A CHAT ABOUT DANCES, TERMS, ETC.
Prompted by a letter from Wes & Louise Tiedtke of Banning CA
We received the Tiedtke ‘s letter back in November and pondered for the longest while about how to respond. Then we re-read the first paragraph and, voila ‘, there it was . . . . “Let’s chat.” Wes’ and Louise’s part of the conversation is in regular (hook) type and CDL’s part of the conversation is in italics.
Greetings again! This is the second “unsolicited” letter I ‘ve managed to send to the revered CDL Staff! There are several topics I wish to visit and certainly welcome any retort via your fine magazine, or?! Let’s chat.
Because of the high number and wide variety of dance descriptions generally published in each CDL issue, I decided to create a database which lists, in turn, the dance titles, dance type, total count and steps of each dance, level of difficulty, CDL issue (month and year), and choreographer(s). I must say that this turned out to be a bigger undertaking than I had anticipated. This project was actually inspired by my wife who complained several times that she found it necessary to look through, a large number of CDL issues to finally locate a particular dance she thought “might be in there”. Although our backlog of issues only began in April of 1996, I inserted 378 separate records of dances with their accompanying information in the database file which is now complete up through September ’97.
The CDL Dance Database (in Microsoft Excel) contains more than 5000 entries of Step Description. and cross references. However, it also contains a lot of information for each dance (such as our file name and directory location, etc.) that would be of no help or interest to anyone other than ourselves. We are working on making a complete list available to our readers. The lists we currently have are,
1 .) the table of contents for each Dance Book and,
2.) a list of dances in magazines that are still available as back issues. This second list only goes back to 1994 as all of the previous back issues are sold out and all of their dances are included in dance books.
As might be expected, this entering of data led to some serious frustration – the cause of which must also be at least some unsettling to the CDL staff. Many of the line dance descriptions failed to even list how many “walls” much less the difficulty level. In fact probably only 60% or less listed the difficulty level. Virtually none of the music listings included the beats-per- minute or time elements. Surprisingly, some of the more prevalent choreographers were also guilty of these omissions.
The CDL step description format has been, and still is, an evolving process. We remember, in the early days, publishing dances noting something called “counts” wherein dances had very odd numbers of movements since the choreographers didn’t specify steps done on the downbeat or upbeat. Hence, a shuffle was written as 3 “counts” and a jazz box as 4 “counts”• That has all changed in that for years now we describe steps in terms of beats of music. For a number of years now we’ve been including the number of “walls” in nearly every dance that has more than one. We’re not as adamant about BPMs and Degree of Difficulty because they are more often relevant to the abilities of the students than to the dance. For each dance three different BPMs should be used. A “slow” for learning the steps, a “medium” for practicing and a “fast” for performing. The music suggestions included with the dances are usually for performing and, except for those dances choreographed to one particular song only, the music suggestions connote more the ”rhythm” and/or ”spirit” of the music suggested for that dance. (Also, remember the “Rule Of Bop!” Bop by Dan Seeds is a recording that ls suitable for teaching nearly any line dance not in 3/4 time.) The BPMs for teaching, practicing and performing a dance, as well as the Degree of Difficulty of a dance is really something that should be determined by the instructor and pertains to whether the instructor is teaching a bunch of “Sixfoot tall and bulletproof’ 20 somethings, or teaching young children or folks at a senior’s center. Regarding “time elements”: All waltzes are done to music in either 3/4 or 6/8 time. All other dances are done to music in 4/4 time. If a dance contains a ‘shuffle’, it can also be done to music in 2/4 time. We’ll deal with 5/4 time when we bear a country version of Dave Brubeck’s Take Five.
Your July ’96 issue, page 45, which provides insight to your policies for management of submitted dance descriptions, details the high numbers of dances submitted and the excesses that could not be published due to space restrictions. Since there is an ever increasing over-abundance of dances being submitted to CDL for publication, it seems that the CDL Staff should be more critical / selective before actually publishing the dance descriptions. If the various choreographers cannot muster the time or energy to include the minimum required information with their dances, then perhaps the dances are not really worthy of publication. In my view, the dance submissions should conform to a minimum information requirements policy before they qualify for publishing in your CDL. This policy’s enforcement would certainly enhance the quality of already outstanding magazine. I understand that this is easy for the readers like myself to critique and suggest changes, but I think this suggestion has the necessary merit.
Besides the step description itself along with any helpful notes the choreographer includes, we require the following information be included with each dance.
- Title;
- Choreographer (if known);
- Type of dance, including # of walls.
- At least one, but preferably three music Suggestions; and
- Inquiry information (magazine dances only as the Books are permanent and much of the inquiry information would be inaccurate within a year or two of publication.)
