Do you support dropping Dive Thru?
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 support dropping Dive Thru. Hopefully the call has enough support to end up as part of the next program (Plus). We as a committee need to make hard decisions to actually be able to trim the introductory program.
It’s rare to see this call used beyond Basic or SSD. So I don’t think it would fly as an addition to Plus. But I like it for the entry level. I find when I teach it, it’s one of the calls that tends to elicit smiles from new dancers. It’s also useful choreographically at that level. I don’t see replacing it with Pass To The Center as a viable option. It’s not reliably danced even on Advanced floors without a reminder to Trade on the outside.
Keep Dive Thru but redefine it as the Arching Dancers release hands the rejoin hands. The call is an excellent way to keep the square tight and has a true “square dance feel” to it. The notion of replacing it with Pass To The Center for decades was not supported as it loses the touching aspect of square dancing. Too many calls that eliminate the touching aspect works the opposite of our activity which is team building through touching and keeping close. I could see an awful future of entry level square dancing that looks like ” Heads Slide Thru Three Times – Pass Thru – Pass to the Center – Centers Pass Thru – Pass Thru – Trade By – Pass Thru – U Turn Back – Pass Thru – Weave The Ring – Home”. That is surely not what will grow square dancing.
While I don’t call this much, it has a dancing element that shows off our dance as a dance. Dropping it will be great for old dancers, but it’s fun for younger dancers. You don’t need to “hold on when you make an arch,” and it has great fundamentals in its teaching, like square breathing. Keep it.
Let’s drop it. I like the brevity of the call and the hand holds, but I don’t like to syllables in “Pass to the Center”. Drop Dive Thru and rename Pass to the Center.
On one hand I do not like to drop all the calls which have a „handhold“ and replace it with the no-hand counterpart (in this example with Pass to the center).
On the other hand I very seldom use the call, because it is not nice to dance to (specially when its called often).
Therefore I am in favor of dropping it.
I DO NOT support dropping Dive Thru
While it can be replaced by “Pass to the Centre” it is better for newer dances to touch hands while completing movements.
Sure, at later programs, we don’t use it much and that’s fine. New dancers need Dive Thru.
I am on the fence on this one. I have always been a proponent of anything that keeps the dancers physically connected, especially for newer dancers. I have had favorable reactions to the call from the classes I have taught. I understand that it may create challenges for dancers who have shoulder or arm problems, but most dancers have adapted well. I remember when Pass to the Center was first introduced as a “no-hands” alternative to DT. In my experience, it has never really caught on. When I call it at an open dance, I always get a significant number of dancers who need to be reminded of the Partner Trade.
I would vote to keep Dive Thru and drop Pass to the Center
I vote to keep it. It’s not hard to do. I like dancing it (for a second, my back gets a bit of stretch as I bend over – if I’m so lucky to be the one who gets to bend!) and I love calling it “Who makes the arch? Who ducks? and Who gets bonked on the head?” and make the dancers laugh! Aren’t we supposed to be keeping the calls that make dancing fun and are easy to teach and learn and dance? There are much harder calls that we can get rid of.
I personally don’t like Dive Thru because of the arch. I know it can be fun, but a lot of dancers I know have shoulder issues and so I would prefer to call Pass to the Center. Of course, the ones that have the issues just don’t make the arch, so it doesn’t cause much issue except for the dancers insistent on making the arch when others don’t want to. However, Pass to the Center is it’s own issue. I personally would like to essentially consolidate Dive Thru and Pass to the Center into one call and slightly change the definition to add extra uses to it, but I guess that is another discussion for another time.
For an “entry level program” I support keeping Dive Thru. It’s a hands-held movement. Both the Archers and the Divers have continuous hand contact. A combination of moves like “Dive Thru, Centers California Twirl” become possible, where “Pass to the Center and Centers Partner Trade, is not a great combination.
It’s just a “one name” movement that quickly puts you in that specific FASR. Add to that, the ease at which it’s useable with the entry level dancers, and newer callers. For me, that makes it a good choice to keep.
Well said.
Furthermore: Dive Thru is unique, while Pass Thru and PTC have a big chance to endorse dancer’s creativity. 🙂 .
