KGTech

Apparently clarification is needed. No one is calling on a ministry to come in and unilaterally administer morality for all. That would be weird. What is also weird is turning down volunteer help just because you don't happen to like a persons beliefs. That seems petty and childish. We take a bunch of young adults and kids, put them under an unusually heavy physical and mental workload, make them live together and drag them across the country for weeks on end. We do this not only in the name of creating entertainment but also with the hope that the kids come out the other side with experiences that they can draw upon for the rest of their lives. Along the way some of them may find it comforting to be able to reach out for spiritual guidance. If having that type of guidance available to them ultimately gives them a better overall drum corps experience is that not a good thing? Especially when it comes accompanied with hard working volunteers who cook, clean, sew and drive? If a message therapist wants to go on tour as a driver and also volunteers to treat sore muscles would we say no? How about a math teacher who comes in as a cook but also offers to tutor anyone who wants to brush up on math skills before returning to school? Should that offer be declined? What's next? Pepsi drinkers should not be allowed to volunteer because Coke drinkers don't want them around? -kg

If someone came in and just started telling everyone how they are wrong that would be a problem. Can you please show me where on the Box 7 website they state that is what they intend to do? You are taking the bad behavior that some have exhibited in the name of religion and assigning it to all who have a religious affiliation. I could take the same logic and say that anyone who is a teacher should not be allowed to volunteer because some teachers wind up sexually abusing kids. How about we accept with open arms anyone who wants to help out and make sure we kick out those who actually do something wrong. -kg

And the Box 7 folks are the narrow minded ones? Perhaps I'll make a donation to them in your name. I think what they are trying to do is pretty cool. I don't see any evidence that they are cramming religion down everyone's throats. They just want to be there to offer guidance to those who seek it out. I fail to see it as anything but a win/win. -kg

If a Rabbi, Buddhist, Monk, Wiccan or Atheist wants to go on tour as a volunteer by driving vehicles, serving meals, sewing uniforms and helping out then by all means they should. The more help the corps receive the better off they will be. A Rabbi might wear a yamaka and thus identify himself as being Jewish. If a member seeks him out for guidance because they realize that he is a Rabbi is that a bad thing? Without a doubt if the actions of a volunteer create a disturbance they should be removed. What is not OK is to prohibit someone from volunteering solely because their religious/spiritual views might be evident and offend someone by just being there. -kg

Forget religion for a second. Every volunteer has an agenda; i.e. a purpose for being there. Therefore your logic that people with agendas "just get in the way" is a bit flawed. The only way a volunteer could get in the way would be to interrupt a rehearsal or if they harassed members in an effort to push their agenda. In that case yes you would need to remove them. Think of it this way. Lets say a volunteer who happens to love the Chicago Cubs and Drum Corps goes on tour and works in the kitchen. Every day he is wearing a Cubs jersey and hat and just loves to talk baseball. During his interaction with some of the members he finds out some of them are Cubs fans as well. Then while serving meals as he sees the Cubs fans come through the line he fills them in on the score of last nights game and any memorable plays that occurred. The Cubs fans appreciate the updates and are glad to spend a minute or two on a topic other than drum corps. You being a White Sox fan can't stand the site of of that blasted Cubs hat and you cringe when you overhear the conversations he has with other Cubs fans. Should that volunteer be removed from tour for being a distraction? Does having a strong identity with anything above and beyond drum corps preclude a person from being an effective and valuable volunteer? Another question: Lets say a group of drum corps loving psychiatrists decide that they want to volunteer and help out on tour. Their thinking is that along with serving the corps they could also make themselves available to provide counseling to members if needed. Would they also fail the agenda test and their offer to volunteer rejected? -kg

How about a DCP sponsored show? There should be enough expertise and volunteer power around here to put that together.

I'm curious, why would that not be a good idea? If Box 7 wound up helping a few people find a better path would that be such a bad thing? I had no idea what Box 7 was until I saw it mentioned in this thread. I looked up their website and read what they were all about. In a nutshell they are a Christian organization asking people to sign up as a volunteer and go on tour with a corps. While volunteering they can openly live their faith and support members who want to live theirs. As long as members are not being forced to attend a bible study I don't have a problem with this at all. Do you object because you don't think it would help anybody or is it the whole religion aspect that has you concerned? -kg

