So,
atreic and
emperor got married yesterday, which was nice.
I managed to get through the ceremony without worrying too much about its transactional integrity, as I've tended to do at other weddings I've been to recently. Instead I found myself wondering what I'd do about clothes if I ever got married. My particular peculiarity, you see, is that I absolutely hate wearing a shirt and tie; I'm willing to do it for other people's weddings, but at my own wedding I would want to make it very clear that nobody should wear anything they didn't actually want to wear. But that only solves half the problem: having the occasional guest turn up in jeans and a T-shirt is one thing, but having the groom dress like that would still seem a bit odd even to me (and the hypothetical bride would have to be pretty forgiving to let me get away with it!). I haven't yet thought of a satisfactory answer to what I'd wear at my own wedding, so it's probably just as well such an event isn't looking the least bit likely in the near or medium future.
Also I've figured out what the deal is with four-part harmony in hymns. Ever since my social group started putting sheet music in their orders of service, I've stopped complaining that I could never remember the hymn tune from one verse to the next, and instead bemoaned my apparent total inability to sing it sensibly. I've now figured out what this is about: it's because I naively thought that given my vocal range I clearly ought to pick out the bass part from the sheet music and sing that. Unfortunately, singing bass appears to be incredibly hard: I can't clearly hear myself over the clamour around me, so I can't correct any pitch errors I might make, and also it's surprisingly hard simply to keep the bass part's tune in mind when all you can hear is the soprano part. I don't know how much of this is normal, how much is due to my musical skills being rather rusty, and how much is due to the fact that even when I was a musician I played the violin and hence mostly lead melodies or nearly so. But part way through this wedding I suddenly noticed that the men around me seemed to be singing the soprano part transposed down by however many octaves seemed appropriate, so I switched to doing that and found it to be almost laughably easy in comparison. Proper musicians are now welcome to complain, or offer helpful advice, or sympathise, or all three.
After the wedding I went home, ate some food, and changed out of my suit for the ceilidh. (I had seen an LJ post from
emperor a few days ago saying they ‘officially’ didn't care what people wore to the ceilidh, which was very welcome given my abovementioned dislike of shirts and ties, and probably also what got me thinking about clothes in general.) A bit later it occurred to me that what I could have done to achieve comfort while showing a continued willingness to look at least vaguely smart would have been to keep the actual suit on but switch the shirt and tie for a simple long-sleeved white T-shirt; but by then I was half way through walking into town for the ceilidh, so it was too late.
Ceilidhs strike me as strange. What primarily strikes me as strange about them is the preservation of the tradition of people personally asking one another to dance. I participated in one of the early dances mostly due to not running away fast enough, and what happened was that we all arranged ourselves in a gender-alternating circle and then the men went round anticlockwise while the women went round clockwise, so the person who had actually asked me to dance rapidly headed in the opposite direction and I only saw her in passing once or twice thereafter. Not only does this make it slightly meaningless to ask someone to dance with you, but it also means that if etiquette requires (as I wasn't sure whether it might) that you thank your nominal partner at the end of the dance, you have to find your way through a milling crowd of randoms in order to do so. As far as I can tell, therefore, this is a nearly-vestigial tradition whose sole remaining purpose is to achieve the parity of gender generally required by the dance structure.
After that experience I managed to stay off the dancefloor for the rest of the evening and treat the event much as I treat the Calling (primarily a social gathering, with the added risk that the person you're talking to might at any moment decide to dash off and dance). As a social gathering it was definitely good, with about the right combination of lovely people I knew well, lovely people I hadn't seen in too long, lovely people I wanted to know better, and lovely people I'd never spoken to before. (Not all of these categories are disjoint. :-) So that was excellent fun, mostly.
On the way home my umbrella exploded. It was the only accessory I'd brought with me to the ceilidh, and I'd been a little worried that I'd forget I had it with me and leave it there. In fact I remembered about it with no difficulty (without even having to step outside, notice it was raining, and think ‘hmm, an umbrella would be useful – aha!’), but it did me no good at all, because as soon as I got outside and pressed its Up button, it shot to full extension with unusual force and then went *twang* and what looked like a couple of snapped metal hawsers shot out of the mechanism. Among the damage was the catch that held the umbrella actually open; I was able to hold it open manually, but that proved so painful after a few minutes that I abandoned the idea completely and just got very wet on the walk home. Bah.