Keep it.
Keep DIVE THRU… I am not a big fan of DIVE THRU due to issues of sore shoulders and height differences of dancers. But we need the action of getting the outside dancers into the middle. Those who propose PASS TO THE CENTER (PTTC) are not considering the teaching order. DIVE THRU is in lesson 3. PARTNER TRADE needed for PTTC is not taught until lesson 10! Are you going to move PARTNER TRADE to lesson 3 to support PTTC? Good luck with that. DIVE THRU is an easy teach once CALIFORNIA TWIRL is taught – much easier than teaching PTTC in lesson 3 where the action is needed. Vote to keep DIVE THRU to support an easier teaching program!
There is no teaching order we could consider to.
I personally like Dive Thru, but it again is really for a younger crowd than I get. Pass to the center is much easier for my dancers to dance. Keep one of these in the entry program.
We don’t need dive thru and PTTC both on the plus program. Therefore, I will vote to keep it. If there was some movement on bringing PTTC (with a shorter name) down to entry level, I would be for removing Dive thru.
I strongly agree with Bob Riggs about the need to retain Dive Thru as a well-loved call that has clearly stood the test of time. It is a favorite call in both Traditional Squares and Contras. Younger dancers love this call and frequently request dances that use it. It is easy to teach beginners and is an essential call in a simple sight resolution system that uses only Basic Part 1 calls. It includes hand connection for security but that connection is easy to release if necessary. Although we commonly use it only from an Eight Chain Thru formation, the definition says “Starting formation: Facing Couples” so there are other possible applications. Even those who no longer bend well, still smile and find a way to make it work. This call is an essential part of our square dance heritage — please keep it!
I’m in favour of dropping dive thru. While I’m young and like to have fun with it, it’s awkward for the majority. If we have to manipulate the move to result in letting go of hands in our base level, then we may as well remove this movement. I certainly like the formations it can get us to however I feel times have change and the idea of this proposal is to introduce new ideas into our base level.
I am fully in favor of our efforts to develop the new entry program. However, I must comment on the fact that this program must not only be easy for new dancers to join but it must contain content that will entertain most of our current mainstream population.
On the subject of .Dive Thru.. I vote to retain this call as it provides a fun way to move from the 8 chain formation to a double pass thru formation. My experience with younger dancers indicates that they enjoy tunnels and stars, thus Dive Thru is most enjoyed. We have several callers working with younger dancers and I would hate to see the elimination of a fun call just because some have to adapt to be successful.
In addition: The call Dive Thru is often found in the pattern dances used in community and traditional dancing. If we drop it from our initial program I believe it would be sent up the program chain and ultimately be dropped from MWSD like Curlique. I would anticipate that Dive Thru and its Dip & Dive patterns would continue to be used widely at limited basic community events. CALLERLAB would still need to have it defined and assigned to some list. It is currently on the CDP list.
I like Dive Thru for newer dancers. I find it easy to teach, and the dancers enjoy the “fun” of diving through the arch. While it is not used much at Plus and beyond, it’s a good basic call to move dancers around the square easily. I would like to see it stay in the entry program.
Very much agree with you, Eric. We teach Dive Thru relatively early in the SSD/Basic programs because it’s easy and fun. Almost everyone gets a kick out of the “dive” aspect, even when they have to “modify”. Callers can have fun with the “Dive Dive Dive” submarine call. Besides, it gives a “first intro” to the chicken plucker concept of moving across the street.
Although Dive Thru can be cumbersome it can be used to add fun to the dance experience and the dancers that can no longer do the call due to physical limitations simply adjust on their own to complete the call. I am in favor of keeping this call.
keep it, Yes to dance it is akward, but, tell the “archie dancers”, (centers) to loose some contact for the divers.
I like to call it as a kind of gimmic, from facing lines, couples out of sequence.. “X-couples make an arche, dive thru and prommenade”.
Most of the time the “archie dancers” forget to California twirl… than the fun part comes when they “colaps” with the other couple.
Drop dive thru, add pass the center and rename it to pass and trade.