I don't think there is a youth activity in the world that can offer absolute protection from all undesired behaviors. Problems like this can or do occur anytime young people spend time in group settings. It is in their nature to explore boundaries and push the envelope on social behaviors. Thinking back to my experiences as a teenager involved in drum corps I cringe when I think about my daughter doing some of the same things I did. While my first reaction is to keep her far away from any activity that might expose her to behaviors like this I also realize that I would do her a huge disservice by doing so. As I see it my job as a parent is to teach my child how navigate her way through this world, not to remove her from it. She will spend her life surrounded by idiots and bad behavior so ultimately she needs to learn how to avoid the bad behavior and not become another idiot. I believe the positives aspects of the drum corps experience far outweigh the possible negatives. The OP called drum corps by and large a "shady" activity. I could not disagree more. The sheer magnitude of effort, money and people it takes to get a corps up and running indicate that those that undertake such endeavor are anything but shady. No one is out there starting a drum corps for the express purpose of getting over on someone, it just defies logic. That is not to say that bad organizational decisions are never made, clearly they sometimes are. However I believe those decisions are usually made with the best possible intentions. Every parent needs to take responsibility of determining whether or not a drum corps experience is right for their child. If my daughter wants to join when she is a teenager I will need to determine if she is ready for all aspects of the experience. If she is not capable of making mostly good choices on her own she will not be going on tour. All I can ask of an organization is that they have a stated code of conduct and that they follow through with appropriate discipline when that code is broken. -kg

I didn't actually know about or even like drum corps until after I found myself a member of one. I was an aimless junior high kid who would start an activity and a few weeks in would find it too hard and drop out. One day at school the director of our local corps made a presentation to the band about his group. He had no video or audio to show but whatever he said was interesting enough that I wanted to join. My parents having tired of signing me up for activities only to have me give them up later let me join but only if I agreed to stay in the group for one year. I had to sign a contract to that effect. Sure enough a few weeks in I was ready to bolt. The season was months away and I hated the whole experience. We were not a very good and the drum instructor was a shouter and a stick thrower. Try as I might I could not get my parents to let me out. I was stuck for the year. The season started and our not very good group was in a circuit with 4 other groups who were significantly better. I was not a happy camper and put in the minimal effort required waiting for the season to end. The shows for our particular circuit were always in the afternoon and held in conjunction with a full DCI show later that evening. At the last show of the year instead of leaving after we were done we stayed to watch the DCI groups perform that night. The first group up was the Colts featuring their screaming sololist Harpo. That definitely got my attention and my mood went from "get me out of here" to "lets see what is next". During intermission I went out to the parking lot and observed Phantom Regiment's placement of their brass instruments in a perfectly formed block on the grass guarded by a single member standing at attention with no one else around him. Then the Madison Scouts rolled up in their bus caravan. As soon as they parked the busses started wildy rocking side to side as the members hyped before exiting. I had no idea an activity could be so precise and demanding yet the members were having a blast. The show ended with Phantom and Madison performing back to back. That sealed the deal. It was 1981 and I was a 12 year old kid who just discovered an activity I would be passionate about for a long, long time. When my parents had dropped me off at the bus that morning I spent the entire car ride over talking about how glad I was this was the last day I was going to have to do this. When I got home late that night my parents congratulated me for completing my obligation to stick it out. Needless to say they were surprised when I started going on and on about next year and my future plans to march with Colts, Madison and Phantom in that order. While most of my plan did not materialize I am thankful for the parts that did. The kicker is that my parents wound up having to endure years of me involved in an activity that they did not particularly care for. While they successfully taught me a lesson about sticking things out they learned the the lesson of being careful what you wish for. -kg

Should we not reject the very premise of this thread? It just seems like a whole bunch of people are jumping to the conclusion that those in charge were immediately aware that a person was down and the severity of the injury was immediately known. Then knowing all this they delayed providing assistance for two minutes because the the show was more important. If anyone has any evidence to that effect then I think this discussion of what the priorities should be are in order. Otherwise we should just chalk this up as being a "stuff happens" moment and save our introspection and outrage for topics better deserving of our energy. At some point we need to realize that not every accident requires a reflex reaction of more process, procedure and thoughts of legal liability. When did we start going through life with the expectation that there is always someone in charge who will immediately and perfectly react to every situation? Lets play devils advocate for a minute. To those who saw the player go down and think that there was negligence on someone's part I ask you this; what did you do? If you were in the stands why did you not jump down and immediately render aid? Clearly you instantly recognized the scope of what was happening yet you did nothing. If you were watching on video did you pick up the phone and alert the Arkansas authorities that someone was injured? After all you were witness to the event. Perhaps we should target you as the "someone" who should have handled it better? Until there is actual evidence to the contrary I chose to believe that those in control reacted appropriately and rushed to provide aid as soon as they recognized there was a problem. -kg

