Mail Archive sponsored by
re: sher questions
- From: r l reid <ro...>
- Subject: re: sher questions
- Date: Mon 26 Apr 2004 01.10 (GMT)
Helen - your points make a lot of sense. I see the
contradiction between our "shine" and the contra
ultra-egalitarianism. You may be right about that. What
might tend to happen instead is a "contrazation" of the
sher, which might itself bwe interesting.
Returning to the Cape Breton thing - individual talent
melds well with an accessable form for those folks. While
the sets are "set", within that framework is allowance for
When circling, those who can will step dance just as fancy
as they please - really showing off what they have. You
are still in the form, stil with your partner, still doing
what most folks are doing, but putting the extra in from
your ankles down.
Between square sets, often an audience member will fill in
while the fiddler and piano player hit the toilet and grab
a smoke or whatever. Often at those times, people will go
to the walls, and individulas with dance talent (or one
too many rums) will show off thier stuff in solo step
dancing. And Michael Jackson's got nothing on some of
these men and women.
But no, there is no point in Cape Breton square sets (to
my memory) where an individual could move to the center
and show off.
---------------------- jewish-music (at) shamash(dot)org ---------------------+
- Re: sher questions, (continued)