I say keep it. If we start getting rid of all the traditional calls, we will lose the dancing aspect of the activity as it was intended to be. Sure, it’s a bit awkward, sure there are height differences but it is FUN and isn’t that what dancing should be? The people making that arch don’t necessarily need to hold on to each other. Just a raised arm pointing in towards their partner is sufficient. They can rejoin the handhold AFTER the others Dive thru to finish with a CA Twirl.
Well, I know the callback from a lot of dancers is to groan, if that helps. But if we got rid of things due to dancers not liking the call, not doing it properly, or simply not executing the call when asked, we’d need to remove Promenade, Do-si-Do, RLG and many others.
It’s helpful because it’s tactile, and it’s fun… for a minute or two. The flow is not good. I should lower my head to look at the floor, but I have to look up at the same time to make sure I’m not clocked in the head. The height challenged centers that refuse to let go, regardless of the size of the diving couple are annoying too. And I always have to caution people that if you’re not sure in the moment what to do, drop hands and walk forward. As that’s a safer choice than bending over and pretending you’re playing rugby/american football.
All that being said, I’ll probably vote to keep it, as it’s a good tool early on that I stop using as often once I have other things to do. As has been said, we can’t take away everything that touches someone else, of we might as well send them to line dancing.
I am in favor for dropping Dive Thru from the entry program.
I have heard for years “why do you call dive thru?” and “That shouldn’t be called” from dancers – and every time I call it I pause for the synchronized groan I’m going to get from the floor of dancers. I have called it and used it a lot because no one else in the area does. It is on the list currently, it should be used. If it weren’t on the entry program anymore I wouldn’t have to call it. We as callers should be more flexible. There are other moves that accomplish the same action.
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 have no strong feelings either way. I see the need of older dancers who are not able to lift their arms, but we can tweak the defintion a bit so they don’t don’t have to raise their hands. I think most callers have worked out ways to say “pass to the centre” with 2 sylables instead of 3″.
Hi all,
I did indeed ask two of my dancer groups the question of whether or not to keep the Dive Thru.
The first group was made up of long-time dancers: they were immediately keen to remove this figure, as they no longer like bending over (probably due to their age and the shape of their midsection).
The second group were my current students. Here, too, some would be happy without this figure, while others need this hand position (arch) to be sure that they are dancing correctly.
I replied that if I had taught them Partner Trade before the California Twirl, would they have been less safe? Surprisingly, the answer was that it wouldn’t have made any difference to them, as I would have explained it to them properly.
Therefore, after this discussion, I can vote in good conscience to remove Dive Thru from the list, as we have (and this has already been said several times) at least two equivalents for Dive Thru that are just as good to dance to.
Greetings
Markus
I feel less inclined to drop Dive Thru from this list than the others we’re discussing, even though my wife actively dislikes the call. If Pass to the Center had a shorter name, I’d be much more likely to use that than Dive Thru.
Even so, reducing the size of the entry level list is important enough to me that I’m in favor of dropping it.
I have at times advocated renaming Pass to the Center as Dive Thru.
For those who do not speak English, square dance terms are just a collection of arbitrary sounds. For those who speak English, square dance terms are a collection of words which do not necessarily mean what they mean in “normal” English.
The challenge of saying “just replace Dive Thru with Pass to the Center” (even if you rename it) is that we have to replace the California Twirl with a Trady By. One of the arguments for having Dive Thru where it is in the teaching order is that you are keeping couples hand connected (even if couples have to modify). I’ve never had a problem in teaching with telling people “don’t worry about holding the arch if it’s uncomfortable”. But I do know that for whatever reason (mostly partner connection), teaching a Cali Twirl is easier than teaching a Trade By that early in the program.
**Caution, irony ahead:** I’m in favor of removing everything that involves touching, especially handholds. If someone wants to “dance,” they should do Round Dance. Square Dance is appealing solely because you share 9 square meters with seven other people and try to get from A to B without injury. The body is merely there to transport the brain from A to B while avoiding other brains. Those who want to avoid any risk do Line Dance.
What soul are we giving to Square Dance? I’m in favor of keeping *Dive Thru* and performing *Chicken Plucker* the way it was originally intended—after all, where do you think the name comes from?
