longtimefan2014

Wallace I think you've isolated the key design failure of this (very well executed) show. The music of Copland is music of the people. On the other hand, the show's selected quotes derive from presidents' perceived need to inspire people during (with one exception) wartime. The linking of American identity to wartime identity is hugely problematic, especially when promoted to youth and framed as art.

Agree. The most unfortunate thing about the design is that it's so self-unaware. I truly believe that the designers didn't intend to link Copland to a set of presidential quotes delivered in the context of wartime and tremendously reflective of wartime politics and pandering, but "didn't intend" doesn't change the reality on the field. That said-- TREMENDOUS quarterfinals showing. From what I saw, Cadets fully deserved to widen the gap with Bluecoats (who also did extremely well). And I don't fully agree that patriotism necessarily supports militarism-- there is such thing as nuanced patriotism.

Points well-taken.

Even granting everything you've conjectured, this is in the end a tenuous defense of the show's artistic merit. While the title, music, and other elements point to potentially challenging material, the show is driven by the way these ingredients contextualize the presidential quotations which are literally front and center, and conversely from the way the quotations inform our perception of the music, drill, and visuals. Given these design decisions, it is a curious review which understates this show's borderline-worshipful framing of past presidents' famous words. If the intent is a challenge to define the promise of America today, then the show misfires, in no small part due to its under-appreciating the deep politicization of conflict implicit in the presidents' quotes. The wartime (or Cold War) invocations of Lincoln, FDR, and Kennedy were grounded in the political and military concerns of the day, and these invocations often implied a foil for the American in an other. Are these truly grounds for defining what it means to be American? Should the promise of America be understood today against this foil? To me, this concept of Americanism, if unchallenged, is deeply concerning. Perhaps this framework could make for a nuanced exploration of Americanism, but can this show be credited with so much? The questions you raise are indeed pressing, but it is far from clear to me whether and how they cut through the show's rather different and problematic emphasis. I repeat: art is defined by what we choose to emphasize. Again: the show execution is top-notch and, I believe the corps' performances in Indianapolis will deservedly impress.

Haha you're totally right, but (speaking just for me) I wouldn't consider myself a purist in that sense. I love the modern incarnation of competitive drum corps, the potential for spectacle and artistry is virtually limitless. And I like patriotism, just not unthinking patriotism that skews history in a really uncritical way by de-emphasizing really important questions. It's not an intellectual reaction, it's visceral. Art should challenge, unthinking patriotism doesn't.

I mostly agree. Art should challenge. Patriotism doesn't conventionally challenge, but it could-- it just would be more nuanced than the kind of bombastic patriotism you're talking about.

To answer your question, yes, I disagree with you: I do think that nuanced historical ideas can be presented in a 10-minute show, and I don't think that one unsuccessful (5th place?) example from 2008 demonstrates otherwise. Again, art is defined by what we choose to emphasize. My question stands: did the design team do a service to this year's Cadets and their audiences with the emphasis of this show? I believe the answer is no. I appreciate that you and I disagree and that's fine! :)

Looks like you didn't read the very next few sentences... "Someone commented above that a DCI show isn't school, and I agree. In fact, if 120 people all talked for twelve minutes straight instead of playing music, they still couldn't say everything there is to say about these things. However, art is defined by what we choose to emphasize. Did the design team do a service to this year's Cadets and their audiences with the emphasis of this show?"

I think the show execution is top-notch in every caption, and nothing else should obscure all the truly outstanding work the corps has put into this show. But I have a bone to pick with your interpretation of my review. I don't think that young adults should be hidden from the past. What bothers me is that this show overlooks some really glaring questions in the way it presents past US presidents and their quotes. For example, some quotes are presented as rallying cries in response to violence (Pearl Harbor) and the threat of defeat by a military and scientific rival (USSR, space race). But honestly, when we reflect on dark times when the people of the United States have rallied together, is it more important to glorify presidents who bravely inspired millions, or to ask from whence comes the need for one leader to corral his millions against another leader's millions? An American president led the country through World War II, and American presidents also oversaw American expansion into the Pacific and the construction of a large naval base in Hawaii in the decades preceding Pearl Harbor. What possessed Japanese pilots to become kamikaze, devoted to their leader in combat until their death? What hasn't been said about Germans' submission to the Nazi Party? About the horrors of Soviet communism? I agree that the fight for a democratic process, civil rights, and freedom is extremely important. The way we think about that fight is tied up in all the above questions. Someone commented above that a DCI show isn't school, and I agree. In fact, if 120 people all talked for twelve minutes straight instead of playing music, they still couldn't say everything there is to say about these things. However, art is defined by what we choose to emphasize. Did the design team do a service to this year's Cadets and their audiences with the emphasis of this show? Again, I found the marching, playing, pit, guard, drum major, and narration work to be fantastic across the board. Everything about the execution of this show deserves (in my opinion) the very high placement the corps has consistently achieved in the rankings this year.

Just saw this show! Love it and love the very high level of execution. I disagree with the above, I thought the variations on Danse Macabre were superb, and the pentagonal pit feature was amazing. The caskets and show colors were haunting. Very cool.

Saw this show in West Chester PA a few nights ago and I'm amazed with the very high level of execution from everybody in the corps! The big stage at the front is super cool and unlike any other set piece I've seen used at this level, and the narration was superb. My only big concern is not with the performers but with the design team's decisions. As a politically-aware and socially-aware US citizen I was a bit jarred by the decision to uncritically glorify past US presidents' wartime quotations. Especially for an organization promoting youth education in the arts, this seems like a glaring oversight-- we need to teach young adults to think critically about states/countries, mass authority, and state-initiated conflict. But, my end impression wasn't disappointment with the show theme, it was amazement with the overall very high level of musicianship and athleticism on display. Bravo.

Saw this show a few days ago in West Chester PA and absolutely loved it! Not sure why it isn't higher in the rankings.