On another subject. ‘C/W dancing term definitions. In your July ’96 issue, a glossary of definitions was provided. I have had occasions to try to resolve conflicts of opinion which occurred from time to time. l think it would be very beneficial to the readers to have a really comprehensive glossary to refer to. Your July ’96 listing was a good start but would need to be expanded upon. One of the terms which recently concerned me, is the “Camel walk”. At least two instructors of recent times have described the camel walk the same way I would describe the ‘lock step’ pattern. l would describe the camel walk where one does a 11 knee Pop” just prior to stepping on the other foot. Your July ’96 listing encouraged me to accept this definition. Also the terms ‘shuffle’, ‘triple step’, and ‘cha cha’ seem to be used by various teachers as if they were completely interchangeable. I believe all three terms are valid, but not synonymous. I don’t think there is a serious problem with ‘shuffle’. A triple step, in my opinion, is done similar to a shuffle, but is done essentially in place, and the cha-cha term should be reserved for Latin rhythm dances only (which I’m partial to, incidentally).
It is strongly recommended that the CDL staff promote a plan for generating a comprehensive C/W dance term definition listing that conforms with the NTA and other teacher associations (as may be applicable) so some very badly needed standardization can be finally achieved (on paper anyway). Unfortunately, I’m not familiar with any other current and fully comprehensive C/W dance term listing which is readily available to the readers. I don’t anticipate this ‘term scramble’ problem will ever be fully resolved, but it certainly can be improved upon. (Pity the poor foreign language people who must try to effectively translate, or even comprehend it.) If the broad spectrum of C/W dance instructors fail to effectively promote standard terminology, maybe the broad spectrum of dancers can force the issue.
We hope the “new-updated-expanded-more comprehensive and, in some cases, corrected” glossary in the last issue (Vol. 27 No. 3 – March 1998) proves to be of help. think we’ve addressed most, if not all, of the terms you’ve mentioned as well as many others. We believe that CDL is a leader in dance step format and terminology standardization. All dances published in CDL Magazine and Dance Books since 1995 are published in the CDL standardized format and terminology. The CDL glossary was originally based on the NTA glossary and has evolved from there reflecting the evolution of dance as well as the specific aspects necessitated by our use of print technology exclusively. While we know that the CDL/ format and terminology is the most widespread and best understood dance step publication process, and while we welcome all of C/W dancing to not only adopt it, but help us improve on it, we don’t claim it to be the ‘only correct way’ of publishing dances. We never ask or demand that others utilize the CDL format and/or terminology, we only require that all dances published by CDL will be in the CDL standardized format and terminology.
New subject again: “Line dance tempo and choreography”. I can recall several comments printed in your fine magazine regarding the frequent practice of ‘race course line dancing’ at the various clubs. Of course, I’m referring to the overly rapid tempo that many of our line dances are done to. Performing dances at the extreme tempos are distasteful not only to many dancers, but also to the spectators. The clubs often call line dances that are done at speeds which turn most dancers into staccato, mechanical machines. No time for the styling or interpretation moves, which to me, makes the dance, a dance and a pleasure to do. The ‘racers’ who are not really dancing, just get the steps in and that’s it!
No argument from us, although we hope that as the ”Achy Breaky” fad subsides, ‘dancing’ will return.
l also realize that many of the younger generation not only turn the tempo up to warp speed, but also radically change the choreography of many dances presumably to disco-tize them (as described in a previous letter). These dancers are disrupting to dance with. I might agree that there sometimes appears to be a fine line between acceptable “personal styling” and unacceptable major choreography changes. Where does one draw the line? Is any departure from original choreography acceptable if the overall dance count is still maintained? I think not! (That little angel on my shoulder is now telling me that tolerance is a virtue and we must accept differences in life – and not be overly critical of other people who have mannerisms which are foreign to us normal types. The angel is quite little but very talkative – he has to be!) .
We feel that in some instances it’s ok for an instructor to make alterations from the specific choreography of a dance. Instances might include simplifying certain parts of the dance to allow the very old and the very young to keep up with the rest of the dancers. Also, in our newest glossary we define “Advanced” as being able to improvise within the dance, such as performing a traveling turn as part of a grapevine. However, any alterations should always respect the timing and distance of any traveling movement and maintain the wall changes of the original, as well as adhering as closely as possible to the original. We are saddened when we hear of instructors who intentionally change dances in order to keep their herd of students from being able to dance anywhere other than their own turf.
Life is sometimes contrary, huh? If l am somewhat frustrated by renegade dancers, the myriad of C/W terms and definitions and omissions, I can’t imagine how frustrated the newer C/W dancers from other countries must be when they try to cope with all that plus the language barriers. I’m really thankful that I have this wonderful CDL magazine, which appreciated all my pain to vent all my C/W problems to. (That little angel is really smiling now).
Thanks for the good words.
You know, by golly, I think I’ll compose a line dance that will express my frustrations — it will probably have far too many steps, have too many turns, would not have a smooth flow and shucks, nobody would want to reach it anyway! Hey! Lets pull on our boots and go dancin’! They’re teachin’ “Frustration Galore’ over the Alamo Disco!
We’ve seen that dance. Under several other names! We love all you C/W People (in a normal way, of course)