On the Propriety of Booing

[Dan Baker]

After Thursday night's antics by the director of the Cadets, much discussion was had regarding the crowd's reaction to his display and to his group's performance. After much introspection, I have come to realize that this is merely a symptom of DCI's schizophrenia. Just think about it: Before 1993, for the most part, the only real boos heard at a drum corps show were clearly aimed at the judges. For example, on several occasions at shows I attended (especially in the 80s), the announcement of the score and placement for the Madison Scouts was met by vociferous booing, which was replaced within seconds by thunderous applause. The clear message: "Judges, you f’ed up; get it together! Scouts, you deserved better; great job!" Although the implication was that they should have placed higher than another corps, it was never interpreted (or, at least, meant to be interpreted) as "Hey, other corps: You suck!", and no one thought twice about it. Well, at least no one with any intelligence.

The first example of actually booing a corps, as others have pointed out, occurred in 1993 with the Star of Indiana. But that's also the first instance of DCI's growing schizophrenia becoming apparent. I will admit: I booed that show. Did I boo the members of that corps? No, I didn't. There had been no evidence from Star's previously well-designed shows that they were about to produce such a lump of manure. And, up until that point, the audience (and most corps members and staffs) still believed that drum corps was a youth activity. I booed the staff of the Star of Indiana, and especially the design team. The American Heritage Dictionary defines "boo" as "to express contempt, scorn, or disapproval", and that's exactly what I did with Star's 1993 show: I expressed my contempt for their design, my scorn for the faux artistry of their visual program, and my disapproval of the musical philosophy demonstrated by their book (or lack thereof). Did the members perform their show with excellence? Yes, but if a sculptor crafted a realistic-looking piece of excrement out of marble, it’s still a piece of excrement, even if excellently rendered.

After that instance in 1993, booing a particular corps (as opposed to the judges) mostly disappeared. Pockets may have occurred, but not like we saw with Star. Why? Yes, corps were "pushing the envelope" from a creative standpoint, but they were doing it within the confines of the audiences' expectations. No show made such a leap from the expected as Star's did, until Cadets 2005. And despite the audiences' overall rejection of the design choices of the Cadets that year, the judges rewarded them with the title. Who could have seen the provocative effect this would have on DCI's schizophrenia?

You may be wondering: "DCI's schizophrenia? What are you talking about?" The American Heritage Dictionary defines "schizophrenia" as "A situation or condition that results from the coexistence of disparate or antagonistic qualities, identities, or activities." And that describes exactly the current state of affairs in DCI. Most (if not all) of DCI's current problems stems from the fact that it doesn't know what "drum corps" is anymore. At various times, and for various reasons, DCI (as emblematic of the activity as a whole) holds itself out as "a youth activity" (emphasis education), as "art", as "entertainment", and as "a competitive sport". However, decisions are made based on the perceived emphasis at that time, not due to an organized and focused approach, creating a jumble of confusing, and often contradictory, principles.

So, is it appropriate to boo a corps? It depends on what you believe the emphasis should be. If drum corps is still truly a youth activity, then the answer is easy: No, booing is inappropriate. No one, not even the worst, most heartless person, would go to a concert given by their local school and boo the 4th graders who are just learning music and are attempting to play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" on their flutophones. While the Cadets are light years past that scenario, if the emphasis is education and they are students, then the attempt, any attempt, should be cheered. Unfortunately, as an activity, this has not been a youth activity for quite some time. Yes, there are individual corps that exist as singular youth activities, but as long as a corps turns away kids who aren't as experienced or talented in favor of a "better" performer, they have lost the right to be considered a youth activity, and the "protection from booing" that goes along with it. Accordingly, as a personal example of how I implement these differences, you will never hear me boo corps like the Colt Cadets, Mystikal, or Capital Sound. However, I will not hesitate to boo the Cadets, the Blue Devils, or the Cavaliers if their show (or performance) dictates it. Conclusion: Booing of a youth activity should be inappropriate, but, unfortunately, few corps meet the definition of a youth activity and thereby deserve not to be booed by drum corps audiences.