In my view the best way to have OC groups and smaller WC groups thrive is to have them leave DCI altogether and create their own circuit. I don't say that without pause, but I do believe it is the only way for these groups to survive. DCI, for better or worse, is run in a manner that best suits the G7/G8 groups. The emphasis on national tours and large venues puts the smaller groups at a disadvantage. They simply don't thrive in that environment. Making matters worse is that the controlling parties of DCI don't think the very system they have devised is sustainable for all but the G7/G8. Why do the smaller groups stay in DCI when they know that doing so is a slow and certain death? Because there is nowhere else for them to go. The tragic thing about DCI is that although they attempt to cater to the G7/G8, eventually the G7/G8 is going to leave anyway. The only reason they would not leave is if they become the only ones left in the organization. If DCI is lucky the G7/G8 will leave soon so that DCI can then take the remaining groups and restructure in manner that doesn't bankrupt and kill off the whole system. If DCP is to band together and help the best thing we could do is put together regional show circuits with enough shows to make the DCP circuit an attractive option for the smaller groups. It would be best to do this while there are still enough of the smaller groups around to make a new circuit viable. With a good critical mass of existing groups it would be hoped that a new circuit could then attract the formation of new groups. We can all argue about the structure of a new circuit later. -kg

Well if you think nothing is wrong then full steam ahead with our current system. While it has been several years I too was a member and a low level instructor/volunteer for a few corps so I know what it takes to get them on the road. I did not intend to make you defensive and I thank you for doing what you do. My point was pretty much as you stated except I would not sacrifice member sleep I would sacrifice rehearsal time. Don't want to do a retreat? Fine, how about trooping the stands? What if some in the hornline and/or drum line went in to the stands and played bit while the next corps got setup on the field? How about instead of retreat there is a very quick announcement of scores and a 1 hour mandatory meet and greet out in the parking lot after the show. During that hour the members could still eat, pack, change, etc. There are more than enough members to rotate them in and out from interacting with fans. How about at lunch time go out to the town center arc up and throw down to generate some interest? The idea is to spend more time in front of an audience and attract more people to become paying customers. Whether 2012 or BITD people still want to be entertained and if anything more money is spent on entertainment now than BITD. There is a lot more competition for that entertainment dollar yet we don't seem to make choices to go after that dollar. Making those choices has a cost and we must be willing to pay that cost if you believe like I do that change is needed. Side rant: Why does it take so long to announce scores at the end of a show? At the most it should take 5 minutes. The score of the last corps can be entered and the final results known almost instantly. The drum majors for all but the last group should be lined up before the final note of the last performance. Last group leaves the field, last drum major is joined by the others and away we go.

Yes things changed, who is to say they can't change again? You listed off all the reasons why we are where we are. Almost sounds like you throw up your hands and say that nothing can be done. Lots of things can be done, we just have to chose to do them. Will it be the same as we have now? Nope, it won't. If we want more fans we must sacrifice other things in order to obtain them.

1. Corps don't "have to" pack up and leave early they chose to. 2. How much does lighting cost? $100 per hour? $1000 per hour? Can someone give examples of lighting cost? Yes it costs money to put on a show and provide lights and the ticket prices need to cover the cost and include a little profit to make the endeavor worthwhile. Those things are what they are. The problem is we don't offer enough entertainment for the price we charge. Things like trooping the stands and having a full retreat add value, yet we don't do them because we find them inconvenient. We have structured our activity to maximize rehearsal time so we can add tenths of points to our score. What if we rehearsed just a little less, spent some time in the communities we visit promoting the activity, and stuck around a bit after the show to engage the audience a bit more. I believe a small sacrifice of the pursuit of perfection would pay large dividends in the growing of the fan base. Those who hold the position that we should do all we can to maximize performance I ask you this: Will the activity still exist if only an interested few will to pay to see it? Do you see any value in presenting a product that engages an average person?

Fan ideas and input are always good to consider but I don't think we want design by mob to rule the day. Sometimes giving them what they actually want does not involve giving them what they ask for.

Simple answer: We need to look outward, not inward. How do we appear to an average person who has no prior knowledge of our activity? Do the rules of our activity make sense? Does our performance draw them in and engage them? Can we excite them and make them want more? Do we as fans welcome new people to the fold and share our excitement with them? Sadly I don't believe we do these things well. Show design is so "out there" that the meaning needs to be communicated in long pretentious explanations that most people never see. Our closed loop system rewards that which we find important and ignores the elements to which most casual observers would be drawn. Then many of us who are hooked on this activity tend to berate and belittle those who don't "get it" as we believe they should. If we want new fans we need to open ourselves up to them and give them what they want, not what we want. If we continue to engage in our own form of masturbation where we only satisfy our needs we won't be an attractive option to most. The question is do we dare change? Do we give up some of our self importance and do things that draw more people in?

