Accompaniment Advice Needed

[Ken_Coles]

(I didn't ask the forum to call me an "Advanced Member" and certainly wouldn't want anyone to be misled! Can anyone tell me how to change that title?)

Keep posting until you earn your 4th blue square and you become a "Chatty concertinist." I'm sure there's no other way, short of prevailing upon Mr. Schwartz to change the headings. They are not statements about how well you play the concertina, but how many posts you've submitted.

 

The names for the first three categories came with the software. When I made up the name for folks with four boxes (100+ posts), I thought it was charming and harmless, and maybe even clever. There ensued a thread with a number of comments, some not terribly kind, about how objectionable or even non-grammatical this term was. Sounds like some folks use too much time being on-line instead of playing concertina! At that point I gave up on trying to find improvements for the first three level names as unlikely to be any more popular. So as David says, just make some more posts, and you'll graduate to a term you like more (or maybe less).

 

Off to attempt a morris tune form Dan's book!

 

Ken

[Woody]

We generally despise classical Ballett for been overwelminly kitchy, and instead turned to modern American dance from the 20-es (and it's resurrection in the 50-es and 90-es).

Amazingly, Michail Baryshnikov had switched to Mordern American Dance and produces some very interesting shows.

So from this perspective we look at folk dance.

Well you seem to be talking about professional dancers and choreographers from classical dance backgrounds, which is so far removed from the ethos of most folk dance as to be a separate world. Normally when they get involved you end up with something like Riverdance. That's not necessarily a bad thing in itself, and it's the sort of thing preferred by most of the public, but nothing really to do with traditional dance.

 

Delicacy, yes. But for me, mostly the presence and the feel of dance. There is no need to present crooked legged, heavy breathing, bad postured, bellied, drunken middle aged men, who not only can't dance, but can't even walk OK. Have you seen some South American Dances, where whomen are plump and thick? The dresses are big and fluffy?

I've yet to see a single Morris dancer doing their stuff while drunk. This I think is perhaps a failing of modern Morris dancers as the history of Morris dancing is closely linked to getting drunk and having punch-ups! If Morris sides want to be taken seriously as being faithful to the tradition they should drink a lots more during (and before) performing, and afterwards beat up the audience

 

I have however seen a bit of traditional dance in several Latin American countries during fiestas where the local traditional dancers can be found strutting their stuff while barely able to walk due to copious amounts of alcohol. Perhaps the difference you are referring to is the difference between real folk dance (i.e. people having fun and dancing for themselves) and the sort of stuff put on for the tourists?

 

The issue is sence of responsibility, absent from, as you call it, Morris sides. So they keep the audience for fools, it seems.

Well you must have seen a lot of Morris sides to feel you are in a position to make your (usual) broad sweeping statements. After about 4 years of seeking out Morris sides to watch, I've maybe seen about 100 (probably less) of the estimated 1000 sides around the world, and I only play for one side which I get to see dance every week, so obviously I don't have your extensive experience to call upon. From the sides I've seen there are better ones and worse ones. Some of the better dancing sides can be very entertaining and some quite boring. Some of the not so good dancers can be entertaining and some not.

 

If the Morris side's ethos is to put on a show for the paying public, then you might have a point, but it would mostly be to encourage the more entertaining ones rather than the technically best traditional dancers. Given that most audiences won't be looking at the dance from your perspective, I doubt you'd approve of the audience pleasing performance they'd come up with anyway.

 

For many (most?) Morris sides the point is that they do it for, and to please, themselves & themselves only - and the public can get stuffed if they don't like it. This is best demonstrated by all the sides that can be found dancing in the middle of nowhere on the early hours of a May Day morning - when any potential audience is still fast asleep.

 

 

Of course, as ever, if you're not happy with the standard of what you see you can always start your own side to show everybody else how it should be done.

[Animaterra]

Imagine vigorous clashing of the sticks, real men's dance. Unison rhythm!

 

Like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JidfqiLtLEA

[PeterT]

Imagine vigorous clashing of the sticks, real men's dance. Unison rhythm!

 

Like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JidfqiLtLEA

With an audience of slightly more than the preverbial "Two men and a dog".

[Mikefule]

The Morris is widely misunderstood, and there are too many easy stereotypes. Most Morris men are indeed overweight, ugly and drink too much. That is because most men are overweight, ugly and drink to much. Most Morris men are only moderately competent, because most people are only moderately competent at whatever they do. 90% of everything that people do is done badly. For every concertina played entusiastically, smoothly and well, there are nine(ish) played rarely, jerkily and sqeekily.

