DrumCorpsFan27 Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 No, not a Freudian slip. I think it is, or an intentional slip. Either way, they don't call themselves bands, they call themselves drum and bugle corps. That's their choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Well, I guess Mike has made his own choice, without regard to what the corps choose.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrunchyTenor Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 (MikeD @ Jan 9 2008, 08:18 AM) No, not a Freudian slip. I think it is, or an intentional slip. Either way, they don't call themselves bands, they call themselves drum and bugle corps. That's their choice. Perhaps we need to define what we're talking about so that there's no confusion. Drum Corps - All-brass (keyed in G or Bb/F, bell-front instruments), percussion (field drums, mallet keyboards, effects percussion) and auxiliary unit (color guard, dance units). Marching Band - Brass (keyed in Bb/F/C/BBb, including upright bell instruments), woodwinds (keyed in C, Bb, Eb), percussion (field drums, mallet percussion, effects percussion) and auxialiary unit (color guard, dance units, drill team). Are these acceptable in terms of current instrumentation and auxiliary units? I know it's a semantics issue for some, but this may help to clarify what the debate is really about. Garry in Vegas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAMystreaux Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Well, I guess Mike has made his own choice, without regard to what the corps choose.... Isn't that what you are trying to do as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrumCorpsFan27 Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Isn't that what you are trying to do as well? Nice deflection, but to no avail. MikeD has always said that the corps should be allowed to do as they please. So, it is hypocritical of him to rename them. It shows inconsistancy in his position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAMystreaux Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Nice deflection, but to no avail. MikeD has always said that the corps should be allowed to do as they please. So, it is hypocritical of him to rename them. It shows inconsistancy in his position. Going back to what audio said: Well, I guess Mike has made his own choice, without regard to what the corps choose.... There is no difference here, regardless of what Mike calls them. You guys want it your way, regardless of what the drum corps themselves (directors) choose. It's not a deflection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale Bari Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 (edited) Going back to what audio said:Well, I guess Mike has made his own choice, without regard to what the corps choose.... There is no difference here, regardless of what Mike calls them. You guys want it your way, regardless of what the drum corps themselves (directors) choose. It's not a deflection. Yes, you most certainly tried to deflect the point of David's thrust, vainly - as much as you wish it otherwise. Mike says that drum corps is whatever the drum corps (both individually & collectively) say it is. But then, Mike also says that they are bands, while the corps say they're drum & bugle corps. I know that, to him, those two terms are one and the same, but they still mean something different to others, especially those IN the drum corps. Therefore, on two levels, he's denying their ability and desire to self-define when he says he supports their ability and desire to self-define. (one level: he's calling them bands when they expressly do not call themselves such, and on another level: he's claiming that band & dc are the same, when they [either band or dc] do not claim such.) Our side is not claiming that DCI has the right to ignore history (or fans or what-have-you) and re-make themselves and the activity at will, simply because they have the ability to do it. You cannot hoist us on our own petard on that point. While it would be consistent for us to say that there is something metaphysically more important than the DCI BoD, this particular point, however, has nothing at all to do with what David, or audiodb, or Lancerlady, myself, et al, want. It is simply about an inconsistency (minor though it may be) that David & audio pointed out. You may not like it, but it is right there in black & white. (Or whatever text colors your monitor displays.) You know, for someone who's such an authority on logic, TX, you show very little of it here. Edited January 14, 2008 by Dale Bari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LAMystreaux Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 You know, for someone who's such an authority on logic, TX, you show very little of it here. Wow, I am an authority now? Awesome. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Going back to what audio said:Well, I guess Mike has made his own choice, without regard to what the corps choose.... There is no difference here, regardless of what Mike calls them. Oh, there's plenty of difference. The difference is that Mike has repeatedly claimed that he supports the DCI BOD, no matter what their decisions. He dismisses the opinions of an overwhelming majority of fans by stating that the BOD's opinions are the only ones that matter. He holds the BOD's opinions as above reproach or even debate....as long as they agree with his own. When they do agree, he uses that as leverage for his own arguments. But, then, Mike tells us that if the BOD even considers proposals that he doesn't like, that they are wasting their time. And that these groups, which the BOD calls drum corps, are really bands - never mind what the BOD, or their individual corps, think. That is, as David pointed out, inconsistent. You guys want it your way, regardless of what the drum corps themselves (directors) choose. It's not a deflection. I have never claimed I would blindly support the BOD. Why, I just might have the audacity to disagree with a decision of theirs (gasp!). But just so you know, my advice is not based simply on "wanting my own way", as you suggest. I consider the position of the corps directors, and at times put my own views aside to support them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Oh, there's plenty of difference. The difference is that Mike has repeatedly claimed that he supports the DCI BOD, no matter what their decisions. He dismisses the opinions of an overwhelming majority of fans by stating that the BOD's opinions are the only ones that matter. He holds the BOD's opinions as above reproach or even debate....as long as they agree with his own. When they do agree, he uses that as leverage for his own arguments. But, then, Mike tells us that if the BOD even considers proposals that he doesn't like, that they are wasting their time. And that these groups, which the BOD calls drum corps, are really bands - never mind what the BOD, or their individual corps, think. That is, as David pointed out, inconsistent. No, I said that IMO these proposals are a big waste of time. I hope the BOD gives them short shrift. If they choose to give them more than that, it's their right. Where have I ever claimed otherwise? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.