I was at Desert Ridge in Phoenix. Theater was probably 85% full with a good mix of old timers (like me) and younger folks who looked like they aged out just a few years ago. I think most in attendance enjoyed what they saw but there was very little energy in the room with the best moments only garnering a smattering of applause. I believe had the volume been louder the audience would have been livelier. With that said I blame the high winds for the lack of volume and the need to turn the microphone gain way down. Blue Devils It almost seems like someone dared their design staff to win another championship using only elevator music. What a waste of the talent the members obviously posses. To be honest I was shocked at just how bad that show is. I have been a drum corps fan for 30 years and the Blue Devils have provided many of my favorite moments. This was not one of them. I'm sure they will be back with a winning concept next year. Cavaliers The visual design clearly carries the day for them. The music is executed well but is not memorable at all. They will be hard to beat come August. Bluecoats Love Creep, just wish they stuck with it for another 15 to 30 seconds with the full force of the horn line unleashed on the melody. Lose the "What the hell" line, it is not appropriate for kids and adds nothing to the show. Crown At first I was worried the concept would be lame. Seeing the guard and pit costuming as they came out on the field only reinforced my initial concerns. Once the pre-show started I bought in and just went where they where taking me. I look forward to seeing it progress through the season. Cadets Cool concept that will only get better. I expect it will come down to Cadets and Cavaliers duking it out at the end. Can't wait to hear it again in better conditions. Phantom Always my favorite. Not because they are always the best but because they epitomize class and elegance. The music is allowed to speak for itself and an explanation of show concept is not needed ahead of time. If I were introducing drum corps to someone who had never seen one before this is what I would show them. Vanguard I don't get it at all. What the heck were they thinking? I'm not talking about the show I am talking about all the people that hate this show. Yes it needs a ton of cleaning but never once during their performance did it lose my attention. The drill is relentless and while the music is not something I was familiar with I actually enjoyed it. I think their ballad will stand out by the end of the year. If just looks and feels like Vanguard. Blue Stars Please turn down the synthesized bass. The camera shot of the pit member with the little keyboard emitting a sound I imagined to be an amplified dung beetle made my wife laugh out loud. Most of the show, including the scaffolding is clever and I actually like the majority of what I was hearing/seeing. There are just times where the artificial sounds do not match up with the image of a drum corps on a field. Overall I think 2011 shows great promise. I find myself wanting to see Crown, Cadets, Phantom and Vanguard again. In the end I think the battle will be between Cavaliers and Cadets but Crown and Bluecoats also have shows that could win.

Correct and exactly why a new way of judging is needed I don't quite get how the local celebs get in the way of enjoying the presentation. People are there to see the shows, not the score announcement at the end. Plus the local crowd will enjoy the home town team coming away with a win. Happy fans = happy return customers. I don't know if either of us is right or wrong but I do enjoy the discourse. -kg

I hear what you are saying but I believe there are compelling reason to do just that. First, the probability that the home corps will win the show should help get more local fans in the seats. The local dignitaries doing the judging should also be selected to provide an attendance draw as well. The second reason is to ensure that an entertaining product is produced by rewarding the corps for doing so. The current disconnect between judging criteria and audience appeal does not serve us well. The only way to ensure survival is to gain an audience base large enough to support the activity. That is the only measuring stick that matters in the end so it might as well be the measuring stick used. With a 50/50 split between audience appeal and technical excellence I would think the winning group would have to best balance both aspects. I would agree that there should be a regional final and a national final that does not use local judges. For those shows a panel of impartial judges with ties to music and dance should be used to provide that part of the score. Will we have uneven result throughout the season? Yep. Will it make it harder for us die hards to micro analyze every aspect of a performance? Absolutely. I think for too long Drum Corps has been looking inward trying to impress itself with it's own genius. It is time for it to start looking outward and sharing it's passion with the public.

As much as I agree it would be nice to keep the DCI brand name I don't see it as a viable option for several reasons. The DCI money stream heavily relies upon large venue ticket sales and audio\video sales. With the G7 gone the large venues are not possible and audio/video sales will be a fraction of what they are today. In addition DCI is saddled with contracts for office space, Lucas Oil stadium and probably other things they will no longer be able to sustain. They will be insolvent with no G7. A new governing organization should have a limited scope and run on a shoe string budget. They would have 3 functions: 1. Promote, produce and organize finals. 2. Sell audio/video products. 3. Set competitive rules and sanction judges. There is no need for the organization to have a physical office or to have paid executive staff. I can see a need for a few paid organizational assistants to answer phones and shuffle paperwork. Everything that can be cost effectively outsourced should be. The traditions and legacies come from the Corps' themselves, not DCI. Whether the DCI name is retained or not those will remain intact.