What if you believe the emphasis should be on art or entertainment; is booing appropriate then? This is definitely a harder case to make. Do people boo at movies they disapprove of? Not usually. Instead, they show their displeasure by advising others not to pay the money to see it. But that analogy doesn’t work for drum corps, because you can’t financially express your opinion about one show: So you didn’t buy a ticket to the show; is it because you don’t like corps A or one of the others performing (or more than one)? How can anyone differentiate? It’s impossible. And that’s before you throw in all the other possible variables (maybe you didn’t go to that show because it was too far away, or you had other plans, or you couldn’t afford it, or you didn’t know about it, etc.). A better analogy is provided by stand-up comedians. When you go to a comedy club, there are usually several comedians performing their routines that night, and booing and heckling a comedian who sucks is commonplace. “Well, they’re professionals; they can handle it,” you might argue, but it happens to amateurs as well. Don’t believe me? Just stay up late some Saturday night and watch “Showtime at the Apollo”. Even the definition provided above for “boo” was followed by the following example: booed the singer off the stage.” Conclusion: Whether booing an artist or entertainer is appropriate is not clear, but it definitely happens on a regular basis. Deal with it.

Finally, the easiest case is if you believe that the emphasis should be on competition. Anyone who has ever been to a sporting event knows that booing the opposition is practically an American pastime. And since this appears to be the primary emphasis these days (as evidenced by DCI’s new branding initiative “Marching Music’s Major League™”), no one should be shocked. Indeed, why did the Cadets perform the show that they did in spite of the palpable disapproval with their show design? Is it because their director is concerned with their education? Clearly not (unless he wants to teach them about derision). Is it because it’s entertaining? Again, clearly not; the “libretto” is simplistic and inane, and the “performance” of the libretto is so dreadful even Dorothy Parker would be incapable of giving it the drubbing it deserves. (How their Music GE and Ensemble scores can be so high is the second greatest mystery the drum corps world has ever known, only behind the mystery of how their Visual Performance scores can be so high year after year despite the blatantly crappy technique.) Is it for the art of it? Unless the director and staff of the Cadets have changed their organizational philosophy recently, I can attest to the fact that the sole motivation for their design decisions is to give their members “the best shot to win a title.” Clearly, the Cadets, as an organization, believe the emphasis should be placed on competition. Conclusion: If you want to play in the majors, you’ve got to grow some cojones or go back home.

Overall, it is clear that booing is an appropriate response to the abomination that is the Cadets 2007 show. Which takes us back to 2005: That year, people booed the Cadets for the same reasons they booed Star in 1993; i.e. they were booing the design team and staff of the Cadets, not the members. But what happened? The judges put their imprimatur on the show by not only handing them the title, but all of the captions (and subcaptions) as well. The message (doing their best Ellsworth Toohey imitation): “We, the judging community, hereby declare that everyone who thinks they know anything about drum corps is wrong, and that the Cadets 2005 show is what we want in the future. Trust us; it’s for your own good.” So, the next year, the Cadets brought us more of the same crap and once again scored well, despite the increasing discontent and increasingly vocal opposition. Now, the 2007 season rolls around, and the Cadets once again decide to show us that they know more about what drum corps is and should be. The problem is that, at this stage, no member can claim ignorance and lay claim to the pass that the members of 1993 Star and even 2005 Cadets receive. If you know enough about the Cadets to be willing to pay the exorbitant fees to march there, then you know enough about their design philosophies; you’ve made your choice, and that choice is to place your stamp of approval on it as well. So, thank you Cadets, for accomplishing the Toohey goal of making everyone equal: First, we booed the judges (and DCI), then the design team and staffs, and now even the members are fair game. Thank you for taking this once-grand activity, steeped in the traditions of honor, respect, duty, and camaraderie, and dragging it down to the vulgar levels of an SEC college football game. “Embrace the suckiness!”

Dan Baker

[year1buick]

Conclusion: If you want to play in the majors, you’ve got to grow some cojones or go back home.

And if you boo, then you've got to have the "cajones" to take it when other people call you out as an idiot for doing it.

edit: typing

Edited August 12, 2007 by year1buick

[Tekneek]

And if boo, then you've got to have the "cajones" to take it when other people call you out as an idiot for doing it.

Does booing immediately qualify someone as an idiot?

[euponitone]

After Thursday night's antics by the director of the Cadets, much discussion was had regarding the crowd's reaction to his display and to his group's performance. After much introspection, I have come to realize that this is merely a symptom of DCI's schizophrenia. Just think about it: Before 1993, for the most part, the only real boos heard at a drum corps show were clearly aimed at the judges. For example, on several occasions at shows I attended (especially in the 80s), the announcement of the score and placement for the Madison Scouts was met by vociferous booing, which was replaced within seconds by thunderous applause. The clear message: "Judges, you f’ed up; get it together! Scouts, you deserved better; great job!" Although the implication was that they should have placed higher than another corps, it was never interpreted (or, at least, meant to be interpreted) as "Hey, other corps: You suck!", and no one thought twice about it. Well, at least no one with any intelligence.

