Do You Remember… Those Peculiar PE Dances? (A Question for the Class of ’50s, ’60s, ’70s)
Alright, folks who remember chalk dust, transistor radios, and maybe even duck-and-cover drills… this one’s for you. Especially if you spent any time in a Physical Education class between the 1950s and the 1970s. We’re talking gymnasiums smelling faintly of sweat and varnish, the dreaded rope climb, and… dancing? Yes, dancing. Specifically, the kind of structured, often partnered dancing that seemed to be a staple in PE curricula back then. It’s something that strikes many younger people today as downright strange – why was learning the Foxtrot or Square Dancing considered as essential as dodgeball for physical education?
So, let’s rewind the reel. Picture it: the gym teacher, whistle firmly in place, puts a scratchy record on the portable player. The instructions begin: “Boys line up here, girls line up there.” There was often an audible groan, maybe some nervous shuffling, and an almost tangible wave of adolescent awkwardness filling the air. Partnering up wasn’t a suggestion; it was the law of the gym land. For many, it was less about graceful movement and more about surviving the sheer social terror of touching a classmate’s hand for a box step.
What Was the Deal with All That Dancing?
Looking back, it wasn’t random. This practice was deeply rooted in the social and educational philosophies of the time.
1. “Wholesome Recreation” & Social Graces: Post-World War II and through the Cold War era, there was a huge emphasis on promoting “wholesome” activities for young people. Dancing, especially the ballroom and folk styles taught in schools, was seen as a safe, structured, and morally sound form of recreation. It wasn’t just about burning calories; it was about learning how to socialize appropriately. Knowing how to waltz, do the schottische, or execute a proper square dance figure was considered a basic social skill – something you’d need for future church socials, school proms, weddings, and community events. PE class was, in part, a boot camp for polite society.
2. Physical Coordination (Beyond Sports): While team sports focused on competition and athletic prowess, dance offered a different kind of physical training. It demanded rhythm, balance, spatial awareness, and specific coordination patterns. Learning to move in sync with a partner or a group required listening, following (or leading), and precise footwork. It was physical literacy of a different sort.
3. Enforcing Gender Roles: This is where it gets particularly interesting (and often uncomfortable from a modern perspective). The strict boy-girl partnering wasn’t accidental. It reinforced very clear, traditional gender roles. Boys were taught to lead – to be assertive, guide their partner, initiate moves. Girls were taught to follow – to be receptive, responsive, and graceful. This was seen as preparation for expected adult interactions. The dances themselves often reflected these roles: the boy’s part was frequently more complex or directional, while the girl’s part emphasized turns and flourishes under the boy’s guidance. It was socialization in motion, quite literally.
4. Discipline and Conformity: Like much of mid-20th-century education, PE dance was about conformity and following instructions precisely. You learned the steps exactly as demonstrated. You moved when the music started and stopped when it ended. You stayed in formation for folk dances. It wasn’t about personal expression or improvisation; it was about executing a predefined pattern correctly and in unison. This built discipline and a sense of collective action.
The Peculiarities: What Stood Out?
Now, here’s where your memories get really valuable. What made it feel strange, even then? What quirks do you recall?
The Mandatory Partnering: The sheer dread or boredom of being forced to dance with someone you might not know, like, or (heaven forbid!) have a crush on. The shuffling lines, the teacher assigning partners if you hesitated too long… the relief when it was over!
The Specific (Sometimes Bizarre) Choices: Beyond basic waltz or foxtrot, what did your school inflict? Was it intricate square dancing with a caller? Rigorous folk dancing from various European traditions (think Mayim, Troika, or Irish Jig)? Perhaps even… tap dancing in gym socks? Some schools had truly eclectic repertoires.
The Gear: Dancing in your standard-issue PE uniform – often shorts or those infamous bloomers and a t-shirt, or maybe your “dress” gym uniform – hardly felt glamorous. And dancing in sneakers on a basketball court? Not exactly the sprung floors of a dance studio.
The “Why Are We Doing This?” Factor: Even as kids, many sensed a disconnect. How did this relate to running laps or playing volleyball? The social skills argument might have been lost amidst the teenage angst.
Regional Weirdness: Was your school’s dance obsession unique? Or was it a widespread district policy? Were certain dances specific to your region? Did boys ever get roped into ballet basics (rare, but it happened!), or were girls ever taught to lead (even rarer!)?
A Fading Echo in the Gymnasium
Times change, educational priorities shift, and social norms evolve. By the late 70s and accelerating into the 80s and 90s, the prominence of formal partnered dance in mainstream PE classes began to wane. Why?
Changing Social Values: The rigid gender roles enforced by traditional partnered dance became increasingly questioned and rejected. Co-ed activities focusing on individual skills or mixed-team sports became more common.
Focus Shift in PE: Physical education moved towards lifetime fitness, individual health, broader sport skills, and less on prescribed social activities. Aerobics, weight training, and diverse recreational games took precedence.
The Rise of “Cool” Dance: Dance itself didn’t disappear from youth culture – it exploded! But it was disco, breakdancing, hip-hop, and later electronic dance styles, driven by popular music and peer culture, not by gym teachers with folk dance records. This was dance as personal expression and rebellion, not as structured conformity.
Logistics and Comfort: The inherent awkwardness and the logistical challenge of forcing partnered dance in large, mandatory classes became harder to justify.
So, What’s the Verdict?
For those who lived through it, PE dance in the 50s, 60s, and 70s was likely a mixed bag. Maybe you secretly enjoyed it. Maybe you endured it with gritted teeth. Perhaps you still remember the steps to the Virginia Reel or can feel the panic of a missed box step.
It stands as a fascinating, sometimes peculiar, artifact of its time. It reflected a society deeply invested in specific forms of social order, gender expectations, and “appropriate” recreation. It was physical education, yes, but equally a vehicle for socialization – teaching young people how to interact with the opposite sex within very defined boundaries.
Over to You!
This is where your memories are pure gold. Do you remember those gym class dances?
What specific dances did you do? (Square dancing? Waltz? Foxtrot? Polka? Folk dances?)
How did your school handle the boy-girl partnering? Was it sheer torture, mildly amusing, or actually okay?
Any particularly memorable (or hilariously awful) moments? Trips, collisions, stubbornly rebellious classmates?
Did you ever actually use these skills later?
Looking back, what do you make of it now?
Whether it’s a chuckle, a groan, or a surprising fondness, those PE dances are a unique slice of your school experience. They tell us something about the world you grew up in – its values, its anxieties, and its ideas about what young people needed to know, right down to the proper way to hold hands while doing a grapevine. Share your stories – let’s keep this peculiar, poignant piece of history alive!
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » Do You Remember