longtimefan2014
-
Posts
12 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by longtimefan2014
-
-
Watching this show, and I'm cringing at the design and much of the message, even though these kids are AMAZING. Too bad the design is choking their potential.
Patriotism, ultimately, ends up supporting militarism, and glorification of a military that doesn't know when to stop, in a patriotic show, ends up being as heavy handed and ham handed as the military of an imperial power.
So it's absolutely fitting that we have all this grotesque excess in this show.
The new flaggy thing on the stage reminds me of the "Mission Accomplished" banner on the aircraft carrier with Bush speaking in 2003.
I anxiously await 2015, and hope that this design staff never again, ever, goes this route.
America, when we're at our best, aren't celebrating ourselves and deluding ourselves about the glory of power and might. We're at our best when we're humble, hard at work, creative, and just.
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.
-
I do see where you're coming from regarding the "worshipful" impression. The introduction sets the stage (literally) for focusing on the 43 men who have held the office, and I think that's an unfortunate bit of writing. Even so, I find myself more focused on the words themselves, as opposed to who said them.
You also make a fair point regarding the definition of character presented by way of a foil, although I don't think that foil is consistently the "other"; instead, the foil is some form of national challenge. In the Civil War we were fighting ourselves. FDR is invoked not only for WWII, but also the great depression. (Although herein lies my one gripe -- the show presents the quote "All we have to fear is fear itself" within the context of WWII, when FDR actually said it nearly a decade before Pearl Harbor). And the goal to land on the moon was a tangent of the Cold War, but I don't sense any real allusion to that conflict in the show.
I don't discount those who might take a self-critical approach when examining who we are as a people. However, I'm reminded of what John Wooden said about sports - they do not build character, they reveal it. In that same way,adversity reveals our character as a nation. Our history is full of mistakes, flaws, omissions and hypocrisy. Despite those faults our PROMISE is a good one to which we should aspire.
At least that's what I get out of it. In any event, I don't think it fair to dismiss the program as pandering, unthinking patriotism. Your mileage may vary.
Oh, and a major tick to me on Senator McCarthy and HUAC. Duh.
Points well-taken.
-
Unthinking patriotism? Only to the facile thinker.
The show is called “Promise”, a word which encompasses a view of the future. What is the promise of America? We see vignettes of history, but the show is not intended to be a per se history lesson. Instead, we get views of the American character as enunciated by past leaders. (They just as easily could have read quotes from Alexis de Toqueville, but I doubt that would have packed as much punch.)
If the show was all Sousa marches, then I might see the point. But they are playing the music of Aaron Copland, himself a figure of some controversy during his lifetime. Copland was among the nation’s intellectual elite, which led him to being pulled in front of Joe McCarthy’s House Un-American Activities Committee. “Lincoln Portrait” was pulled from Ike’s inaugural due to the red scare.
Setting aside the man, to my ears his music touches on the worth of the “common man”, the farmer, the laborer, the factory worker. (hmnn, perhaps some bits of >gasp< socialism lurking in there? I don’t know about you, but I know I sense it ...)
Perhaps the idea of this show isn't just to wave the flag. Maybe we ARE being challenged (in the midst of an extremely fractured political landscape) to remember exactly what it means to be an American. How do we fulfill this promise in the future? Should we move forward based upon individual achievement or collective action? How do we balance the two? Who are the winners and who are the losers?
The answers remain elusive. But in the end we are called to remember that the American Promise is indeed grand, and one we are charged to fulfill.
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.
-
1
-
-
its funny , because all the drum corps so called purists should love cadets, wasnt drum corps founded or based on such things...didnt most corps play mostly patriotic songs, wasnt there a bulit in color pre back in the day...lol
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.
-
1
-
-
Lincoln Portrait is a rah-rah propaganda piece, meant to rally the troops and the war bond sales during the dark days of WWII. It's far from Copland's best work. Why? Because it glorifies in a bombastic way, without nuance.
What a better portrait of Lincoln? Try the high art of Tony Kushner's script for "Lincoln". There you see a real person, dark sides too, a father who hits his son in the face, who screams at his wife, who struggles with depression.
Patriotism and art just don't mix. Patriotic "art" is the kind of stuff you find in the faux-Athenian temples to presidents in DC, and socialist statues in main squares in Minsk, Moscow, Beijing, and Pyongyang. No one would call any of that high art.
I'm hoping that this is the last foray into patriotism for this great Corps. They have such a superabundance of talent, and an unparalleled legacy of innovation, to repeat this subject matter in the future.
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.
-
Yes, I did read it, hence my comment about visions of 2008 going through my brain, as they try and emphaisize the points that take entire college courses to cover.
IMO the Cadets show is fine...MORE than fine, as it stands.
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! :)
-
1
-
-
You really think that kind of thinking can be presented in a 10-minute drum corps show?
Trying to explain that sort of stuff gives me visions of 2008 all over again.
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?"
-
...But we are not going to run and hide from our past (the good and bad).
When we've had to defend ourselves, we have...to great loss yet great honor of those who lost their lives. A show like this is celebrating the process of being American, having a president who is one of the people, voted in by the people, and who must make big and bold decisions that are not always popular. This show, and other patriotic shows/ceremonies, celebrate the fact that what we've fought for (when needed) was a democratic process, civil rights, and freedom.
It would be unwise to hide our past from the present generation. They need to know what we stand for, why we've had to defend ourselves (or be proactive against terrorism), and they need to know the constitution and bill of rights. We are not perfect as a country, and they need to know that, too. But a view of the rest of the world continually shows that we are free to succeed and prosper like no other country going.
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
The Cadets - 2014
in DCI World Class Corps Discussions
Posted
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.