Here is a letter sent to the Morris Ring Circular Number 46, Spring this year and therefore referring to 2003.
Comments please!


"This is the time of year that we review the highs and lows of last season and make plans for next year. There is ( quite rightly) some debate within the morris movement about how we maintain standards. However, most of us agree that we should avoid giving ammunition to those members of the public who are all too ready to mock morris dancing. In this regard, two events last summer caused concern to a number of dance sides and festival organisers. Both involved unscheduled performances by 'ad hoc' dance teams. Neither did anything to enhance the reputation of Cotswold Morris. We witnessed both, and have been encouraged by a number of people to raise this matter openly.
The first event, at Sidmouth Festival, involved 'Motley Morris'. Not the established border side of the same name, but a random group of dancers who were not even in kit and who had clearly made little or no effort to standardise their dancing. Nevertheless, they danced at an official performance spot alongside invited teams, from England and overseas. Sidmouth calls itself 'First Amongst Festivals' and has a justified reputation at home and abroad. Consequently, members of the public, and international dance teams, could assume that the cheerful shambles of Motley Morris represents an acceptable standard for English traditional dance reinforcing the poor public image of Morris dancing.
Although their stunt backfired, at least Motley were well-meaning. The same cannot be said of 'Scratch Morris' who disrupted another excellent festival at Whitby. In past years their stunts at Whitby have included 'gatecrashing' the 1999 dance finale photo (which was meant to be used as the millennium programme front cover), and offending many by starting to carry a mock coffin in the parade. This year, they invaded the parade, barracked and attempted to trip dancers from another team, and 'gatecrashed' the finale at the bandstand after being explicitly told by the dance coordinator not to perform there. They had clearly set out to annoy Organisers and performers alike.
There is a long history of fooling in Morris and the best teams (Great Western, Windsor etc) can hardly be accused of lacking in humour. Their comedy, however, is an adjunct to the dance. The clown on the high wire is the best acrobat, not someone larking about and bringing the show into disrepute. As the squire of one team said to us ' there are enough people taking the mickey out of Morris dancing without morris dancers doing it'. Every experienced Morris Fool knows that there is a fine line between being funny and silly. This stuff is well the wrong side of the line.
There may be debate about the value of such performances on aesthetic or historical grounds. After all, some of these folks are experienced dancers. They may genuinely believe that what others regard as their tatty kit and their erratic dancing are representations of the anarchic, anti-authority spirit of the "real" Morris tradition. We should try to avoid becoming embroiled in a sterile internal wrangle, and think instead about what the public might want to see. Roy Dommett wisely observed (albeit in a different context) that what matters is not so much what dancers think, but whether they perform what the audience enjoys watching. Judging by the hostile reception they received from the crowd at Whitby, Scratch Morris still have a good deal to learn about pleasing audiences. Be that as it may, their habit of wilfully disrupting performances by booked teams at public dance events is wholly unforgivable.
Best wishes"