 

The Morris is a tradition. It is not street theatre, although it is sometimes presented as such. It is not professional entertainment, although sometimes we charge a pittance. (£100 for a three hour booking for 10 men?) It is not an art form, although a few dancers dance stunningly well. It should not be compared to the athletes you see displaying traditional Greek dancing for tourists in tavernas. It should not be compared to the River Dance, with professional dancers making something "spectacular" from traditional materials. It should not be compared with ballet.

 

It is the Morris. A bunch of ordinary people who practise an hour or so a week throughout the winter, and perform for an hour or so an evening throughout the summer, to do something they love, and the public often enjoys. A typical team has a repertoire of 30 or so dances, which means that they get about one hour a year per dance to practise.

[m3838]

Well you seem to be talking about professional dancers and choreographers from classical dance backgrounds, which is so far removed from the ethos of most folk dance as to be a separate world.

I've yet to see a single Morris dancer doing their stuff while drunk.

 

I think all dance come from either work or impersonation.

Classical ballett is rooted in it too. Of course, the real purpose of classical french ballett was (and still is) to provide high profile mistresses for the patrons, and from this perspective Ballett is very functional and not outlandish at all.

I've gone to barn dances, where most of the people dance really badly (including me),but which is great fun, where you meet many people, make contacts etc. it's a social thing.

It doesn't require putting on costumes. When you put on costumes, you start working for the public, and putting on a show. If your tecnique isn't adequate... That's where I find Morris dances bothersome. I myself wouldn't mind getting together with a bunch of drunken dudes and do some hopping with sticks. If it'd be tytled (hopefully not derogatory) - only as a joke.

I checked may be 20 youtube Morris videos yesterday (again) and it was very boring.

Why should I burden myself to see all (hundreds) of them, when one after another comes out silly at best? Enough is enough.

I agree with people's self-entertainment. Not too many people are able to go out in the circle and do their dancing shtik nowadays, but I don't think Morris is that kind of folk dance. It looks to me more like a gang's war dance, or at least young lads show off. So the moves must have application. Just like in Tai-Chi. I can picture them beating up the public. Perhabs the dance of the "side" was simply a call for the general fight, where people form two lines and go at each other. A form of self-entertainment. I should check the Google.

As for general statements, sure, why should I be measuring? There are always others, who will measure for me.

 

http://web.syr.edu/~rsholmes/morris/realhistory.html - interesting article. But not a word about the origin of the "side". In Russia there is a ritual of common, highly regulated fighting, called "Wall to wall". Where people form two lines (sides) and at the command, go at each other.

Fighting continues to fhe first appearance of blood. Before the fight begins and after it ends, there is usually dances, singing and feasting.

Edited August 21, 2007 by m3838

[Woody]

Imagine vigorous clashing of the sticks, real men's dance. Unison rhythm!

 

Like this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JidfqiLtLEA

With an audience of slightly more than the preverbial "Two men and a dog".

I think you've made a mistake Peter. They're just the people required to drive the intoxicated dancers to where they're dancing.

 

Not sure how they taught the dog to dance so well.

[Woody]

...For every concertina played entusiastically, smoothly and well, there are nine(ish) played rarely, jerkily and sqeekily.

There's five of them in my house

[asdormire]

It looks to me more like a gang's war dance, or at least young lads show off.

 

 

That was always my understanding of the Morris is that it originally was a way for the young lads to show off.

 

Alan

[Jim Besser]

It's probably not an easy question to answer in words, but can anyone point me in a direction? Any simple "tricks of the trade"? At the moment, I am having to choose the tunes I practise according to whether they include the D E F# G run or any "fast notes" on that top button on the left hand.

 

If it would be helpful, send me a private email address and I'll send you an MP3 showing how I play Constant Billy on the G/D, and how I've dealt with that issue. But in truth, I prefer playing it in G on the C/G, to keep all of the melody on the right. Or, when playing without other musos, I sometimes play it in D on the G/D

[m3838]

The Morris is widely misunderstood,

The Morris is a tradition. It is not street theatre... It is not professional entertainment... It is not an art form... It should not be compared to the River Dance... It should not be compared with ballet.

 

It is the Morris. A bunch of ordinary people...

From the site

http://bassett-street-hounds.org/morris/

"Morris dancing is a show dance. It is not a social dance like English Ceili or Playford dancing or like the American counterparts of square dancing or contra dancing. It is performed by a troupe of dancers for an audience. Little is known about the origin of morris dancing although speculation runs rampant.."

All and all it looks like if you put on a costume, and perform on public, the notion of mere one hour per year per dance of practice is poor excuse.

[JimLucas]

I think all dance come from either work or impersonation.

I don't. If I don't agree with your premises, your conclusion becomes a non sequitur. But really, where you think dance originates is irrelevant to whether it's competently performed.

 

Of course, the real purpose of classical french ballett was (and still is) to provide high profile mistresses for the patrons....