The first example of actually booing a corps, as others have pointed out, occurred in 1993 with the Star of Indiana. But that's also the first instance of DCI's growing schizophrenia becoming apparent. I will admit: I booed that show. Did I boo the members of that corps? No, I didn't. There had been no evidence from Star's previously well-designed shows that they were about to produce such a lump of manure. And, up until that point, the audience (and most corps members and staffs) still believed that drum corps was a youth activity. I booed the staff of the Star of Indiana, and especially the design team. The American Heritage Dictionary defines "boo" as "to express contempt, scorn, or disapproval", and that's exactly what I did with Star's 1993 show: I expressed my contempt for their design, my scorn for the faux artistry of their visual program, and my disapproval of the musical philosophy demonstrated by their book (or lack thereof). Did the members perform their show with excellence? Yes, but if a sculptor crafted a realistic-looking piece of excrement out of marble, it’s still a piece of excrement, even if excellently rendered.

After that instance in 1993, booing a particular corps (as opposed to the judges) mostly disappeared. Pockets may have occurred, but not like we saw with Star. Why? Yes, corps were "pushing the envelope" from a creative standpoint, but they were doing it within the confines of the audiences' expectations. No show made such a leap from the expected as Star's did, until Cadets 2005. And despite the audiences' overall rejection of the design choices of the Cadets that year, the judges rewarded them with the title. Who could have seen the provocative effect this would have on DCI's schizophrenia?

You may be wondering: "DCI's schizophrenia? What are you talking about?" The American Heritage Dictionary defines "schizophrenia" as "A situation or condition that results from the coexistence of disparate or antagonistic qualities, identities, or activities." And that describes exactly the current state of affairs in DCI. Most (if not all) of DCI's current problems stems from the fact that it doesn't know what "drum corps" is anymore. At various times, and for various reasons, DCI (as emblematic of the activity as a whole) holds itself out as "a youth activity" (emphasis education), as "art", as "entertainment", and as "a competitive sport". However, decisions are made based on the perceived emphasis at that time, not due to an organized and focused approach, creating a jumble of confusing, and often contradictory, principles.

So, is it appropriate to boo a corps? It depends on what you believe the emphasis should be. If drum corps is still truly a youth activity, then the answer is easy: No, booing is inappropriate. No one, not even the worst, most heartless person, would go to a concert given by their local school and boo the 4th graders who are just learning music and are attempting to play "Mary Had a Little Lamb" on their flutophones. While the Cadets are light years past that scenario, if the emphasis is education and they are students, then the attempt, any attempt, should be cheered. Unfortunately, as an activity, this has not been a youth activity for quite some time. Yes, there are individual corps that exist as singular youth activities, but as long as a corps turns away kids who aren't as experienced or talented in favor of a "better" performer, they have lost the right to be considered a youth activity, and the "protection from booing" that goes along with it. Accordingly, as a personal example of how I implement these differences, you will never hear me boo corps like the Colt Cadets, Mystikal, or Capital Sound. However, I will not hesitate to boo the Cadets, the Blue Devils, or the Cavaliers if their show (or performance) dictates it. Conclusion: Booing of a youth activity should be inappropriate, but, unfortunately, few corps meet the definition of a youth activity and thereby deserve not to be booed by drum corps audiences.

What if you believe the emphasis should be on art or entertainment; is booing appropriate then? This is definitely a harder case to make. Do people boo at movies they disapprove of? Not usually. Instead, they show their displeasure by advising others not to pay the money to see it. But that analogy doesn’t work for drum corps, because you can’t financially express your opinion about one show: So you didn’t buy a ticket to the show; is it because you don’t like corps A or one of the others performing (or more than one)? How can anyone differentiate? It’s impossible. And that’s before you throw in all the other possible variables (maybe you didn’t go to that show because it was too far away, or you had other plans, or you couldn’t afford it, or you didn’t know about it, etc.). A better analogy is provided by stand-up comedians. When you go to a comedy club, there are usually several comedians performing their routines that night, and booing and heckling a comedian who sucks is commonplace. “Well, they’re professionals; they can handle it,” you might argue, but it happens to amateurs as well. Don’t believe me? Just stay up late some Saturday night and watch “Showtime at the Apollo”. Even the definition provided above for “boo” was followed by the following example: booed the singer off the stage.” Conclusion: Whether booing an artist or entertainer is appropriate is not clear, but it definitely happens on a regular basis. Deal with it.

