DESIGNER'S TOOLBOX - SETUPS

[Channel3]

DESIGNER'S TOOLBOX - SETUPS

Consider how you convey the narrative platform of your show to your audience. How do audiences get what it's about? Is the concept intuitive? Does it require prior knowledge of history or knowledge of the music itself? How do you convey to your audience your point of view?

The more information that the audience knows about the subject, the more they're likely to ride with you and enjoy the experience.

In film, television, theater, advertising and marketing, there are tools that directors and producers use to help the audience identify the narrative platform of a show, including the who/what/where platform. In non-narrative programs, the designers create a subject matter simply from the pattern of movement or based on the understructure of the music itself.

Here are some of the components that designers can use to help prepare the audience for the program, and to help them understand your theme and its progression:

1. SHOW TITLE - So much information about the production is conveyed in the show title. The title is announced as part of each performance. It's critical. The title reminds the audience in the moment about the subject matter, or the theme, and can even hint at the progression or the resolution/ending. The audience response to Felliniesque would have been different if audiences didn't know it was about him. They likely would have self-immolated. But with the announcement of the title, the show made perfect sense.

2. DIALOGUE/NARRATION - Narration is most loathed method of exposition in drum corps. Brief is better. Carolina Crown did it efficiently in one sentence. "Two lovers (who) sat (what) on a park bench (where) with their bodies touching each other."

3. ASSUMED/INTUITIVE BACKGROUND INFO - This natural information from our experience or knowledge helps fill in the blanks of the subject matter. Audiences have preconceived notions about space, Fellini, sound wave theory, or a shark and a fat lady singing. Our preconceived ideas help us prepare for what's likely next. Or if the show offers no preconceived ideas, that's a disadvantage. And no, it's not a hidden advantage. It just creates confusion in the audience's mind, and results in a low depth of concept score. The more relatable a theme is, and the more universally resonant it is, the bigger your depth of concept score-- even if your show concept is abstract.

4. REPETITION - In non-narrative, and even narrative shows alike, the pattern that you create sets the audience's expectations for what comes next. Cadet's repeating Z-pull move gave audiences all they needed to raise their expectations and satisfy them. Imagine the audience's reaction with a different ending. When an audience screams their heads off at a repeating move, it's because audiences feel like they get the pattern. Audiences crave understanding the pattern. When audiences can't tell where a dramatic action is going, they feel confused and separate from the performers.

5. EMBLEMS/SYMBOLS - Symbolism and pictures are worth a thousand words. Pictures of Paris sure helped Phantom define its location-based show. Imagine Phantom's show without the Paris panels to help inform the viewer and root the show in a specific location/ouevre.

6. MUSIC BACKGROUND INFO - The music itself has a history, reputation, and social commentary. The audience's knowledge of the music and the composer goes a long way to conveying your production's point of view. SCV's Phantom of the Opera show was rooted in the popular musical, and relieved their storytelling burden-- Santa Clara could have brought out pinatas and tequila and the show still would have made sense, based on everyone's prior knowledge of the show.

7. SEMIFINALS SHOW COORDINATOR SPIEL - This broadcast segment seen by thousands of corps fans and professionals alike is the corps' chance to fill in what the designers couldn't make clear with any other tool. This is the chance to add depth to the show concept, and convey its universal truth, which sometimes isn't obvious to the casual or first time viewer.

8. COSTUMES, PROPS - These components help convey not only the who/what/where platform, but also other clues about the production's point of view, timeframe, and social context.

9. FORM, SHAPE, PACING - In non narrative shows, these components help convey the show's pattern, progression and resolution. Drum corps old timers insist this is all you need.

10. SOCIAL MEDIA PROMOTIONS - Ancillary videos and web promotions help clarify your exposition and build your point of view. This component raises the personal stakes of your show and how it relates to the performers and designers as artists. This component raises the universal resonance of your show, and prevents designers from flaking out with comments like "And I’m talking until late March, we had no idea where it was going." Or " When we started the conversation about perspective, that’s how we got into the word tilt. " Story or no story, the show must mean something to you personally in order to raise the stakes and create a resonant depth of concept. The web is the best place to build and promote that resonance.

Face it. Narrative tools or not, you've got to have a strong concept to start with-- a universal human truth or a resonant perception of life as we know it and how it relates to these marching members and to the audience now, in this place, tonight.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Channel3

[drumcorpsfever]

Nice post!

BTW - I think DCI can do a better job of providing info on #7. I love to hear the designer's and arranger's perspective. Often times, it's easy to miss things the corps is attempting to convey. Getting the insider perspective adds a deeper layer of understanding and enjoyment to the show.

Edited May 23, 2016 by drumcorpsfever

[DrumManTx]

......and prevents designers from flaking out with comments like "And I’m talking until late March, we had no idea where it was going." Or " When we started the conversation about perspective, that’s how we got into the word tilt. " Story or no story, the show must mean something to you personally in order to raise the stakes and create a resonant depth of concept.

Can't go without taking a jab at the Bluecoats can you? That's what keeps me from taking you seriously.

