|
01 Oct 09 - 06:22 AM (#2735692) Subject: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Mr Red A recent article in the New Scientist reported research about group physical synchronous exersion. It says that by working in synchrony the individuals in the group release more endorphins. They are happier for doing it all at the same time. The example given was a rowing team. But I submit it does define ceilidh dancing in the same way. Add to that the fact that was given to me by a badminton coach: you can expend 16% more energy exercising to music. Now those two facts fit exactly in the ceilidh canon. I dance because I love it, but it is nice to know some of the reasons why. |
|
01 Oct 09 - 12:28 PM (#2735916) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Folkiedave And and morris dancing. Can't think of any other physical synchronous exertion sometimes done to music. :-) |
|
01 Oct 09 - 01:07 PM (#2735952) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: GUEST,Mr Red line dancing. Old time ballroom sequence dancing. Squares and contra. It is just that ceilidhs are more tolerant than some at mistakes. |
|
01 Oct 09 - 06:08 PM (#2736189) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Dave the Gnome Unless you attend a Playford! I do heartily agree with the sentiment of the OP though. BTW - Why was line dancing invented? To give Morris dancers something to laugh at... :D (eG) |
|
01 Oct 09 - 07:05 PM (#2736223) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: curmudgeon "Can't think of any other physical synchronous exertion sometimes done to music. :-) " Capstan, windlass, pump, halyard, etc? |
|
01 Oct 09 - 08:26 PM (#2736283) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Tug the Cox Ceilidh....synchronous ??? |
|
01 Oct 09 - 08:28 PM (#2736284) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Herga Kitty I think I got more of a buzz from dancing Northwest with Flowers of May than from dancing at ceilidhs... because we tried harder to be synchronous? Kitty |
|
02 Oct 09 - 04:01 AM (#2736437) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Splott Man I'm with Tug on this one. Splott Man with his caller's hat on. |
|
02 Oct 09 - 06:37 AM (#2736501) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: GUEST,Mr Red If the caller is doing his job, it is synchronous. I well remember going up to the gallery at Chippenham FF and saw a sight I hadn't anticipated. Looking down on the dances I expected the bobbing heads all at different times, somewhat like the purturbations on a lake with a bit of wind. What I saw was just that until, all of a sudden, the whole room (well the dancers) moved in a clockwise direction, then moved back. Synchronous is the only word that fits. You try doing a reel with people who haven't synchronised with you. Start a bit late. They move left when you move right (facing each other you have to both move to your own right) well I have done it and it is not synchrony |
|
02 Oct 09 - 07:24 AM (#2736517) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: GUEST,Jim Martin "Can't think of any other physical synchronous exertion sometimes done to music. :-) - can't remeber what it's called, when Hebridean women used to sing while they were beating or rolling cloth. |
|
02 Oct 09 - 07:41 AM (#2736526) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Jim Carroll "were beating or rolling cloth." Hi Jim It's called 'waulking' - some nice footage of it on the Phil Cunningham programme last week. Jim Carroll PS, Did you know we have booked Ultan (The Men Who Built Britain) Cowley for the first OKS talk on Friday week? |
|
02 Oct 09 - 07:44 AM (#2736529) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: GUEST LOL Well, I take the intended point although I wouldn't seek to limit it to ceilidh dancing. The buzz from ceilidh dancing is IMO quite different from that from Morris (in its various forms) and country/folk/Playford, for instance. At a "typical" ceilidh the formation is more a means to an end. You need the formation to do the dance, but nobody really bothers too much about how it looks from the stage or how synchronised people actually are. Most people are there to have fun flinging themselves around, more or less to music. (An event only for experienced dancers might differ...) Getting it wrong is often as much fun as getting it right. With Morris and Playford, getting it right is part of the dance. The dancers know when the dance is going well, when everyone is in time with each other (and the music!) and there is a very definite kick when everyone stops together, in the right place and at the right time. Dunno about sequence and line dancing. Likely to remain that way... Malcolm |
|
02 Oct 09 - 08:10 AM (#2736546) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: GUEST, topsie Dressage? Armies marching to military bands? That thing they do at the Royal Tournament pulling gun carriages? |
|
02 Oct 09 - 08:27 AM (#2736555) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: GUEST,Penny S. (elsewhere) That would also explain the attraction for certain regimes of mass gymnastics. Make them feel good and they won't notice the monsters up on the dais are monsters. Penny |
|
02 Oct 09 - 01:29 PM (#2736765) Subject: RE: Ceilidh science confirms wot we all knew From: Marje I remember some long-ago TV programme about some aspects of social anthropology touching on this. They said, I think, that dancing was important for social bonding because it entailed synchronised moving to music, and also because, in many cases, it also involves physical contact between the dancers. In many societies, when people are elated and celebrating, (e.g they've just heard some great news), their spontaneous reaction will be to join hands and dance in a ring, clockwise, possibly singing or chanting something together. Ceilidh dancing includes some moves that are quite primal and instinctive for humans - and many, it has to be said, which are not quite instinctive enough for some of us :-) Marje |