Excellent comment, Martin. We as a group do need to consider the “soul” of Square Dancing. Maybe silly, fun, joyful, wild, devious….?
I support dropping Dive Thru.
It is a movement like Box Gnat that has become more awkward for our current demographic of dancers and often results in a “let go” of hands of those making the arch. I think we need to accept that this is a reality.
Teaching will need to be adjusted a little to move dancers to the centre from an 8 chain thru formation before Pass to Centre is taught but that’s quite doable.
From previous years of our Australian Callers meetings, there is a lot of support here to drop DT.
I support keeping Dive Thru,
it is a list rather early on the list and you only need to know two other calls to dance this (Pass Thru and California Twirl)
It is a great way to change a 8-chain-thru formation to a double-pass-thru formation early on to raise awareness on different formations.
The call is well taught and used in my area (Germany, Braunschweig) among multiple callers.
As how often it is used, I am used to at least use it once on all dance nights (up to C2) to keep the awareness fresh, that all the basic calls shall be known and danced.
If we remove this call, we should find a replacement for it. Most caller will propose pass-to-the-center for this, but please be aware, we would need to have the whole trade family completed before doing so, that was figure 35(c) on the basic list or figure 47(d) on the ssd list, I would think this would be too late to raise awareness on different formations.
In our area we also teach right on the beginning, you are allowed to let go of the hands, if there is a peculiar configuration of different body heights in your square, also don’t go lower as you know your body supports.
I support dropping DT. I know tradition plays a major roll in our activity and we need to keep as much as possible, however, it does create a “space” issue when executing the call.
We have many calls to get dancers into the centre.
I support to drop it.
I don’t see many people in Europe liking that call.
We even changed the “chicken plucker” in caller training to a version without it.
Everything else is already said.
Dive thru: I support the dropping of Dive thru. There are other options available. I would even support dropping pass to the centre, as there are other options available with better flow and better verbiage to timing delivery.
There are however a lot of positives with Dive Thru. It is still a very popular call everywhere (Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Canada etc. Except for perhaps in parts of the US where after basic it is not use, or it has been removed from use because of the age of the dances (sad but true) it is a fun call – especially for young dancer. The lack of use and problem is likely more attributable to the lack of styling options being properly taught rather than danceability of the movement. – That is not the movement’s fault, so I hope dancer age and lack of use that does not become the drop reason. Dive Thru is a well-loved and well used timeless classic and a basic staple of foundation modules.
That said however; despite all the positives and the history, the movement really doesn’t serve a lot of practical purpose that aren’t done with other more flexible movements. It is for that reason alone that I would support its removal
I support Dive Thru staying on the list. Many callers forget how much fun you can have with the call. You can use this call from lines by specifying who will be making the arch. And, the outside couple doesn’t have to be normal: From CB: RL Thru, Outsides Half Sashay, Dive Thru, RL Grand. So there are a lot of ways call Dive Thru and make it fun. This call has seen a revival in SSD programs.
As we move forward in creating the best of all possible foundational lists, I think it is important to ask a few questions with each possible drop. For Dive Thru these are:
• Is this call an essential call that plays an important role in the program? I would say no.
• How often does it occur in common choreography?–I would say rarely after Basic and SSD class—even in Basic and SSD once it is taught, its use fades out.
• Are there alternative equivalents that we can use instead of this call? Yes—the most obvious is possibly adding Pass to the Center if Dive Thru is dropped, ass Thru, Outsides Trade works well.
• Would dancers miss having this call? I would say no they wouldn’t. I think many would be glad.
• Do dancers execute the call with alternative action? Yes, very many do. In fact, I believe most of us teach minor variations in action as part of our instruction
• Is this call needed/used frequently at following programs? I find it is rarely used after beginner class
I would support dropping Dive Thru.
I support pass to the center to replace dive thru. I feel pass to the center is a much smoother motion. Besides with dive through you might have a tall couple trying to dive through facing a short couple.
I strongly support dropping Dive Thru. I’m iffy on adding Pass to the Center. I think better choreo options exist.
I support the action to remove DT from the proposed Ad-Hoc list. This call has been a hanging fruit to delete for a couple for decades. Can Pass to the Center be moved up to the first list if DT is removed?