Show Meanings

[lindap]

Drum corps has become theatre.

It should be all about the music. Maybe it's time to get back to basics for the performers. I care about the kids.

[GUARDLING]

It should be all about the music. Maybe it's time to get back to basics for the performers. I care about the kids.

nm

Edited November 12, 2015 by GUARDLING

[tesmusic]

It should be all about the music. Maybe it's time to get back to basics for the performers. I care about the kids.

Lol

[Brian Tuma]

It should be all about the music. Maybe it's time to get back to basics for the performers. I care about the kids.

I think the kids are well aware of what the are getting into. Perhaps your post is more about your wishes rather than the kids?

[jthomas666]

It should be all about the music. Maybe it's time to get back to basics for the performers. I care about the kids.

I'm an old timer, and while I agree that music almost become a secondary consideration, I wouldn't want the pendulum to swing that far back.

Gimme complex, fully developed music, and I'm a happy camper. I'm, still not entirely sure what the Cadets 2005 show "means", but dear God, that ballad is one of the most incredible things I've ever heard.

[lindap]

Here we go, a rare wordy nerdy me

I'm old school bred (marched 1969-1979) but embrace modern drum corps (have the legacy collection and more; need to buy 5 years from this century). I attended DCI finals 2010 and 2013. The corps that had an impact, that is ingrained in memory, are 2010 Cavaliers (exceptional performance), 2010 Phantom Regiment (sublime design), 2010 Bluecoats and Blue Knights because of their choice of music. I really enjoyed 2013 Carolina Crown, Blue Devils and Bluecoats because their music, presentation and performances all worked for me and my mind. I know what I like.

My concern for the kids is the demand requested from many on DCP for bigger, faster, louder, clean feet, no drops or fracks etc. If this fan based expectation overrides thoughtful, emotional, well staged performances, then the genre of drum corps becomes robotic and loses the humanity of the activity.

I had studied theatre from middle school until 2nd year University, acted, sang and danced in high school musicals, directed, sewed costumes, did makeup, lighting, props and set construction. The most rewarding experience was set construction, sawing, hammering and painting flats to provide the illusion on stage. During the winter guard years 1968-1988, I shortened flag poles, made lighter flags, sewed costumes and bought jazz slippers to allow free expression of the music and was on the board of directors for a winter guard circuit (logistics, logistics, logistics as well as location, location, location lol).

During the high school theatre years, our wonderful drama teacher subsidized field trips to the theatre, ballet and symphony each school month for years. As an anaolgy for this thread, we saw a live theatre performance of Carol Channing in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. It was ok but not my preference. The most outstanding performances that I remember from the 1970's were Angela Landsbury in Gypsy, William Hutt in King Lear and Zero Mostel in Fiddler on the Roof. I know what I like. Great music, exceptional performances, dynamics, timing, excellent staging, capturing the audience and giving them a wonderful experience that they'll remember for a long time.

[Channel3]

So when the Cavaliers played "Church: Renewing Vows" by Wynton Marsalis in 2006, was their show made lesser because they took a piece whose original context was a love story and contextualized it as the workings of a machine?

Was Tilt a less effective show because The Hymn of Axciom was stripped of its original meaning of computer surveillance and databases?

As shows become more design-centric, the original context of pieces becomes less important, and what the corps do with those pieces becomes more important. All your artistic sensibilities and semantic posturing mean very little. I do agree that Power of Ten left me wanting some depth, but to demand that it reflect Shostakovich's original image of Stalin's regime is absolute bunk.

Cavaliers playing Church: Renewing Vows didn't help thematically, no. It didn't hurt. It's an unrecognized piece, so at least is not glaringly antithetical to the theme they selected. Charlie Parker's Free the Robots might have been a better selection, thematically.

No music could have helped or hurt Tilt-- the show had no thematic argument. They could have played Mary Had a Little Lamb, it had no impact on the show's intent whatsoever because the show concept was inexplicablly tied to a random, unexplained, abstract adjective and audiences couldn't agree on the meaning. Neither could the judges.

Did you actually just write "As shows become more design-centric the (composition's) context is less important?" So you're saying that the composer's original intent in writing a piece, and its original historical context, and the original impetus, the mood intended, the social and political climate do not add depth of concept? My God. And people wonder why their shows don't win.

