Do you support dropping Circle to a Line?
Please provide your final thoughts on dropping/keeping this call. Please contribute your thoughts and comments in a focused and professional manner that reflects how your opinion strengthens the final program. It is important to limit your points to the specific call being discussed.
I use this call quite a bit, but there are other ways to get there so I could manage without it. For me the most persuasive reason to drop it is that in many places dancers have “voted with their feet” by changing its action to something they prefer. I don’t really remember the last time I saw it danced according to the definition.
I support dropping Circle to a Line not because it is a “bad” call, but because we need to make hard decisions to accomplish our purpose. I had 2 Senior Citizen Basic programs that each lasted many years and I never got to introduce those dancers to Circle to a Line. We can add Circle to a Line to the next program so it will still be a part of the activity.
I am not in favor of dropping Circle to a Line. There are great tricks to teach it and it is very danceable. It’s also not jerky like Lead Right, Veer Left, Bend the Line. If taught right, it puts the dance back in our dance. Let’s keep the dance in our dance.
Let’s drop it and let another level pick it up. I don’t hear it enough to think it critical and half of the dancers have their own way of dancing it which actually makes it harder for newer dancers.
“Circle To A Line” should not be in the entry-level program in my opinion. It doesn’t take long to teach to the dancers It DOES take quite a while for the Dancers to understand it well enough to be able to dance it. We are hoping to cut not only the number of calls but more importantly, the time that it takes for the dancers to learn the entry-level program. This could easily move into the next program level above the entry-level program.
I’m told that many of the dancers apparently have modified the execution of this call so it is practically unrecognizable (slide to a line, type of execution). This is proof that the dancers don’t like the way the move is supposed to be executed. Therefore remove the call from entry-level and consider redefining it and adding it to the next program up, if it is deemed to be useful and a call that dancers want to dance.
I will be voting to remove “Circle To A Line”
I would like everyone to think about one thing: how often do you use a circle to a line from a half sashayed couple? Or from other arrangements?
I think it’s a difficult call and therefore it should be on the next list.
Circle to a Line should not be dropped.
It is not as difficult for dancers as some would have us believe.
It flows beautifully and the twirl for the 2 end girls is what dancing is all about.
The way we are going, we are going to entirely remove the dance from the square dancing.
If we want a smaller list, we must cut SOMETHING. The stated goal — the task we were assigned — was to come up with a list of no more than 50 calls, with SSD very specifically cited by comparison as having 53 calls. We were then led through a process that started with the SSD list, but so far we have cut NOTHING from that. Some might say we even added one call relative to the existing SSD list, Single Circle to a Wave — because that does not appear in the posted formal SSD list but IS now listed in our most recent draft. But whatever your views on that point, it is clear that we have made NO progress toward making the actual set of actions OR names that a new dancer needs to learn smaller. Yes, we managed to make the set of CALL NUMBERS smaller, but what we have now is just the SSD list sorted and grouped differently, and if that’s what we present in April most members will see that for what it really is, and judge our work accordingly.
If we want our draft list (the purpose of which, as I understand it, is to illustrate what the members could be getting if they approve The Proposal) to actually be an improvement, we are going to have to remove more than one call. But removing more than one means removing at least one! So why is Circle to a Line a good one to start with? Many people have given reasons that it’s useful to have in an entry list. But many people have also pointed out that there are some dancers who don’t like this call or refuse to do it as defined, and callers who don’t feel it is necessary. Personally I have no problem with it. I consider it in the category of “nice to have” — just like Cloverleaf would be nice to have, and Walk and Dodge would be nice to have, and Spin the Top would be nice to have, but none of those calls are included in our draft list (because they were not in the SSD list). It’s a compound call, made up of several different actions, which would be more appropriate as part of a set of ADDITIONAL calls for people to learn when it’s time for them to go beyond the minimum, But it is not NECESSARY to include it to have a complete starter level. There are plenty of other ways to make facing lines, and plenty of other things that you can call from an eight-chain position.
So assuming we want to actually cut SOMETHING, this would seem to be a prime candidate.
