The top drawing here, is a drawing of a double figure of 8, as seen from inside my head. You can see why I think of this as a "train set you got for Christmas".
The second drawing is one that was sent to me later by Chrystal, of a double figure of 8, as seen from inside her head. Read the comments section for more about these pictures. Basically, I think Chrystal's wins, so the following comments will serve merely as a whimsical historical perspective on the issue, but which helped me understand a lot.In my picture, you can see that no one walks around anyone because there is no one standing inside the loops. Instead, everyone walks the same track, starting from different points on the track. Counterintuitive though it is when you're standing on the floor getting ready to start the move, everyone walks around the track in the same direction.
Theoretically, you could have four little train engines, all chugging around the track, one after the other, cheerfully avoiding each other so long as they observe one simple rule: "ladies first".
It is easy to see how you teach where the train crossing is - first corners and second corners merely point at each other, arms extended, and it lays out exactly where the track crosses. Harder to see is the part of the track which curves outside the set. Would it make sense to lay down some sort of token (a shoe, perhaps? or a plate of cookies?) between man 1 and man 2, and between lady 1 and lady 2, for the dancers to walk around as the upper couple "casts" around the outer curve of the 8 to start?
I think what we need here is some sort of "X" prize for the person who comes up with the wording to teach a new set of dancers this move in under one minute. I did it once, but it was an unfair test - they were four of my colleague Ben's friends and probably had a collective IQ of 800. Oh, and they saw the drawing.
What I did, with much protest from my calling friends standing nearby, was to have the ones simply walk a figure of 8 on the floor without the twos. Then the twos without the ones. Then both together, invoking the ladies first rule. I'd like to try it with just the ladies, and then just the men. It might work better that way because you see immediately that you're leading and/or following someone, and you're going the same direction.
Oooooh...just thought of something. How about having first corners do it first? The guy walks the outside of the 8, the girl walks across the train crossing. You're doing (and showing) both parts of the move at the same time, but simplified, by having just two people moving. It's quite clear in this move that lady 2 follows her corner around the track. You could then have the second corners do it, and remark that here, gentleman 2 follows his corner around the track. When everyone does it, you can point out that the lady 1 and gent 1 follow their (same gender) neighbors around the track. Re-emphasize the ladies first rule, and it should work fabulously.
Oh, and how awful would it be to call it a "simultaneous figure of 8" instead of a "double figure of 8"? No one does two eights. Each person only does one. We call it double because two couples are doing the figure of eight. It would make more sense to call that a "quadruple figure of 8" because four people are doing it! But even better would be the term "simultaneous figure of 8," for both accuracy and simplicity. Is there some sort of ECD academy where such suggested changes can be submitted?
Or have I reinvented a wheel?
M
E
5 comments:
Thinking too much??
If just the ladies walk it, or gents, or any subset of the whole, wouldn't they bang into the non walkers if everyone just walks the same pattern from a point on which they are already standing?
How about a floor covering with an 8 on it that you can plop down, have partners start at assigned dots, and then walk the pattern?
Well, Mr Boston Banjo, first of all, happy birthday (belated) and second of all, duh, the others stand out of the way.
It would be great to have a figure of 8 on the floor. We must now go out and find a dance hall with a wood floor, ample parking, good source of water, a place to store the sound equipment, and a figure 8 on the floor.
And some of those little Arthur Murray feet too. I love the women's ones with the little tiny circles for the heels.
I suppose I could paint the 8 (and the dots) on a big canvas, but then I'd have to use it on every set of four people in the dance. If there are, say, 10 sets, I'll just bet I go over my one-minute limit and lose the X prize. Drat.
What I dream of is a biggish ballroom, very old-fashioned, but with a screen that drops from the ceiling on which I display all the teaching aids I need.
Hmmm...wonder if my local University of Phoenix would let me use one of the classrooms for English Country Dance. No wood floor, but a great screen, hooked up to a computer.
M
E
What we need is a sprung wooden floor with LED insets that can be illuminated from the master control panel where the caller sits, madly programming the dance. Arthur Murray footprints would light up right in front of the dancers, who unfortunately would all be staring at the floor rather than in their partner's eyes.
Slightly more on topic -- I find the train-track analogy to be confusing, but then I don't think of it that way. As a number 2, you just follow your corner -- letting people pass in front of you when appropriate. As a number 1, you cast off then follow your neighbor -- letting people pass in front if they must.
But then that's just how I think of it when I dance.
The train track is only SORT of correct...because the figure of eight...while we walk the sort of same track...the 8 goes AROUND the places where people are standing. I cant diagram it. Dont even ask.
Think of a half figure of eight. One couple is stationary the other is moving around the other. Double implies that BOTH couples move along the path AROUND the imiginary people. So the ones Cast first to go to the 2's place so they can go around the spots they were just standing it. It's not necessiarly THRU.
Well, a figure of 8 is just as you say - the other couple acts as a set of posts to go around. But a double figure of 8 is NOT like that, but rather like the drawing.
In the intervening days, I have learned a couple of things, however, one of which is that it's difficult for dancers who haven't done the figure to walk in a figure 8. Don't know why, but they wander off the track (maybe trying to turn it into a hey) but they do, so we may have to go back to the old way of having both couples do a regular old figure of 8 first. The problem is that when you do the double one, there's no one to walk around, so it's extremely confusing, or was to me the first time I tried it, so I figured it was better to think of the track than the posts.
I'm pretty sure that Dale's observation is a part of it, too, that it matters who you follow. So my current, most elegant (in the sense of "brief but thorough") wording is this: "Top couple cast down, bottom couple cross up, ladies first, and follow your corner, curving back down to make the loop of the 8. Top couple, after you cast, cross up, ladies first, and follow your neighbor. Keep going in this way, making a nice curve on the outside and crossing in the middle, ladies first, until you are back where you started."
I chatted with a friend from Atlanta, Andrea, about this a few days ago, and then, she said, last night a caller successfully got newbies to do a double figure of 8 without walking doing the regular figure of 8 first, and rapidly. If I get the caller's words and the success is replicable, he shares the x-prize with Andrea, because she asked three questions which made it possible "what is my start point or figure, what is the foot path, how do we cross?"
I don't quite understand the questions, so I'm hoping she'll make a comment here explaining what happened, but if not, I'll try to recreate it from our conversation.
I think, to make the under-a-minute goal, there may have to be (1)a demo and (2)a picture and (3)the right words. If we could get rid of (2) we'd get the x-prize.
Post a Comment