A NOTE ON SIDING
By Pat SHULDHAM-SHAW
There has been much discussion on the
question of siding in recent years. People
have suggested that it should be danced like
a half-hands in morris. Others have suggested
that it was probably a courtesy movement
in which you came up beside your partner
and kissed. There is, however, a written
description of a movement called Set Sides,
presumably the same thing as siding, in a
manuscript in the National Library of
Wales. In a letter from William Jones
to Edward Jones, one of the famous
Welsh Bards, the writer mentions some
dances that originally came from Shropshire,
and conform roughly to the Playford type of
Set Dance. The letter is undated, but was
probably written about 1790, though the
dances are obviously earlier. Before giving
the details of the dances, he gives a description
of some of the more important movements,
including Set Sides. Here is his
description of it:
“Set Sides: to set to one another always
facing, but veering to your left or right or
proper or improper.”
I do not know whether Cecil Sharp had
access to this manuscript at all, or even knew
of its existence. I do know that he arrived at
his interpretation of siding after an immense
amount of thought on the problem, and his
interpretation seems to me to be curiously
in accordance with that given above.
The only big difference is that the words
“left or right” seem to imply that the first
half of the figure is done crossing right
shoulder, and the second half crossing
left, in other words side right and left.
The other difference “always facing” is
less obvious, and I suspect was not really a
difference in Sharp’s original interpretation,
but has crept in since. When we side to-day,
the majority of us only turn to face our
partners after we have crossed over. This
means that we are not always facing our
partners. If we are going to keep our eyes
on them in an affectionate manner without
cricking our necks, we must turn as we cross.
(This movement is somewhat akin to the
“corners cross” movement in The Hole in
the Wall as generally danced nowadays.)
This movement has a much nicer swing to it,
has become a real movement of courtesy,
and in general has far more meaning.
Whether we should now go so far as to side
right and left (why not? We arm right and
left, and I am convinced that is what happened
originally), I have not made up
my mind, but I do know that whichever
side I go, I get far more satisfaction out of
turning as I cross and not after I have
crossed.