Of the four calls we are considering, Circle to a Line is the one I am most in favor of dropping. There are many easier ways of getting to a line of four. CTAL is more difficult to learn for newer dancers. Many dancers adopt their own version of CTAL (Some call it Slide to a Line), presumably because it is not comfortable to dance. Also, I seldom see it used, except following a Lead to the Right.
Drop It
Yes, we are supposed to drop calls to make the list shorter, but we are also supposed to keep the calls that make the dancing fun and not difficult. I find that teaching CTAL with the “twirly girl” hint is a big hit. The dancers love it! They also love that I teach “this is the one call that GIRLS are in charge! Girls, you have to know if you are the twirly girl and you have to make sure your partner twirls you!” I don’t want to drop any call that has an aspect of FUN to it. Please keep this call. So what if Plus dancers cheat and do a Slip and Slide to a Line (as much as I hate it when they do that). Let’s keep this call.
We need a move that converts Eight Chain Thru into a pre-double pass thru. Pass To The Centre would be acceptable, but the hand contact of a Dive Thru makes it easier for new dancers to perform correctly. I understand the issues for older dancers and shorter dancers, but they can be taught how to perform the move without holding on while everyone else really enjoys the move. It is also more familiar to dancers in the UK who dive thru arches in the traditional Barn Dances which take place and from where many of our dancers come.
I think Circle To A Line is quite awkward to dance, not easy to teach, and doesn’t offer the Dancing experience I like to provide when calling. There are other ways to get to the same lines from Eight Chain Thru which are far more enjoyable for the dancers. Happy for it to be available at higher levels, but not needed at our entry level.
I think this is a call wich should not be in the entry level program.
The effort does not justify the choreographic result. Too complex not really smooth.
Just a comment regarding most of the alternatives, that were presented. They may achieve the same FASR, but still are not the same.
They all miss the orientation, even if the couples result in the same occupation.
Personally, I have never liked this call both as a dancer and a caller. I find it awkward to teach and have several other ways I can accomplish what this call does.
It seems to me that CTAL is one of those calls much like Spin Chain Thru, that is being used so little that dancers (particularly the new dancers), have trouble remembering it. That, along with the fact that many dancers have done what should have been our job, and smoothed the action out to, “Slide to a Line,” or something to that effect. I see no reason to keep something the dancers insist on changing. We have other ways to get the desired FASR.
Drop it.
This is by far my least favorite call. Most dancers in our area cheat when it is called. Almost no one does the twirl. The best part of this call is that I have to encourage my new students to count the beats to get them to twirl at the right point. Otherwise they are too early or late and the line is all over the place.
For a younger group this could be a wonderful call.
What I like about CTAL: It keeps the group of 4 connected (if done right) which can help to hold the integrity of the square. It makes an easy conversion from box to line in a single call.
What I don’t like about CTAL: This is probably the one call that I get the most questions on from students and newer dancers on “how to remember who does what”. A lot of dancers struggle to remember “who’s the veer and who’s the twirl”, so when I call it (even at a regular dance with “experienced” dancers) I see a lot of people twirling who shouldn’t and have had several squares break down because they aren’t sure where to go. Even teaching it can be confusing at times, because the dancers lose track of “inside/outside”.
While I would like to keep CTAL because I like to use it, I would support dropping it from the entry level to reduce new dancer confusion.
I think Circle To A Line should be dropped. Most folks don’t dance it correctly anyway. I usually call an equivalent rather than CTAL. But, if we did everything I thought, we would be in trouble.
I would be fine with moving “CTAL” to Plus. It’s pretty easy to call circle 4 left halfway, veer left, outfacers (leads) California twirl to accomplish the same FASR.
Over the years dancers have created their own definitions of Circle to a Line. As a lady dancer on a convention floor, I never know which way I am going to be turned or pushed. That fact tells me that many dancers do not like the original definition. For new dancers, it often takes a long time to figure out which way the Line should be facing and who does the “twirling”. The commonly used “Heads Lead Right, Circle to a Line” can be replaced with “Heads Lead Right, Each Four Circle Left 3/4, Forward and Back”. The results are technically equivalent and take about the same time. If we want a call that requires team coordination, there are lots of better possibilities. I would much rather have Cloverleaf than Circle to a Line.
