byline

Hi, Nancy! Good to read some of your comments, as they're very close to what I remember working on in guard. Especially learning to be ambidextrous. That was especially important when guards mirrored one another (side to side, every other one, etc.). I always loved it when work you'd learned on the right hand had to be switched to the left . . . with no rehearsal time to work through it. My instructor just said, "Do it on your left hand. You figure it out."

First and foremost, they have to be able to handle equipment and march at the same time. Without fail, that was the biggest challenge I encountered teaching beginners how to perform guard work (and not always just beginners, either). I started guard relatively late in life, myself (19), and having marched in band, I thought it would be a piece of cake to do guard. What I didn't realize--and what most people don't realize till they do it--is how hard it is to coordinate two or more physical movements, with the lower body doing one thing and the upper body doing something completely different. After lots of frustration, I finally got the hang of it, but it didn't come naturally, and it didn't come quickly. Be prepared for it to all fall apart the first few times your guard puts work to drill. It's kind of nightmarish, watching something you've cleaned in a block turn into a great, big train wreck on the field or floor, but that's natural. It may be that you need to clean all over again, but this time from the standpoint of integrating work with drill. It's a completely different set of physical and mental responsibilities than just working in a block. After teaching guard for 14 years, the one thing I learned about beginners vs. more talented and/or experienced guard members is that they will learn, and 99 percent of them will perform whatever you put in front of them. But you have to take into account your "weakest" (I hate that word, but for lack of a better one, I'll use it) guard member, and make sure you write what he or she can perform. If you write something that you know is too difficult for that one individual, in the hope that by some miracle they'll eventually be able to pull it off, chances are it will come back to haunt you. In very rare situations, I've seen such individuals work their butts off to where finally, by the end of the season, they were able to perform stuff that was way beyond their capabilities. But most of the time, those members were overwhelmed by it all and were never able to perform up to the level of the rest of the guard. Which wasn't good for that person, and wasn't good for the guard, as a whole. So I finally learned to write to the level of my weakest member. That didn't mean I wrote basic shows. I just made sure I wrote work I knew every single person in my guard would eventually be able to perform. Also, make sure you break down your work and subdivide all the counts, so that each individual knows where the flag or rifle and body positions are for each count. That's the one thing that drove me nuts in my drum corps experience (and I still see it happening in guard rehearsals today). A lot of instructors rely solely on the "Simon says" method of teaching guard work, where they simply demonstrate a section of work in front of the guard and then expect each individual to mimic it exactly. I see a lot of sloppiness coming out of that method, because the guard instructor doesn't bother to clarify things from the beginning. So then guard members develop bad habits because they're practicing a piece of work incorrectly. It's much harder to fix that later on than it is in the beginning. Another thing: If you have a lot of body movement combined with guard work, then in the beginning--no matter how good your best guard members are--make sure you teach the guard work and body movement separately, then slowly integrate them. If you see things that aren't uniform, stop and work on those things then. I learned this the hard way: Don't wait! And if you have work to a fast tempo in the music, slow it way down so that each member is in unison with the others on each count, then gradually speed it up. It will fall apart the first few times you speed it up, but then the members will gradually work it out till they get it. I never had success starting out teaching fast work at its intended tempo; I had a lot more success slowing it down and breaking it down till each person got it. Yes, it's time-consuming, and some of your more experienced members will probably be impatient with it, but don't be put off by that. You'll all be rewarded in the end with a cohesive unit whose timing is tight, as opposed to a collection of individuals struggling to stay together. As others have said, teach the basics first, then build on that, and you'll have a strong guard program. Good luck! :)

Excellent review. Thank you!

I could be wrong about this, but I'm thinking a fellow from Cavaliers (who marched rifle) was their guard instructor.So his ability to teach and clean rifle shouldn't have been an issue. I suspect it was more a choice of what the corps wanted the guard to do, much like Santa Clara's choice of going all -flag in 1978. Many guards went all-flag from the late '70s to about the mid-'80s, and then rifle began to make a comeback. (I was actually afraid rifle would die out altogether. All that kept that from happening, IMO, were the all-male corps and winter guard.) If you asked people back then why they preferred all-flag, they insisted it was because flags had higher visual impact (more GE) than rifles. I never really understood that comment, since there's nothing more thrilling, IMO, than a rifle line nailing a quad (or higher). But for some reason, that was the prevailing sentiment back then. For whatever reason, I never much cared for Star's guard. Most years, my feeling about them was that they were "fluff" . . . they were there for ornamentation, but what they did wasn't very substantive. I thought they finally looked like a real guard their last year, 1993. You probably want me to define "real' guard, and I can't. Obviously, it's very subjective. But they didn't really hit me as a clean, high-impact, interpretive, cohesive guard till that last year.

I voted for Cavaliers because, of all the guards on the list, IMO they've been the best over the years, in both weapons and flag, integrated with body work. That's remembering back to the '70s and '80s, when their winter and field guards were so good. In my recollection, they've never really let down since I began watching them in the late '70s, though their work--especially on flag--was becoming a bit dated in the '80s . . . till their "Planets" show. Then they developed into a really fine contemporary-style color guard, a trend they've continued to develop and refine since then. However, I'm surprised 27th Lancers isn't on the list. They're the first guard that comes to mind whenever I think of "best DCI color guard."

