Monday, 29 April 2024

School of Grace


Having written an article (and, in a report for Mass of Ages, a paragraph) arguing for the role of social dance in traditional Catholicism, I'd like to write in defence of traditionalism in Catholic social dance. The first argument is contra Catholics who believe dancing necessarily leads to sin and the second is for Catholics who suspect some undead oppression lies behind traditional ballroom deportment. 

My own dance parties are simultaneously very old school and mildly quixotic. Guests are begged to reply to invitations, but they are warmly welcomed if they come without doing so. Everyone invited either goes to the local TLM or went to one of my ticketed dances, so I know who they are. If young people visiting our TLM from afar appear uninvited at the party, they too are welcomed. (I would really very much prefer that someone introduce me to them first, though.)

So far we have three old-fashioned but helpful conventions: the RSVP, which helps the host or hostess know how many people whose enjoyment he or she must work toward; the exclusive guest list, which helps the host or hostess guarantee that the party is companionable (and safe); and introductions to potential guests, so the host or hostess doesn't feel that he or she has been mistaken for a youth worker. At the same time, the Christian value of hospitality takes precedence over strict observance of these tools of civilization.

Now we come to the parties themselves, which are currently held in hall with a wooden dance floor. Unusual for adult parties these days, they involve planned entertainment: primarily dance instruction. And the oldest of old school conventions occurs at the beginning of the lessons when I ask all the ladies to sit on the cushioned benches and then invite the gentlemen to ask them to dance. 

Gentlemen asking ladies to dance

I can imagine the objections already. Women, equal in dignity to men, are made to sit and wait for a man's invitation? And men, who could be at home playing video games, are expected to risk women saying no to them

If this were an alt-right meme, this is where the big-jawed "based" man says "YES." However, it is a blogpost, so I will write (from experience) that learning to sit and wait for the man who truly wants to spend time with you (and is not just being polite) is one of the most important lessons the modern woman can learn. Meanwhile, the man who is too scared to ask a woman to dance is one day going to have trouble inviting the woman he really wants to marry him. 

Gentlemen leading ladies back to their seats

But wait--there's more! The gentlemen take the ladies by their left hands and lead them to the dance floor. And when the waltz is over, the gentlemen take the ladies by their left hands again and lead them back to the bench (or "their friends," as I imaginatively put it). 

There are two reasons why we do this. The first is that I have zero training as a dance teacher beyond watching YouTube videos, and my favourite YouTube waltz teacher is Egils Smagris. And when Mr. Smagris teaches his class of impossibly tall, slim and beautiful students, he directs the boys to offer their hands to the girls, lead them to the dance floor, spin them around when the dance is over, and lead them right back to the side. Mr. Smagris won the Latvian Ballroom Championship in 1987, and I'm not going to argue with him. 

But the second reason is that this very old school approach solves the problem of a man abandoning his partner the middle of the dance floor, leaving her standing around awkwardly wondering if she should wait there for her next partner (if one ever turns up) or scurrying back to her seat. 

Gentlemen as metaphorical party hosts

In short, from the time the lady accepts a gentleman's invitation to dance (her RSVP, incidentally), she is his guest. And like a good host, the gentleman escorts her to the dance floor, does his best to keep her entertained and unharmed, and then sees her back to her temporary home when the 2-to-5 minute party is over. Like a good guest, the lady follows along with what her host has planned (the dance steps), keeps a cheerful countenance, and thanks him when the mini-party is over. 

Thinking this through, it is because the gentleman is expected to provide the entertainment (the direction the dancing goes) and the protection (avoiding bumping into other couples) that it is up to the gentleman to do the asking. There's a big difference between offering to give someone something (entertainment, safety) and asking for those things. It's the difference between "Please come to my party!" and "Can I come to your party?"

Also, the gentleman making the lady his guest (as it were) before and after the piece of music is over, suggests that he is engaging with her for her own sake and not just because he needs a live body to dance with. 