I’m in favour of keeping circle to a line. It’s a good movement to use with beginners. I find it gets called often and therefore worth keeping. While we can say circle 3/4 is the same, circle to a line flows better. In our entry program, we need movements that flow well. We need to teach our dancers to dance. It’s not all about our equivalents.
I rarely use Circle to a Line. To make lines quickly from an 8 Chain Thru, I used Circle Left 3/4. There is little to zero teach time, whereas Circle to a line takes time to teach and some practice. Also, some dancers do the call correctly, while others cheat (slide to a line). This confuses newer dancers. I can easily live without this call.
I would prefer to keep Circle to a Line. It’s an easy teach and the dancers seem to enjoy dancing the call. Of course, there are different methods to get the dancers into zero lines as most callers use a variety of methods to attain the formations they want to achieve but this call is utilized at every dance I attend and called by every caller whose dance I attend.
I support keeping this call.
keep it, it is a nice call, has a lot of “working together ” in it…
I don’t see this call necessary for an entrance program. Drop.
I have to agree with Mel and Larry on this one. It teaches team work and besides, it’s FUN to be the “twirly Girl”. If they have a shoulder disability, they should be letting the other dancers know about it and then they can always just unroll the line and have the same results.
From a static square Heads Lead Right, Circle to a line ends up with couple 1 & 2 in the same line. Circle Left 3/4 does not.
In teaching beginners, I find it the best way to keep the couples together & in their comfort zone while still working with the other 3 couples.
I’m meh on this one as well. I’m probably that way for most calls as I feel I have a good handle on finding ways to do what I want with whatever calls I have. The callback for this up here lately is “I’m the twirly girl!!” I tell them at the beginning that provided the caller doesn’t change anything the belle position on the outside is person going under the arm. Kind of like they know who is leading on a SP&ETG before they do the first turn. I’m happy to hear the excitement on the floor and it’s made me call it more often early on. I just want them having fun.
I’ll probably vote to keep it. I guess I’m in the minority as I’m not “looking for a way to set up Partner Lines” – I could care less.
I am in favor of dropping the call circle to a line. There a lots of better ways getting into a line from an eight chain thru formation. And It easily can be replaced by circle left / right 3/4.
I would accept dropping Circle To A Line.
I find it difficult for dancers to grasp the concept of who breaks after you circle. Yes, it has artistic appeal when watching from outside the square, but the twirl action is becoming more difficult for dancers. Especially since most dancers start the twirl too early or too late causing the motion to become awkward for whomever is going under the arch.
Of the 4 candidates, this is the one I am most interested in keeping.
Circle Left 3/4 is not an exact replacement. It also requires emphasizing during teaching that, after circling, the caller may utilize the pre-circling formation – circling does not necessarily convert the formation into a circle.
Also, we can drop Lead Right, since it can be replaced with Circle Left 1/4, Pass Thru.
In light of what our goal is, “to make a smaller (less calls) entry level program”, I am in favor of dropping this call. Remember, that does not mean we are doing away with the call, just moving it to a different program, besides entry level. I don’t believe there will be any calls where someone does not have a valid point in keeping or eliminating that call. After we have voted to drop whatever said calls are on that drop list, I don’t believe we should be adding any calls to the entry level program list. That does not accomplish the goal of a smaller (less calls to learn) program list. For me, to accomplish our goal, I am in favor of dropping all 4 calls listed.
I think we should keep “Circle to a line”. I know there are alterantives, but it is a very graceful move that is easily taight and the dancers love it.
All arguments are on the table, so please drop Circle to a Line.
I’m in favor of dropping this call from the entry level list. Circle Left 3/4 the same result and people do the full action rather than replace it.
My experience is not long after teaching it, callers use it less and less due to many other ways to get into partner lines or other lines facing. The build in styling limits it to normal couples and thus less useful than equivalent calls.
I do not think dancers would miss it.
I’m in favor of dropping this call from the entry level list. Circle Left 3/4 provides a choreographically equivalent formation in the same time and with less confusion.