It's all too easy to say, "If only we didn't have so-and-so, our guard would be so good." I marched in guards with people who said that, and I taught guards with people who said that. And, in a few moments of weakness, I thought it, myself. Not something I'm proud of, to be sure. Nobody needs to "teach her a lesson." Everyone in this thread has offered sound advice as to how to handle a situation like this. Did you, or anyone else in the guard, bother to ask this girl what happened (nicely, and with no hidden agenda)? Chances are, there's something going on there you don't know about. If this gal has the opportunity to talk about it, and feel like she's supported, then it's likely she'll grow stronger from this experience. So will the entire guard. If you're splitting off into factions of the "talented" vs. the "weak" ones, then you'll never be a cohesive guard, and so you'll never get anywhere. The point is not to get only the most talented people in your guard. It's easy for someone with natural talent and performing ability to get the work. Far more difficult for someone who's an introvert, or not quite up to the talent level of the rest of the guard. The point is to get people of all talent levels performing at the *same* level by the end of the season. That means some folks will have to work a whole lot harder than others. They should be rewarded for their growth, not chastised. I was one of those "weak" ones, so I know.

One show that I never saw live, but have on tape, is Blessed Sac's Gordon Lightfoot show. What an amazing show: perfectly written, and beautifully performed by the guard. So musical. One of the most ethereal shows I've ever seen. Which is amazing, considering what a huge style change that was for Blessed Sac. And, of course, there were Skylarks and Cavaliers. So many memorable winter guards, but they're the ones I think of first. In terms of high school winter guard shows, my favorites are all by Union. The butterfly show, the bird show, and the mannequin show are incomparable, IMO.

I saw Skylarks in prelims and finals that year. My jaw dropped and stayed propped open throughout their entire prelims performance. "Awesome" is an overused expression, but I think it's entirely fitting in their case. They were like a machine, almost like they really *were* extraterrestrial creatures. And Cavies . . . as great as that "James Bond" show was, it seemed lukewarm in comparison to Skylarks' eerie, ethereal, powerful "space" show. Then, at finals, the roles were reversed. It seemed as if Skylarks suddenly realized they could win the whole thing, and froze. I could actually see "deer caught in the headlights" expressions on some of the guard members' faces. Meanwhile, Cavies seized the moment and had their performance of the year. Theirs was a "trick" show, and they did some of the most amazing tricks I've ever seen. It was so hard to watch retreat. I was happy for Cavaliers, but in my heart of hearts, I felt Skylarks was the best guard on the floor. But they just didn't pull it off that afternoon. That's what competition's all about. Later that summer, I was at a workshop conducted by Fred Miller, and he said Skylarks had their worst performance of the entire season at finals. The disappointment must've been crushing for them.

OK, we have this debate raging over on RAMD, so I thought I'd post the question here to see if anyone can provide a definitive answer. Someone posted that Santa Clara Vanguard and 27th Lancers tied for the top color guard score at finals in 1978. However, several people are disputing that, insisting that Phantom Regiment's guard won the top guard award. Everything I have on hand here at home confirms that Santa Clara and Two-Seven tied (both guards received a perfect score of 2.0), but Santa Clara actually won the best guard award. Here's what I have: The DCI recap, as published in the 1979 yearbook, for the 1978 DCI finals color guard scores: Santa Clara Vanguard--2.0 Phantom Regiment--1.9 Blue Devils--1.9 Madison Scouts--1.8 Bridgemen--1.9 Spirit of Atlanta--1.8 27th Lancers--2.0 Blue Stars--1.7 Crossmen--1.9 North Star--1.7 Guardsmen--1.9 Kilts--1.9 I also looked at my 1978 DCI album liner notes. About 27th Lancers, Steve Rondinaro writes: "The 27th Lancers have always had one of the most energetic shows around. Furious tempos, great guard work and loads of flash are trademarks. The 9.9 GE M&M mark and 2.0 in guard bear witness." About Santa Clara, he writes: "A perfect guard score and 10's in GE M&M and percussion (29.8 total), along with high field drums (19.1) provided the edge." According to notes I took back in 1978 (I was sitting in the stands at finals, and wrote down what the announcer said), for some reason, Santa Clara and 27th Lancers did not share the top color guard award. That went to Santa Clara. I have no idea why. Would it be because Santa Clara, as a corps, placed higher? Here's what I wrote down for caption awards in 1978: Top GE: Santa Clara Vanguard Top color guard: Santa Clara Vanguard Top drum line: Santa Clara Vanguard Top horn line: Phantom Regiment Top M&M: Blue Devils Other people who were there--including someone who marched in 27th Lancers' guard at that time, and remembers very clearly that it was Phantom, not Two-Seven or Santa Clara, who won the guard award--insist DCI's public record is wrong, and Phantom definitely won the guard award in 1978. (I feel like I'm writing to Ann Landers.) Who's right? BTW, I don't mean to question who was most deserving of that award. All three guards were fine and, IMO, equally deserving of the guard award. They had radically different styles, but all three were the epitome of what they did.

The first guard that comes to mind, for me, is Blue Devils 1982. I saw them at the show in Evansville, Indiana, and they just blew me away. Well, OK, the whole corps blew me away, but that guard was just amazing. My first winter guard experience was seeing the first-ever WGI finals in 1978. The sad thing is that I remember little about that show. I can vaguely recall little snippets of Quasar, Phantom, St. Anthony's Imperials, Marcus Whitman, Cavies, and, of course, Seattle Imperials and their ballet slippers. I had just begun spinning flag, myself, so I was only learning what was going on. I would've appreciated that contest so much more with a little more experience. Found this web page with an article by Jeff Fiedler: http://www.emeraldmarquis.com/wgi78.htm