We're using cookies to make this site more secure, featureful and efficient.

Issue 948: Incorrect progression in "The Eight of Diamonds" by Derek Haynes

Object
The Eight of Diamonds (Dance)
Submitter
Eric Ferguson (EricFerguson)
Assigned to
Eric Ferguson
Priority
Normal
Disposition
Fixed
Description

My attention was drawn to this dance by issue 947, now fixed. I checked the progression, as described by Derek in his original description (5th Carnforth book). It is clear what Derek writes, he just lets both the “squares” repeat the progression figure from “Domino Five” (four Rsh place changes of the centre and corner dancers, taking the corners successively anticlockwise).

Regrettably, that does not work. If you make all four double changes, you end up with the progression (53216784). In that progression, dancers 2 and 3 just change places each time, and never become a “centre”. The set returns to initial positions after only 6 times through. It seems likely that Derek tried out this dance, but later made some untested change to the progression and did not discover this error.

Alas, we cannot ask Derek how to fix it. So I have been looking for ways to get the progression working well. There are endless possibilities. The simplest one I have found is to keep all three pairs of changes exactly as Derek describes for bars 25-30, and on bar 31-32 just to let dancers 2 and 3 (who both just arrived at the “centres”) to change places. That gives the progression (56412783) which goes round beautifully in 8 times through, and every dancer visits every place once.

I invite you all to discuss this by contributing to this “issue”. Anselm: is this an issue to discuss on “Strathspey”? Eric

Previous Actions

  • Date  May 23, 2016, 5:02 p.m.
  • User  Eric Ferguson (EricFerguson)

New issue submitted

  • Date  May 23, 2016, 5:46 p.m.
  • User  Heiko Schmidt (castle_ghost)

We actually do not need to ask Derek, because he was aware of this.

The Carnforth Collection 5 reprinted in March 2003 contains the following sentence below the description: “Repeat from new positions. Note that dancers number 2 and 3 simply change places with each other every 32 bars.”

(I do not have the initial print from March 2002, but I guess that one did not have that comment and that it is the version you have.)

Thus, progression “other” is correct (we should not define 53216784 as a proper progression I think) and we do not have to hypothesize how to correct this to make it a proper progression ;)

I guess that the dance was devised more for demonstration purposes and not for balls… but that is guessing.

Eric, I leave it to you to set your issue to either “fixed” or “ignored” ;)

Cheers, Heiko

  • Date  May 23, 2016, 8:51 p.m.
  • User  Anselm Lingnau (anselm)

This might merit an “Extra Info” note mentioning the revised edition. I agree with Heiko about the non-necessity of second-guessing Derek.

As a matter of interest, for a display a few years ago we did an 11-person version along the same lines (basically two Domino Fives side by side facing the audience with an extra person in the centre between the two sets). It looks pretty impressive. I probably have it on video somewhere (not on YouTube).

  • Date  May 23, 2016, 10:17 p.m.
  • User  Eric Ferguson (EricFerguson)

Assigned changed to »EricFerguson« (previously »None«)
Disposition changed to »Being handled« (previously »New«)

I had close contact with Derek, who keenly supported my crib work and sent me more corrections than anyone else has done since. My copy of 5th Carnforth is marked “Gift from DH, may 2002”. I don’t own the 2003 reprint, so I was not aware Derek knew of the imperfect progression.

I agree with Heiko and Anselm. I have added “Note that dancers number 2 and 3 simply change places with each other every 32 bars.” to the Extra info, and set the progression to “other”.

If anyone wants to use this dance with a full progression, it goes fully round in 8 times through if 31-32 reads “the new centres change places”. If for 31-32 the new centres do not move at all (or make a full RH turn) the dance returns to initial positions after 4 times through. Is that comment worth adding? Greetings. Eric

  • Date  Feb. 23, 2017, 3:47 p.m.
  • User  Eric Ferguson (EricFerguson)

Disposition changed to »Fixed« (previously »Being handled«)

Comments now complete. Fixed. Eric