Don't you like dancing? Why not?
Dancing alternate gender. Yes, mostly obsolete. It does serve a practical purpose, in that it most of the dances are designed for two rows of people and you can see at a glance which you should be aiming for. At least in Ceilidh in cambridge no-one bats an eyelid if you change sex, (especially if you're female), whereas in CDC no-one *minds* but because it's always inevitably two very good dancers showing off, it's not normal but cause for staring and applause :) And most people seem happy with most of the time dancing with the opposite sex.
Asking people to dance. Well, maybe somewhat obsolete, but it's a convenient way of (a) getting an even number of people mostly opposite sex on the floor and (b) allowing some discretion who you spend half of the dance with. Progressive partner dances are the exception; it's like asking someone to dance but only 10% as much, I don't think you need find them specifically. (c) Also, it's a nice way of socially interacting someone other than talking.
I am a geek
I believe the phrasing is supposed to be "Simon in 'is a geek' shock; read all about it!" :)
Transactional integity
As gerald duck says I assume it's implicit that "I do, provided they also do."[1] It always puzzles me that they never do this in fantasy novels.
Hero: I swear to [go on quest we agreed is more important than our differences]
provided all the other people actually do swearAntihero: Mwahahaha! I don't! Now you have to go and save the world, whilst I shall be taking it over. Ha!
[1] Hey, I just had a scary thought. We have suggestions for their not being unique, at which point we need to wonder if they're supposed to be transitive, which leads to the question, are they reflexive? But [1] makes me wonder what on earth would happen if they weren't symmetric!
The one dance that stressed me out at the ceilidh did so because it had a complicated phase where everyone was moving individually at the same time (which is much harder than having a fixed point of reference or someone to hold on to), because it changed what you had to do half-way through the dance, and because your couple moved to form a four with a different couple each iteration, and so I was responsible to different people each time for getting it right (or, er, wrong).
(S)
Hmm. Perhaps I've been unlucky in only finding myself involved in the kind of dance where it doesn't make a difference then. *shrug*
Don't you like dancing? Why not?
As
Also, I think, the sort of big sprawling dance that involves every dancer being one cog in a large machine just doesn't hold much intrinsic appeal for me. I can at least see the point of a ballroom-style dance such as a waltz, even if I don't have the skills to actually do it, because it seems to me that dancing with a partner in that sense is a means of spending quality time with them which combines the good points of several sorts of activity: the bonding effect of any cooperative physical activity, the intimacy of a prolonged cuddle, and the pleasant feeling of having each other's undivided attention for a reasonable period (which is often hard to get any other way in a large social event). But a ceilidh-style dance doesn't really have any of those things in the same way, and I'm not entirely sure I see what it does have instead that makes it enjoyable.
They're a minority, I'd actually like to see more of them[1]. It's mainly very confusing/annoying when you don't realise before you start, if either you would have liked to join in, or prefer to stick with a couple of people you started with you know will lead you round.
[1] I'm not sure why. I like meeting many people even if briefly. It has an intricate clock like thing going.
[dancing]
I feel sure there must be an RFC or something somewhere explaining "Why dancing is fun", if only in case we meet aliens and they all go "You do WHAT? To MUSIC?" :) You're right, if you haven't, it's awkard. I did ballroom for ages, and it's only comfortable when you can dance with people without checking if you know the same things first. It's perhaps lucky if someone takes you in hard and shows you a first few, easy dances; a partner who can show you in a dance where that makes sense can make it a lot easier.
waltz vs ceilidh
*shrug* To each his own. I like both, though I couldn't say why. Perhaps compare a ceilidh to socialising with a *group* of friends; while waltz is clearly superior for cuddling, celidh has more abandon and mixing. I don't know.