All of the calls on the list are “great calls” with many potential uses. That’s a given. But if the goal is to reduce the set of calls needed for brand new dancers, I’m willing to sacrifice this one.
We don’t need Circle to a Line to have a fun dance with newer dancers, and the ending action confuses new dancers during a teach. Yes, we can teach them how to do it without overflow or balance issues, but WHY BOTHER? Yes, it’s a historical action and yes, it’s a staple in many modules… but since there’s a trivial drop-in replacement, cross it off the entry-level list and move on.
I am in favor of dropping CTAL.
I actually like CTAL. It’s “dance pretty”, it has uses from any facing couples and it’s used a lot, hence dances successfully. HAVING SAID THAT – I would be prepared to sacrifice it off the list. There’s many ways to achieve lines from facing couples. The reduction of moves on the entry level list is a tough call (pardon the pun), but I think the benefits outweigh the attachment we (alright, I) have for some of our nice actions.
I am on the fence about this.
There are some challenging motions in this calls, that are not easy to teach and/or learn.
But as Mel noted, this is the first chance for the dancers to work as a team. So showing the dancers, they might and have to work together and are part of the fun is an important experience on the journey of a square dancer.
If there are motions not doable for your group, you could also show some helping moves to work around that, as some calls are danced different in some areas. (for example: in northern germany there are some noises to be done, when dancing circle to a line)
I’m in favour of keeping CTAL on the condition we look at eliminating the twirl action on the end. This seems to be the obstacle with dancers doing CTAL.
There are so many variables with CDTL that are fun for dancers and this level that we are formulating is what we are looking for.
Circle 3 to a line
One of the couples 1/2 sashay CTAL
Circle 6 to a line.
I am personally adamantly opposed to dropping Circle to a Line. Other than the move being extremely popular, and a calling stable it is one of the first early flowing collective flowing in contact formation changers in square dancing. I know that there are other ways to establish lines such as veer right bend the line, or Right and Left Thru, Veer Left Bend the Line, or even establishing lines out of sequence with the Veer Left, Bend the Line (depending on where you start from. Circle to a Line is used heavily and frequently in the basic mainstream and plus programs without Lead Right as a precursor and it flows well from a lot of set ups.
It also is one of the early movements to have a group working together to achieve something with separate component parts and activities – which happens frequently the further you progress. (Dive Thru is another but I am actually in favour of dropping that. The ability to Circle to a Line with the centre couple Half Sashayed also gives a lot of dynamic without changing the styling of the call. This like Dive Thru however does need to have styling stressed and callers need to stop emphasizing that twirling action rather than just a hand raise action. I would also love to see it be circle to a line well defined rather than the current bastardisation of circle about ¼ then shuffle around and try to get out everyone’s way while you half slide sideways into lines garbage that happens too often these days, but that is another issue. I would say keep this movement
I fully support keeping Circle to a Line. It’s used (combined with lead right) as the second most popular get-in from a squared set so it is hugely popular. This single call turns an eight chain Thru formation into a line facing in. Does any other single call do this? You can create lots of different lines with this call. It doesn’t always have to be a zero line. And, you can change the arrangement of the center couple to achieve even more variations. This an easy call to teach and easy to dance.
I am on the fence with this also. In my former area of the Hudson Valley, NY, some people just tap instead of having the lady go under the arm of the person they are next to. Either drop or re-work the definition to just tap if someone has shoulder problems.
I think dropping Circle to a Line is a great idea! PLOS (Partner Lines Out of Sequence) are much more smooth flowingly setup by calling Heads or Sides Lead Right, Veer Left, Bend the Line. Then maybe call three PL to PL zeros, then call Slide Thru and Pass Thru and AL Left.
Drop CTAL!
CTAL has had lots of challenges for dancers. The action to remove from the proposed list is moving in the right direction. Phillip’s suggested equivalent makes sense. When calls are removed, maybe a list of equivalents need to be listed as an alternative.
I think circle to a line should be dropped.
First off all it’s mostly just used from the zero arrangement. This shows, that it is not an easy call for an entry level.
Furthermore it can be easily replaced by a circle left/right 3/4.