare Necessities - I love that dance! Mainly for the music, of course... :) The dance itself is flowing and elegant, and is in the less-than-usual set-up of three couples in a circle; also, though the steps are fairly common, the progression is interesting and requires a bit of thought and good timing to execute well.
One dancer in our set of six remarked that Bare Necessities would look nice from above - this threw me into a whole new strain of dance analysis! At first I thought, "leave it to a videographer to talk about a dance in terms of what it would look like in a top-down shot!" Immediately afterwards, however, I began to realize just how right he was in this assessment. A star for three? Grand rights and lefts ending in a twirl? Waltzing? A gypsy once and a half around, and a graceful step backwards for a starburst progression? Of course! What could possibly be better for an aerial view? He was absolutely right in his observation! Still, I must admit that this thought would never have come to me... my thoughts are usually elsewhere... for example, at the moment in question I myself was overwhelmed by the beauty of the swelling strings in the recording; indeed, so bursting with delight was I that, in a rare expression of feeling, I came close to smiling!
Juice of Barley... this one, I think, would not look good from above. It certainly didn't look nice from the top of the line when we made it there - it was so lopsided-looking during the "weave through" portions! Everybody bunched over on one side, people having to turn sideways in an effort to not collide with the people they were going between... also, the lines themselves weren't straight. Ugh.
Still, the music was great! One of the finest improvised renditions by Bare Necessities, though perhaps not one of their crispest recordings.
Later in the evening we danced Auretti's Dutch Skipper, another longways for as many as will in 6/8 timing. This dance is fairly basic, by which I mean there is nothing extraordinary or surprising about it. As such, however, it provides a good illustration of the "typical" English Country Dance.
The first couple steps down the set, then casts up to place for a two hand turn. This sequence is then performed by the second couple from the opposite direction. Next, there is a two hand turn for the first corners, followed by the same for the second. Partners face again, maintaining friendly eye contact for the set twice, and the round is completed with three changes of a circular hey to progress. All the while, everyone is moving in time with the calmly joyful music so proficiently performed by Bare Necessities on piano, violin, and flute. The result is a thoroughly pleasing dancing experience!
An interesting segment of the evening came when we all attempted to learn The Young Widow, a longways dance in triple minor formation - sets of three couples down the line as opposed to the more typical sets of two. Since none of us were very familiar with this formation (and some of us not at all!), it took awhile to figure out what exactly was supposed to happen and make it actually work out with some measure of style. In the end, everything worked out.
The final two dance experiences of the evening were dancing The Scottish and beginning to learn The Laendler! The former was thoroughly delightful, as always, and the latter only somewhat less so because I had no idea what I was doing! Ah well... both were excellent!
Though I've been harsh on many of the dances we did that evening, let me hasten to say that it truly was a delightful time - indeed, 'twas one of the top three dance events I've ever attended! The conversations were pleasant, the people-watching was entertaining, and the dancing was grand! I just happen to like picking things apart, and thought I'd share some of my opinionated analyses. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)