The hostess' sneaky ulterior motive

Thus, despite all this emphasis on masculine actions and decision-making versus feminine sitting, accepting (or rejecting, remember), smiling, and being led about, the real goal is to make women feel honoured, cherished, comfortable and that they are having a very good time. Of course, I also want men to feel confident and appreciated, which is easier when there is a clear set of conventions to follow and the women they interact with are fun to be with. However, I am a woman who has felt very bored and rejected at dances, and I never want a woman--any woman--to feel bored or rejected at any dance that I organize. Not on my watch. 

Meanwhile, in modernity...

Yesterday I went to a ticketed tea dance in Edinburgh with two female friends. The dance featured a live jazz band, and I would have paid just to hear them. For one thing, I might want to hire them one day. 

The dance was entirely unlike my own dances and not just because there were no lessons involved. First, there was no discernible host or hostess--just name-checkers at the door. Second, there were more ladies than gentlemen. Third, there was no institutional interest in whether or not the ladies along the walls were dancing. Fourth, I was not introduced to any potential partners. Fifth, the ladies were not escorted back to their seats. (When a dance ended the partners had desultory conversation in the middle of the floor and then parted there.) Sixth, some women darted hither and thither, looking for unengaged men to ask to dance. 

Mrs McLean, the one-day-to-be-famous Trad Catholic Dance impresario, sat smiling in her seat and was only just saved from total wallflowerdom by a gentleman who recognized her from elementary swing class. We had an agreeable Lindy Hop, and that was that. I was also approached by a nice young man who recognized me from swing events years ago, and I introduced him to my friends. He thereupon asked one of them to dance and then, when the music was over and after desultory conversation, he left her in the middle of the floor. (Sigh.) O tempora, o mores

The band was excellent, and I was sorry none of my gentleman acquaintances were there, for those who like swing-dancing would have had a very good time, and we ladies would have been assured of partners. I have been to enough Edinburgh swing events to know that it takes a very long time and much hard work to become one of the women the male adepts ask to dance. I walked in not expecting to do so. 

Meanwhile, there was a silver lining in my black invisibility cloak, and it was the evidence presented that in presiding over old school ballroom manners, I am indeed making life easier--not harder--for young women. I hope I am also making it more pleasant for young men. What I am running, however imperfectly, is a school of grace. At least I hope so. 

Update: I feel inspired to mention that in the 19th century, gentlemen didn't necessarily take ladies right back to their seats/friends/chaperones during a formal ball. They were expected to ask her if she would like anything from the refreshment room, take her there, get her a drink and a snack, and chat with her until someone else insisted on chatting with her. In fact, gentlemen's duties at upper crust dances in the 19th century were so heavy, it is not surprising to me that so many kept to the card room instead. 

2 comments:

  1. Something I remember reading in that Pan Book of Etiquette and Good Manners (the one you've written of; I hope the title is correct) is that at traditional 'coming out' balls, young men were in a decidedly junior social position. Those dancers were organised by women for their daughters. The family money might well have originated with the mothers rather than the fathers The food, decorations, invitations and customs were dictated by women. Their husbands had very little say in the matter.

    Also, young men often had to earn at least some of their own money, because few upper crusties were able to support entirely idle young men, given the cost of educating them. You had to be the son of a duke to be idly rich, and even in the last half of the 19th century and first half of the 20th, there weren't that many dukes' sons around. Some of the dukes were actually rather cash poor. I believe rising taxes and wages for workers had greatly diminished their incomes, along with the fall in the price of 'corn' (i.e. wheat) with the abolition of the corn laws (tariffs on imported grain). Anyway, the young men at balls were more like clients than patrons. I know you don't much like 'information', so I apologise for inflicting it on you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mrs Humphrey gives that impression, too, in the 1890s. Of course, her guide "Manners for Men" was for young men entering high society through their own endeavours, not birth and upbringing, so the insinuation is that they are darned lucky to be invited to a ball or dance, and here's how not to mess it up. It's so curious that centuries of being careful to make a good impression and show respect to one's neighbours (according to their degree) suddenly ended in the the let-it-all-hang-out era beginning in the 1960s.

      Delete