Assuming that the G7 is gone and the rest of the organizations want to do more then beg for scraps from the benevolent G7 table, the questions is how do you put together a sustainable operation in which the remaining groups thrive. I have my thoughts and would like to hear others. I would start with a blank slate. Tour: National organization with regional divisions. Regional divisions organize local first tour, perhaps weekends only. Shows in smaller areas appreciative of the entertainment value. Second tour has half the groups in a region visiting other regions. One year you stay close to home, the next you go to a different region. Shows are bigger and go to iconic venues that DCI no longer serves (think Whitewater, DeKalb, etc.). Either a central location for finals (Kansas City?) or a system that rotates finals among the regions. Cost Containment: There would an agreed upon costs cap for administration, equipment and instruction personnel. There would be no cap on the cost to transport and feed and house the members. Allowed instrumentation would be finite and not include any type of electronics. Performance venues should be smaller lower cost facilities that are appropriately sized for the audience in attendance. A small full house would be better than a large quarter full stadium. Staying local every other year should help with travel cost Target Audience: Shows would need to be designed to appeal to the general public. There is no reason that a show cannot be both challenging to the members and entertaining to the audience. Target Members: Members should not need to be music majors in order to participate. The more broad the base of members the more broad the captive audience that will pay to see them. Judging: Judging would be based 50% on audience reaction (local dignitariesl)and 50% technical aptitude (circuit judges). The general idea would be to reduce cost, appeal to a larger audience (albeit in smaller chunks) and serve more members. Instructional talent will change often because they will not be able to make a career of it. That should keep the product fresh year to year. In the end it is not about the stadium the members perform in nor the super star staff who puts the shows together. Instead it is about the friends you make, the life lessons learned and the adoration of an appreciative audience. Will the end product be as polished as it is today? Probably not but it does not need to be. For every fan lost because Drum Corps is no longer good enough we should endeavor to gain 2 new fans by entertaining the heck out of them. No question the G7 is a talented bunch and they will be missed. They may even be successful out on their own as they move beyond Drum Corps and become some other type of worthy entertainment. This is about preserving the traditional Drum Corps idiom and creating a system under which it can keep going. How would you structure things to save the non G7?

I did not spend hours going through all 109 pages of this topic so if I am repeating something already covered I apologize. I don't think there is any way to save the relationship. If the G7 and the rest of DCI stay together one side is going to wind up killing off the other. I actually don't think a split would be such a bad thing either side. The G7 can concentrate on a national tour with big, self produced events. DCI can proceed on with smaller shows in a modified tour (regional for part of the season, national for the rest). There is no doubt that the split will not be without challenges. The G7 will have to put together a new infrastructure to support their own circuit. Their ticket prices will be high and they will have fewer performance opportunities over the season. DCI will have to greatly reduce cost. Without the draw of the G7 attendance will be down and audio/video sales will be slashed. Those problems considered, there is no reason both can't thrive. For every person who would only pay to see a G7 performance there is another who would only be attracted by a local, low cost offering. The reality is that the split has already happened. Think of a marriage where the husband comes home and announces that he is going to start dating other people but still wants to keep living together so he has a place to come home too during the week. He has also decided to start taking more money out of the bank for himself expecting the rest of the family to live on less. No self respecting spouse is going to say yes to those terms and there is no way to repair the damage done. The best option is to split as amicably as possible and allow both sides to pursue their own interest.

Will you be removing the video as well? After all it is the "political overtone" that started the whole thing. I believe they made a mistake posting a video with that image. Unintentional mistakes cannot be corrected unless they are pointed out. I think it would be a good move for the Blue Knights to edit the video removing the images of the t-shirt. In fact, if they do that I will send a $100 donation to the Blue Knights. I don't want them to be disparaged and I don't want them to apologize, I just want them to make it right. -kg

Of course I am right but that is not the point. I don't think the Blue Knights would purposely cause a controversy by intentionally using an offensive image. I am merely pointing out that the t-shirt is offensive to many and it would have been a better choice not to have had it in their video. -kg

Nice T-shirt. Che Guevara was a notorious mass murderer. I'm sure Mark Sylvester (and the Blue Knights by extension) did not intend to offend by wearing his image on the shirt however, through their lack of historical understanding they may have done just that. -kg