I don't know about in France, but that isn't what I observed during my involvement with classical ballet in America.

 

When you put on costumes, you start working for the public, and putting on a show.

That's your view of how you think things should work; it's neither a fact nor a law. Anyone who attracts attention in public is essentially putting on a show, whether they intend to or not, but that's the case whether or not they're wearing a "costume". In fact, I think many (most?) Morris dancers think of their "kit" (as it's commonly called) more as a uniform than as a stage-actor's "costume". (The "fool" or "hobby" would be an exception.) Private school uniforms and boy/girl scout uniforms are no less "costumes". Do you claim that anyone wearing those is automatically "working for the public, and putting on a show"?

 

But I also get the impression from your phrasing that you think that putting on a show and therefor "working for the public" carries with it some obligation to put on the sort of show that a particular segment of the public -- namely you -- will enjoy. My own viewpoint -- at least as regards street performing -- is quite the contrary. When I'm busking (or dancing Morris), my desire and purpose is to attract those individuals who enjoy my performance, not to contort my performance to conform to the tastes of those who don't like what I like.

 

If your tecnique isn't adequate... That's where I find Morris dances bothersome.

I've just viewed about a dozen YouTube clips of Morris dancing. On most (not quite all) the technique is more than "adequate". The dancers are quite competently achieving the particular "look" and "feel" that they want. If you don't like it, if you want something else, then you don't want Morris, and that's your problem, not theirs.

 

Why should I burden myself to see all (hundreds) of them, when one after another comes out silly at best?

You find them silly. I don't. What I find silly is your assuming your personal taste to be an unbiased measure of technical competence, especially when you haven't taken the trouble to actually learn about the stylistic goals and bodily control which go into dancing the Morris.

 

Enough is enough

Exactly!

 

I agree with people's self-entertainment. Not too many people are able to go out in the circle and do their dancing shtik nowadays, but I don't think Morris is that kind of folk dance.

It's not. It's neither improvisation nor solo (except for a few one-man dances, known as "jigs"). It's teamwork! The dances and the dancers form a variety of patterns by their postures, relative locations, and movement, and by the movement of the handkerchiefs or sticks. The rhythmic and dynamically varying sound of the bells -- and also of the sticks in a stick dance -- is another crucial element.

 

It looks to me more like a gang's war dance, or at least young lads show off.

As Alan (asdormire) says, yes, it's a way for the young (and not so young) lads (and lasses) to show off. I don't think there's any evidence that it ever was "a gang's war dance", nor (contrary to the wishful thinking of some self-invented "neo-Druids") is it a remnant of an earlier pagan religion. While some of the movements -- mainly in the stick dances -- seem to resemble ritualized combat, they are in fact demonstrations of cooperative precision.

 

So the moves must have application.

But not necessarily a combative one. Their purpose is to demonstrate precision teamwork.

 

I can picture them beating up the public. Perhabs the dance of the "side" was simply a call for the general fight, where people form two lines and go at each other.

On the contrary. My experience is that when Morris teams get together, they generally dance for each other to gain approval and build inter-team camraderie, not to establish dominance hierarchies. They also do "mass dances", where the coordination of all the sides forms a combined whole.

 

But not a word about the origin of the "side".

The "side" is simply a team, a group that works together, the equivalent of a "company" in ballet or "modern" dance.

[Pete Dunk]

All and all it looks like if you put on a costume, and perform on public, the notion of mere one hour per year per dance of practice is poor excuse.

 

Actually no, all this proves it that you cannot understand the British psyche. Getting up in public and making a complete fool of yourself is a way of life here. It's not about being the best or even being good, it's about doing something you believe in and want to do, and, dare I say it, having fun in the process, if others want to stand by and jeer that's their problem.

 

I'm the first in line to ridicule Morris dancers but I have to say that if I go along as a spectator I always have a really good time.

[m3838]

I'm the first in line to ridicule Morris dancers but I have to say that if I go along as a spectator I always have a really good time.

Speaking of which:

These weekends in Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, there will be Renessance Fair.

Will there be Morris teams performing?

[Animaterra]

It is the Morris. A bunch of ordinary people who practise an hour or so a week throughout the winter, and perform for an hour or so an evening throughout the summer, to do something they love, and the public often enjoys.

 

And that says it all, as far as I'm concerned.

 

Signed,

 

Incompetant morris musician

[m3838]

But really, where you think dance originates is irrelevant to whether it's competently performed.

 

Lack of understanding is what, to my believe, let majority of dancers perform sets of random moves, that deemed "beautiful".

 

Of course, the real purpose of classical french ballett was (and still is) to provide high profile mistresses for the patrons....

 

I don't know about in France, but that isn't what I observed during my involvement with classical ballet in America.

 

Perhabs not, perhabs you are not among the patrons.

