nezneau

The funny part of it is I bet the Cadets would have probably changed uniforms decades ago if they could have afforded it, instead of McGyvering (safety pins, staples, superglue, etc.) the old WOOL uniforms they had for ages. The fact they couldn't afford to replace them for so long probably greater solidified a lack of change as "tradition", rather than a practical necessity. I suppose these same folk wish George was still rocking that handsome mustache he had going in the 80's... for the sake of tradition? Anyway, it is a uniform... which, in general, seem a bit awkward in the context of current drum corps. The speed, type and planes of movement that performers are currently executing feels a bit stifled and .... well... square given the limitations of the uniform and shako. Add to that you are forcing some static, external concept into a creative program (imagine going to a broadway production and 2/3 of the cast are all wearing matching three piece suits and mexican sombreros - regardless of the production - while 1/3 are wearing costumes actually relevant to the program). It is just kind of weird. Winterguard realized this ages decades ago and made the change. Just like drum corps finally caught up to marching bands of the 80's by adding electronics, we can only hope that drum corps will catch up to early 80's winterguard sometime soon.

The intent is to eventually build corps in Europe that are on the same competitive level as DCI's Div I. They would be based in Europe. They would rehearse and perform in Europe but pick up part of the North American tour and finish the season at DCI championships. The other part of this if for North American players to get the experience of living, touring, performing in Europe as well as for the European kids to have a similar in North America.

The intent here is not for corps to have to compete in a specific 'International' category... but for them to eventually compete in Div I. Currrently, most European corps do not have enough members under 22 to field a full competitive corps. If they were allowed to combine with their >22yo members with individuals that aged out of a North American corps only the year before, they could have some excellent competitive groups. The point of this is to 'seed' competitive groups in Europe with experienced performers from North America. It is this ability to be competitive that would dramatically improve a European-based corps to eventually recruit enough members within their own region to consistantly field a Div I group.

hmm... I had not heard anything about the Rosie issue... but that seems to be a good indicator of the politically correct nature of media. It is entirely possible that a condition of corporate sponsorship of the activity could require that these elements be removed. It is even more possible that a major television broadcaster would have concerns and their removal as a condition for broadcast. The biggest problem here is that even though these rifles and sabres are simulated, they present weapons a something to play with in the eyes of young viewers. To look at the recent cases involving toy manufacturers and guns, there seems to be quite a lot of legal precedent here. Enough so that KB Toys and Toy-R-Us stopped selling (in 1994) anything that realistically resembles a gun. On a more extreme level, lawmakers in New York City are currently debating a complete ban on ALL sales of toy guns (including air guns), not only to minors, but even to adults. As far as those that viewed this and the notion that "when they were in High School they never paid attention to the band". None of these individuals had grown up in America. Also, the idea of guns in most western countries outside of america is taken VERY seriously. In most of these countries, toy guns of any sort have been banned for a number of years. So, it is quite shocking to see this for many people in an international audience. Anyway, just some things to consider in promoting the activity to a wider audience.

It is quite often interesting to hear comments from those that have never seen drum corps (or anything like it), upon experiencing it for the first time. I recently had opportunity to show a DVD to a couple of curious friends. Of their reactions, there was one rather troubling comment that stuck out - "Oh my God... they're throwing guns and swords!" Now... this wasn't an awed response at the technical skill... but one completely aghast at the irresponsibility of the idea. From their perspective, very young viewers might imitate what they see (with a real weapon) and the result could be quite dangerous. Also, as one of these new viewers is also a practicing attorney - they couldn't believe that youth organizations like this would perform throwing around guns and swords (even though 'simulated') - one accident, one lawsuit... and the activity as a whole could suffer terribly. An interesting perspective. While there is certainly an argument for tradition, et cetera... the activity (and color guard, especially) has evolved so far from its military roots that these might seem no longer relevant. Another consideration is possible PR value of phasing these out. It would get an excellent amount of coverage and support (this particular argument is one that would be of interest to 20/20, 60 Minutes and the like). Though these both have been a part of both color guard and drum corps for many generations... It might be worthwhile to discuss their current relevance and eventual replacement. Best Regards,

This might be a bit confusing as that the actual question of the poll was somehow disappeared when this posted (any admin that can help edit this?). The original question: "Should performers that have 'aged-out' of corps in North American be given a 'bonus year' to compete at DCI sanctioned events, to perform with Non-North American based groups ONLY?" In more simple language... should Ameican or Candian performers that have 'aged-out' of corps in the US/Canada be given 1 extra year of eligibility to compete at DCI events ONLY if they are performing with a group from Europe, Japan or anywhere outside US/Canada? The point of this is to get more performers with US/Canadian experience performing in corps overseas to boost the performance level and participation internationally. I hope that is clearer.

"Should performers that have 'aged-out' of corps in North American be given a 'bonus year' to compete at DCI sanctioned events, to perform with Non-North American based groups ONLY?" [Note: The original question did not actually post for some reason, so I have added it here] The growth of drum corps internationally could be stimulated by allowing 1 'bonus' year for performers that have 'aged-out' of corps in North America to compete at DCI sanctioned events with Non-North American based groups. In addition to possibly boosting the membership in corps internationally, this would also provide an excellent educational experience for those participating - exposure to new languages, cultures, ideology, etc. It would also renforce the base of talent in these corps with many mature (technically and emotionally) performers, allowing them to become more competitive with North American based groups. This increased performance level would also be extremely beneficial in recruiting new members in their local areas. Having traveled for the first time internationally with the Blue Devils, I have seen first hand the incredible educational impact that international travel with drum corps can have. While it is difficult for many North American based groups to travel internationally, it is much easier for individual performers to do so - and this should be strongly encouraged. Encouraging this by allowing a bonus year for North American performers that wish to perform in Non-North American ensembles could be an excellent start.