Your depth of concept score increases if the music you're playing fits the theme. Align your music to the theme, align your theme to the music. Strive for unity of design. Basics.

PS: To clarify, you're saying that you agree that Cadet's playing the 10th lacked "some depth", but their lack of depth had nothing to do with the composition's well-known context. My God. In order for this art form to be taken seriously, designers must begin to do basic research in building their themes. Otherwise, they're going to be exposed to making glaring design errors that are thematically incongruent, and just plain lost-your-wallet-in-the-red-light-district-the-day-before-final-exams embarrassing.

Edited November 18, 2015 by Channel3

[Shempy]

No music could have helped or hurt Tilt-- the show had no thematic argument. They could have played Mary Had a Little Lamb, it had no impact on the show's intent whatsoever because the show concept was inexplicablly tied to a random, unexplained, abstract adjective and audiences couldn't agree on the meaning. Neither could the judges.

So you're saying that this show that eschewed your brilliant rubric of sociopolitical arguments, which was a crowd and judge favorite (silver medal), was poorly designed?

And no, I'm not claiming the original intent of composition does not add to your be-all end-all "depth of concept." I'm saying that it's not necessary to reference if given a different, but also strong context (i.e. Marsalis in Machine), or even if the production lacks a "thematic argument" but presents an entertaining and moving presentation, like Tilt.

Not every production has to be an intellectual treatise, bud.

[Channel3]

So you're saying that this show that eschewed your brilliant rubric of sociopolitical arguments, which was a crowd and judge favorite (silver medal), was poorly designed?

And no, I'm not claiming the original intent of composition does not add to your be-all end-all "depth of concept." I'm saying that it's not necessary to reference if given a different, but also strong context (i.e. Marsalis in Machine), or even if the production lacks a "thematic argument" but presents an entertaining and moving presentation, like Tilt.

Not every production has to be an intellectual treatise, bud.

The kids executed the heck out of that show and they were miraculous. (I've learned to always start with a cheerleader comment to appease the soccer moms.)

The show has to mean something, otherwise the kids appear insane, which they did-- constantly leaning to one side for absolutely no purpose other than maybe their bus had two flat tires. (Actually that would have added meaning.) The show lacked depth of concept and lost as a result. It didn't make sense. Why is everything tilted, and what in God's name are these insane people doing, and how is the corps marketing the meaning of this show? Videotapes of Tilt can be used in Psych 101 classes as examples of Stockholm syndrome-- people conditioned to conform to absurd behavior in order to avoid punishment.

Tilt made no clear commentary on society, the composer, humanity, philosophy, human behavior, the arts, culture, interpersonal relations, science, commerce, technology, law, the nature of life, or how sewer covers are designed and forged. There was no "there" there. It meant nothing. Tilt was an unclear metaphor with no real-world relatability. People performing the hell out of this show appeared insane-- they were moving frantically and passionately for absolutely no reason, like robotic vacuum cleaners randomly cleaning the floor. What did it mean? No one in the audience knew. It would have made sense if the marching members had cleaning rags attached to their feet, but alas they didn't. It seems like the design staff refused to apply significance to the word Tilt. After all, it would have been easy to formally link the motif "tilt" to something real world that, if added to their marketing plan for the show, would have made a powerful artistic statement, but I'm not going to reveal what that idea is. The point is BlueCoats had to work really really hard not to build meaning to this frivolous show, and they succeeded. It was completely without metaphorical content, without humanity, and it lost as a result. You can tell the show lost because the audience had that "huh?" look until the pitch bend at the end, which was a clutter-cutting device which made everyone wake up and scream, but ended up being as meaningless and without context as everything that preceded it. Same response with Kinetic Noise. "Huh?" Look at these people watching Tilt's final run-throughs at 7:26. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YztUZ0Cf9ZU

Bloo's To look for America was brilliant, however. One of the most brilliantly conceived drum corps shows of all time, albeit with a flawed ending.

Edited November 18, 2015 by Channel3

[lindap]

I like Bluecoats To Look for America AND Tilt because I'm an anomoly, a non-mainstream person where the right and left brain work in harmony, weird situation. I decided to stay balanced.

A co-worker once asked 'Love to get into your brain. You think outside the box'. I answered 'Once you're there, it's a maze and difficult to get out'. Balanced brain tilts often but stays level.