It was interesting to read a book by Maya Plisetskaya.

When you put on costumes, you start working for the public, and putting on a show.

That's your view of how you think things should work; it's neither a fact nor a law. Anyone who attracts attention in public is essentially putting on a show... Do you claim that anyone wearing those is automatically "working for the public, and putting on a show"?

 

I don't see where our views differ.

You get noticed - you've put on a "costume". If you don't want to get noticed - don't put on an attire, be it "uniform", or "kit". But if you do want to get noticed, it's preferably that you perform at the level of your costume, otherwise you demonstrate "the British psyche", where Getting up in public and making a complete fool of yourself is a way..." Nothing wrong with that, just the fact that needs to be admitted.

 

But I also get the impression from your phrasing that you think that putting on a show and therefor "working for the public" carries with it some obligation...

Yes.

Granted, we all have different tastes.

I've just viewed about a dozen YouTube clips of Morris dancing. On most (not quite all) the technique is more than "adequate".

 

We've probably seen the same Youtube videos with very different impressions.

To each - it's own. It sounds as though either you deny the notion that Morris dancers allocate an hour per dance a year, or insist that it's quite adequate.

 

What I find silly is your assuming your personal taste to be an unbiased measure of technical competence, especially when you haven't taken the trouble to actually learn about the stylistic goals and bodily control which go into dancing the Morris.

 

I'm not even touching my personal taste here.

I'm merely noticing that in most videos I saw, Morris dancers are:

Not always dancing in unison

Not always clashing sticks in unison

Sometimes act randomly, as though there are no dancers around, with whom they form a team

When not participating actively, don't always hold the line, look around, walk leasurly.

 

Etc.

 

 

But not necessarily a combative one. Their purpose is to demonstrate precision teamwork.

 

From this site: http://bassett-street-hounds.org/

 

"Border morris is a much different kind of Morris dancing than Cotswold style. It was the favored form danced by the coal miners of the Welsh/English border and is typified by rather rougher looking outfits than the Cotswold sides, lots more stick dances, and plenty of grunting, yelling, and various other less-than-couth antics."

 

I have a hard time believing that using sticks (swords, clubs) is simply "to demonstrate precision teamwork". which most Morris dancers are lacking, btw.

 

That said, I do enjoy wholesome street activity, as any such activity is better than Hot dog stand been the centerpiece of public amusement.

Edited to add some examples of non-combatant team presicion excersizes:

Edited August 22, 2007 by m3838

[Woody]

I'm not even touching my personal taste here.

That's just silly - of course you are!

 

When not participating actively, don't always hold the line, look around, walk leasurly.

It seems you're demonstrating a basic lack of understanding here. The informal and relaxed behaviour is a central part of the character of Morris - particularly Cotswold and Border.

 

I have a hard time believing that using sticks (swords, clubs) is simply "to demonstrate precision teamwork"

Well you're right and wrong. The use of swords as in Rapper or Longsword, and the use of garlands in some North-West dances is precisely about precision and team work, and anybody who has seen just one such dance would know that! Sticks have a similar element but are (IMHO) mainly about their percussive qualities.

 

which most Morris dancers are lacking, btw.

Well you seem to slate Morris dancers because of their (perceived by you) imprecision, yet you are happy to use imprecise language. By your own admission you haven't seen most Morris dancers perform, so how can you make any statement about most Morris dancers without appearing to be foolish?

 

At the end of the day - Morris dancing has been going in one form or another for hundreds of years and is thriving today. The people that do it are happy doing it. The people that like watching it are happy watching it. If you don't fall into either catagory, why don't you stop wasting your time and go and find something you do like instead?

Edited August 22, 2007 by Woody

[jon melville]

As an aside, a few years ago the Royal Ballet formed a Cotswold and rapper team. They were well taught (they sought out the best instruction the morris world could offer beforehand) and performed spectacularly, with high jumps few mere mortals could aspire to.

 

I had an opportunity to discuss this with a couple of the guys. They said the biggest problem they found with learning the morris was the requirement for a lack of precision - the fact that you are not supposed to point your toes "just so" in such-and-such a movement, but a degree of imprecision was needed to reflect the essential rusticity of the dance. They themselves had recognised that as an element of the morris which they were striving to emulate in order to be authentic.

 

The other interesting snippet I remember is a discussion on "doing nothing" when others in the set are performing capers. Ballet never requires dancers to "do nothing" on stage - they always have a position to be in and an action to perform, even if that is to remain stationary. Standing stock-still in precise ranks is not doing nothing, as any soldier or performance artist will attest, and has a tendency to draw attention from the capers.

 

However, nothing in the last few posts has done much to help Mikefule with his fingering, nor can I offer any assistance as an English player, so perhaps we should get back on topic?