Finally, the easiest case is if you believe that the emphasis should be on competition. Anyone who has ever been to a sporting event knows that booing the opposition is practically an American pastime. And since this appears to be the primary emphasis these days (as evidenced by DCI’s new branding initiative “Marching Music’s Major League™”), no one should be shocked. Indeed, why did the Cadets perform the show that they did in spite of the palpable disapproval with their show design? Is it because their director is concerned with their education? Clearly not (unless he wants to teach them about derision). Is it because it’s entertaining? Again, clearly not; the “libretto” is simplistic and inane, and the “performance” of the libretto is so dreadful even Dorothy Parker would be incapable of giving it the drubbing it deserves. (How their Music GE and Ensemble scores can be so high is the second greatest mystery the drum corps world has ever known, only behind the mystery of how their Visual Performance scores can be so high year after year despite the blatantly crappy technique.) Is it for the art of it? Unless the director and staff of the Cadets have changed their organizational philosophy recently, I can attest to the fact that the sole motivation for their design decisions is to give their members “the best shot to win a title.” Clearly, the Cadets, as an organization, believe the emphasis should be placed on competition. Conclusion: If you want to play in the majors, you’ve got to grow some cojones or go back home.

Overall, it is clear that booing is an appropriate response to the abomination that is the Cadets 2007 show. Which takes us back to 2005: That year, people booed the Cadets for the same reasons they booed Star in 1993; i.e. they were booing the design team and staff of the Cadets, not the members. But what happened? The judges put their imprimatur on the show by not only handing them the title, but all of the captions (and subcaptions) as well. The message (doing their best Ellsworth Toohey imitation): “We, the judging community, hereby declare that everyone who thinks they know anything about drum corps is wrong, and that the Cadets 2005 show is what we want in the future. Trust us; it’s for your own good.” So, the next year, the Cadets brought us more of the same crap and once again scored well, despite the increasing discontent and increasingly vocal opposition. Now, the 2007 season rolls around, and the Cadets once again decide to show us that they know more about what drum corps is and should be. The problem is that, at this stage, no member can claim ignorance and lay claim to the pass that the members of 1993 Star and even 2005 Cadets receive. If you know enough about the Cadets to be willing to pay the exorbitant fees to march there, then you know enough about their design philosophies; you’ve made your choice, and that choice is to place your stamp of approval on it as well. So, thank you Cadets, for accomplishing the Toohey goal of making everyone equal: First, we booed the judges (and DCI), then the design team and staffs, and now even the members are fair game. Thank you for taking this once-grand activity, steeped in the traditions of honor, respect, duty, and camaraderie, and dragging it down to the vulgar levels of an SEC college football game. “Embrace the suckiness!”

Dan Baker

You had me until the end when you started ranting against the visual technique as being 'terrible'

way to ruin a decent post with ignorance and bias

[Gentleman Marcher]

The first example of actually booing a corps, as others have pointed out, occurred in 1993 with the Star of Indiana.

Factual error? The Bridgemen were booed as they entered the field in 1977 for finals, or so I've heard.

[mohanico]

I read your entire analysis, and I really enjoyed it. It kind of comes down to this, If you play jazz to a group of people who want rock, what kind of reaction do you expect? No matter how good the jazz artist is, a negative reaction is bound to happen. The same goes for drum corps too.

[year1buick]

Does booing immediately qualify someone as an idiot?

Does an unpopular drum corps show immediately require boos?

IMO, it all depends on when and where you are as to how "okay" booing is. At a Yankees game? Sure, it's part of the "social norm" for that activity. Drum corps? No, in my opinion. Obviously, other people see this differently. If so, then they've got to be just as thick-skinned as they expect the performers to be.

[Tekneek]

Does an unpopular drum corps show immediately require boos?

IMO, it all depends on when and where you are as to how "okay" booing is. At a Yankees game? Sure, it's part of the "social norm" for that activity. Drum corps? No, in my opinion. Obviously, other people see this differently. If so, then they've got to be just as thick-skinned as they expect the performers to be.

Given that this edition of The Cadets was not the first corps to be booed, there is obviously some history of booing in the activity.

[year1buick]

Given that this edition of The Cadets was not the first corps to be booed, there is obviously some history of booing in the activity.

True, but it's relatively limited. (Particularly in comparison to sporting events.)

[Tekneek]

True, but it's relatively limited. (Particularly in comparison to sporting events.)

I'm not going to argue for booing, because it is pretty clear to me that those who want to boo vociferously and those who freak out over it are both quite a bit over the top.