So what do we want the cadets to be?

[bawker]

Whoever makes that call to YEA!, be sure to call up Kevin Smith of Crown and David Glassgow of the Bluecoats as well.

...when they decide to make spoken word a third of their show, we'll get the phone book out quick as we can. :P

[CuriousMe]

And that is the real problem. That and his mindless followers who defend him and his actions at all costs.

Interesting perspective you have there...if folks disagree with you they must be "mindless."

To quote my friend Stu, "Thank you very much--you have a very nice drum corps."

[chaddyt]

...when they decide to make spoken word a third of their show, we'll get the phone book out quick as we can. :P

Oh okay. I wasn't aware that there was a time quota on "good" narration.

My bad. :P

[bishtom]

I must be one of those mindless followers

[drumcat]

I can see how that argument could be made, but.... What's the reverse of that?

To NOT use the rule changes he initiated? Hopkins would get even more crap for that.

The fact was stated earlier. While Hopkins introduced these "controversial" rules, he did not (nor could he have) single handedly push them through. You can give him #### for starting the process, but you can't point solely at him for their approval. The rules are now the rules and the Cadets have played within the new "definition" of drum corps.

That said. I don't particularly love narration. I don't particularly hate it. Regardless, the Cadets put on a phenomenal show this year. I want them to continue doing that.

That's fair, and in one line, it's a blanket statement. I think that if they had used about as much narrative as crown and coats used for effect, there would be a lot less venom slung. Instead, you have the appearance of a man that pushed a rule through, and the perception occurs because many of the people who voted for amplification haven't touched vocal amplification -- think Blue Knights vs. Cadets.

I'm not accusing anyone of cheating, of course -- they are playing within the rules they set, no doubt. But obviously, no one is higher on the soapbox of vocals, and no one programmed nearly as much as they did. With that, I hope that they reign in, and stop being the posterchild for all of this madness. They don't have to use it the most just because they led the charge. Yet it seems as if you don't do the most, they wouldn't be justified in seeking the rule change.

At this rate, imagine the amount of narrative in 2011 for The Cadets. Let's reverse the rate.

[BigSnareline]

Interesting perspective you have there...if folks disagree with you they must be "mindless."

To quote my friend Stu, "Thank you very much--you have a very nice drum corps."

Did I, at any point say that anyone who disagrees with me is mindless? No - I certainly did not. I am referring to those who mindlessly defend all things Hopkins no matter what lunacy he pulls. There are a few here that fit exactly in that catagory. Try reading entire posts before putting your proverbial foot in your mouth.

[drumcat]

How exactly was the narration highlighted above other parts of the show?

I can't wait for this.

Considering that the narration was often an explanation for what was about to come next, I don't think it could have been any more "highlighted".

But hey, if you don't believe that "the narration (was) highlighted above other parts of the show," you really say all that needs to be heard, and that is that you won't ever stand for a rational debate on the situation because you start with an irrational stance.

It's like trying to tell Bush he's wrong about Iraq. He doesn't care because he believes he's right and that history will judge him in a kind light. I don't find much difference here.

[whitedawn]

i want the cadets to continue offering young men and women positively life-shaping experiences.

i want the cadets to continue being the most talked about corps, because that's what they are really after -- not the internet's "approval."

and yes...

thank you, you have a very nice drum corps.

[CuriousMe]

Did I, at any point say that anyone who disagrees with me is mindless? No - I certainly did not. I am referring to those who mindlessly defend all things Hopkins no matter what lunacy he pulls. There are a few here that fit exactly in that catagory. Try reading entire posts before putting your proverbial foot in your mouth.

My mouth is foot free, but thanks for your concern. You misunderstanding my point, doesn't invalidate it.

You think some of his actions are lunacy....others obviously disagree(my previous point being that according to your statement, these folks are mindless). I have some shocking news for you here...ready for it? You don't universally decide what is lunacy. I don't know how to break this to you, but there are folks who agree with what Mr. Hopkins is doing (ie, they don't think it's lunacy). One easy example is that he can't pass anything through the DCI BOD by himself....others must have agreed with him.

I'm all for disagreeing (it would be so boring if we all agreed about everything), I can't imagine the point of telling someone they're lacking in intelligence for disagreeing, they have that right.

[bawker]

Oh okay. I wasn't aware that there was a time quota on "good" narration.

My bad. :P

Of course...now you're qualifying some of the Up With People monologue as good writing... :P