% Typed in by Dana Scott and converted to Latex by Stephen Gildea, August 2007.
% Proofread by Veronica, December 2010.
% Veronica's changes made by Benji Fisher, February 2011.
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\begin{document}

\title{A Brief History of Square and Round Dancing}
\author{Veronica Ann McClure}
\date{February 5, 1987 (revised February 8, 2011)}
\maketitle

Today's square and round dancing is a continuation of the social dance
history of western civilization.  This tradition has always emphasized
a group of dancers moving through space making large patterns, with a
steady, rhythmical base supporting the melody of the music.  An early
form was a line of dancers who made circles, spirals, and
followed-the-leader.  The line could be divided for concentric
circles, lines, columns, ranks, or squares.  Individuals moved as a
group so that it could make these patterns. Over and over, references
describe a group creating a basic shape, moving through other
formations, and returning to the starting shape, just as when we do
some calls and then promenade home.

Coinciding with these group dances are couple dances in which one of a
few couples separate from the group, dance for the group, and then
rejoin the group.  Both types are in Italian dance manuals of the 15th
and 16th centuries and appear to have been danced in all parts of
Europe.

In the 17th century (the Puritan era), what became known as ``English country
dancing'' (then it was just ``the dancing'') was widely popular.
However, the name may be
misleading as the dancing was also done in cities and by the upper
classes---it was not ``hayseed'' or ``bumpkin'' at all.  In 1651, the
first book describing this dancing, \emph{The English Dancing Master,} was
published.  This was also the beginning of the Baroque style of
dance, which reached its greatest development in the French courts.
There is much surviving documentation about both and how they
influenced one another, especially in England and France.

Because the North American continent was colonized by Europeans,
especially the English and French, we inherited this dancing.  During
the Revolutionary period, the formation most popular was two lines
facing, then called ``longways'' and now ``contra.''  In the second half of
the 18th century, the square formation, then called ``cotillion'' (the
spelling has changed over time), became popular.  In the 19th century, the
square formation became the ``quadrille'' while the name ``cotillion'' morphed
to several other uses.
All
through the 19th century it was a dominant force in the ballroom, and
a mainstay of all the classes, although class differences show in the manner
of dancing.

In the late 18th century, a folk dance became popular in upper class
ballrooms because of the same mindset that fueled the French and
American Revolutions and idealized ``the common man.''  It was the
waltz.  It was considered shocking not only because of its low-class
origin but because dancers turned their backs on the group and
concentrated on themselves instead of working as a group.  Not only that, they
turned around and around
together, creating the first ``round dance'' in the sense that we today
use the term.

For several decades, the terms ``waltz'' and ``round dance'' were
equivalent (like ``car'' and ``automobile'' now).  In the 1840s, the polka
arrived.  Because it was a couple dance with turns, it was also called a
waltz and a round dance.  As other couple dances were introduced,
including gallops and schottisches, they too were called waltzes or
round dances to distinguish them from the square dances, \textit{regardless of how
much or how little they turned}.  Throughout
the 19th century, ``ballroom dancing'' meant squares and rounds.

In the late 19th and early 20th century, the history of western dance
was disrupted as never before by ragtime and jazz.  Both have
characteristics opposite to western tradition, particularly more
emphasis on individual improvisation, a tendency to stay on the spot
and move body parts, and complex or multiple rhythms.  These were
brought to the forefront of popular interest by black musicians and
dancers and the whites who copied them.  Squares and rounds became
unfashionable and were danced only by those who were either unable or
uninterested in keeping up with the latest from the cities.  Among
them were rural folks in New England, Appalachia, and the American
West.

In the 1920s, Henry Ford of Model-T fame worried that the flamboyant
popular dancing of the day might ruin forever the more elegant and
genteel dancing his grandparents had done.  He decided to
revive the ``old'' style by building a beautiful ballroom, hiring
Benjamin Lovett (a dancing master from Sudbury, Massachusetts) to run
classes and dances, and publishing a book called \emph{Good Morning,} in
which the late 19th-century squares and rounds were revived ``after a sleep
of twenty-five years.''

Ford's revival influenced Lloyd Shaw, a high school educator in
Colorado, who decided to include dances of the American West in the
physical education curriculum.  The old-timers he worked with had been
young people in the 19th century and told him about local variations
on the usual 19th century dances.  Shaw augmented this information
with 19th century dance manuals and liberally edited the results
according to his own needs and those of his high school dancers, who
were, as one might guess, an energetic group.

Shaw and ``The Cheyenne Mountain Dancers'' danced in many locations,
making their version of 19th-century dance particularly well-known.
After World War II, the healing senses of ``home'' and ``American folk,''
together with greatly increased communication and travel, coincided
with the growing interest in Shaw's ``Western'' squares and rounds.
Colorado became Mecca and people who went there wanted to bring this
dancing to their own communities.  Charlie Baldwin, the ``grandaddy of
square dancing in New England,'' was one of them.

At first, these ``Western'' squares and rounds tended to have short
sequences with predictable repeats, fairly energetic tempos, and a
lively style of movement.  Dancers learned by watching and listening
but usually did not need many lessons.  As more people became
interested, more ideas began to flow, resulting in more square dance
calls and round dance steps.  This, in turn, created the need for more
technical understanding on the part of callers and cuers, more
training for dancers and more written materials such as round dance
cuesheets and caller's note services. The information explosion of the
20th century hit the dance world.  Further, it contributed to a
slowdown of the\ tempo and energy level of the dancing, which
coincided with an aging dance population.

Today's modern western square and round dancing are so richly
developed that there is more material than most dancers want to learn.
Subgroups have been created in which dancers use certain portions of
the material.  An emerging question is whether these subgroups will be
part of the whole, new branches on the family tree, or wither and fall
off.

Western squares and rounds are only a part of today's total, for
social dance is fragmented according to age group and subculture.  We
have---and take for granted---a much wider sampling of movement and
musical styles from more different cultures than have ever before been
available.  (Perhaps, as the globe seems to shrink, we will have to
look to outer space to find those things which seem truly
``outlandish.'')  It is hard to imagine today's culture without the
dancing derived from the jazz tradition, i.e., Broadway's show
dancing, tap dancing, jitterbug-lindy-swing, and the solo dancing
associated with rock.  We also have round dancing and the dancing
usually meant today as ``ballroom dancing,'' as well as the
``traditional'' squares and contras which survived through the ragtime
and jazz eras.  They too have changed along the way, for change is
often equivalent to survival.

Squares and rounds (in all their forms) continue the dance tradition
of western civilization as well as or better than anything else in
this wide and beautiful array.  We need to understand and appreciate
this heritage without negating other forms or being vaguely
sentimental and emotional.  We need to understand that change is
normal and that we are not dancing exactly as we did 50, 100, or 200
years ago.  We are one of a number of forms of recreational dance and
a vital part of the dance world.  We have a proven vehicle for fun,
fellowship, and community-building to enjoy, share and continue.

However, as for the nature of square and round dancing---or any other
dancing---to come, only the dance historians of the future can tell
us where we will go from here.


Happy dancing!

\end{document}