Edited May 23, 2016 by DrumManTx

[Clutchtow]

Can't go without taking a jab at the Bluecoats can you? That's what keeps me from taking you seriously.

Eh, give channel3 some slack, there was no video game called Kinetic Noise to help him understand the plot.

[Cappybara]

Can't go without taking a jab at the Bluecoats can you? That's what keeps me from taking you seriously.

Just because he used the Bluecoats as an example doesn't make his commentary any less valid. Not taking his post seriously over that, rather than simply taking issue with the overall point itself, is silly.

[Stu]

If your list is what it takes then please explain this: In 2012 BD failed on so many levels to convey many of your points to the typical non-artists who make up the overwhelming majority sitting in the audience. The only way for an audience member to have had any idea concerning what BD was trying to portray was if the person was already academically aware of that obscure artistic movement and performance venue, or they had to do their own extensive research to even come close to understanding the show concept. Moreover, those who are astute on DADA realized that the BD show itself was inaccurate because BD presented structure and organization which is a complete antithesis of the actual performances presented at the Cabaret Voltaire. That is why many in the audience even at Finals were confused or at best golf-clapped. Yet BD still won.

[Channel3]

Can't go without taking a jab at the Bluecoats can you? That's what keeps me from taking you seriously.

Tilt could have easily won if the design team applied meaning to it, behind the scenes, but the show coordinator refused. Tilt could have been a metaphor for social acceptance for young adults. Tilt could have been a metaphor for overcoming depression. Tilt could have been a metaphor for alternative musicians' overcoming their sense of alienation. Tilt could have been a metaphor for rocking the boat politically and succeeding. Tilt could have, behind the scenes, been a metaphor for the perspective scientist Leon Battista Alberti, whom the marching members researched and admired and followed his zest for the marreage of art and science. Pick a powerful metaphor, apply it to the performer's lives and leverage the f*** out of the concept in critiques. Easy.

Unfortunately none of these metaphors was promoted publicly by the design team, the show lacked real world meaning behind the scenes for the marching members, and the show's depth of concept suffered as a result. Thanks for playing.

[DrumManTx]

Just because he used the Bluecoats as an example doesn't make his commentary any less valid. Not taking his post seriously over that, rather than simply taking issue with the overall point itself, is silly.

Oh come on. If you haven't noticed the weird obsession they have to make Tilt an experience on the human condition or some sort of other unnecessary depth BS I'll gladly go back and get some quotes for you. If this was the first time I really wouldn't care, but it's been like that since day 1. If that point would have coincided with a poor placement I would agree with him. But what they do works. Remember the whole fiasco on the Bluecoats guard having skirts back in 2014? Guess who was a bit part of that conversation. If you want "silly", I'll direct you here:

Tilt could have been a metaphor for social acceptance for young adults. Tilt could have been a metaphor for overcoming depression. Tilt could have been a metaphor for alternative musicians' overcoming their sense of alienation. Tilt could have been a metaphor for rocking the boat politically and succeeding. Tilt could have, behind the scenes, been a metaphor for the perspective scientist Leon Battista Alberti, whom the marching members researched and admired and followed his zest for the marriage (did some spell checking for you) of art and science.

I'm not saying they don't make some valid points, but it's hard to take those seriously with some of the other things posted between that.

By the way C3, you never responded to my rebuttal on the other thread, I'm interested to hear your thoughts about what I said. Why did Bluecoats suddenly start scoring better and being have 1st place GE content scores in 2015 after switching from depth of concept, meaningful shows they did in 2011 - 2013?

Edited May 23, 2016 by DrumManTx

[Channel3]

If your list is what it takes then please explain this: In 2012 BD failed on so many levels to convey many of your points to the typical non-artists who make up the overwhelming majority sitting in the audience. The only way for an audience member to have had any idea concerning what BD was trying to portray was if the person was already academically aware of that obscure artistic movement and performance venue, or they had to do their own extensive research to even come close to understanding the show concept. Moreover, those who are astute on DADA realized that the BD show itself was inaccurate because BD presented structure and organization which is a complete antithesis of the actual performances presented at the Cabaret Voltaire. That is why many in the audience even at Finals were confused or at best golf-clapped. Yet BD still won.

I golf clapped too. But maybe BD's Cafe Voltaire theme had a direct correlation with the marching members as alternative artists at the cutting edge of experimentation. That just fits. 12.25? Turandot? Starry Night? For the Common Good? UnMasqued? These were concept shows that were deftly performed, but how did the show concepts resonate personally with the performers? Maybe that's what the judges were thinking. Yes, the conveying of the historical context, and the who/what/where platform could have been much clearer, but in terms of depth of concept, this is pretty tight: https://bluedevils.org/programs/a/2012/repertoire.php

Edited May 23, 2016 by Channel3

[Channel3]

By the way C3, you never responded to my rebuttal on the other thread, I'm interested to hear your thoughts about what I said. Why did Bluecoats suddenly start scoring better and being have 1st place GE content scores in 2015 after switching from depth of concept, meaningful shows they did in 2011 - 2013?

Crowd response to aggressive volume? Their GE score would have been even higher with some behind the scenes application of concept.