Has DCI been a success or failure?

[IntheMood]

Really, VFW and AL operations of corps circuits weren't really about the kids either. It was really a scheme to give dads another reason to sit at the bar of the VFW Hall. "Hey, you kids go out there and practice while I sit here at the bar until you are done."

If some of the Midwestern former stallwarts are any indication, it is clear that not all corps were formed for purely altruistic reasons. Forming a not-for-profit has tax advantages, especially if the director has interests in the dining/entertainment field.

WOW JUST WOW. I know this is your opinion and I respect that. But people need to know that in most cases this was just not true. My dad is a Nam vet. yet he has never joined a VFW or AL Post to this day. My dad's job took him all over the world. Yet some how he always found time to help out the Glassmen anyway he could. In the Glassmen many dad's steeped up to the plate to offer any help they could. Just like dad's today do. And MOM'S. I know a dad whos son age-out in the early 90's yet he still gives up his weekends to work on the buses.

Anyone who knows Glassmen history will tell you that without the Maumee Demons a SR. Corps sponsered by a VFW and AL Post, the Glassmen would not be here today. In 1961 Mr. Ford and a handfull of Maumee Demons started the Maumee Suns. Mr Ford risked a lot and underwrote all the early expenses to develop his dream of a local musical youth organization that reaches out to the local youth. Sounds to me like Mr. Ford was doing this for a tax advantage and not for the kids. NOT. In the early days there were members who marched in the Demons and the Suns. There were times when they where at the same show. So thoses members had to change into different Unis. and in some cases had to change ints. and march with the other Corps.

The Glassmen went inactive from 76-79. When a handfull of Glassmen Alum decided to bring back the Glassmen in 79 they needed a place to practice. WELLLLLLLLL, guess what? It was that same evil VFW Post who sponsered the Maumee Demons in 50's, the Maumee Suns in the 60's, the Glass City Optimist and the Glassmen in the 70's. who opend up their doors and gave the Glassmen a place to practice and start over again for free.

Yes there were money issues. But, I think some would agree that the VFW and AL orgs. did more good then harm to the Drum and Bugle Corps avtivity.

Dean

[Tom Brace]

agree to a point. you're right about trial and error, but sometimes being stubborn and forging on in some areas that have proven to hurt isnt always good business. for the most part, DCI has done well. But in some big ways, they dont see the forest for the trees.

It sounds like you have a list of these big ways. Please share. Specifics would be nice. Thanks in advance!

[BRASSO]

Ah, but it is "debatable".

No question that money was one principal reason for the corps electing to run their own championship. But the money situation had been that way for years and years without the corps taking action. In the press of the day, it was said that the outcome of the American Legion rules congress in late 1971 was the last straw that catalyzed the formation of DCI....which indicates that had the AL made enough concessions to the corps, DCI would not have been formed that year. So then what - would it have been formed in 1973? 1974? 1976? Never?

Again, money was certainly a primary reason for creating DCI. Whether it was the primary reason, likely though it may be, is not completely beyond debate.

Not true. 2 Corps Directors, ( Warren, Bonfiglio, ) agreed ( confirmed on video tape ) ) that what principally motivated the 5 Corps Directors to leave was 1)" more revenue share of performance fees" and 2 ) "more standardization in judging criteria "....... and in that order.

Edited February 10, 2009 by BRASSO

[Tom Brace]

The PRINCIPAL reason DCI was formed was because a handul of Corps Directors decided they were not happy with the revenue...... read...... MONEY..... share that the Veteran's Organizations were providing to their Corps in performance competition show receipts.

This point is not even debatable. As we have available to us both the written word from these gentlemen and a video tape of their words to to thiis effect. preserved for posterity. ( source..." Brass Roots" )

And personally, I think there is nothing particularly unnerving that DCI was formed for principally self serving financial purposes on the part of a handful of disgruntled Corps Directors. What CAN be unnerving is any attempt at revisionist history thst attempts to put forth the incorrect motive that the impetus for DCI was done principally " for the kids ". Nowhere in ANY comments from the 5 Corps Directors involved in the mutiny at the time was there ANYTHING mentioned as a catalyst that precipitated this action by these 5 men was done principally.... " for the kids ".

I totally agree here. This was a small band of rebels (to start with) jumping ship and refusing to accept the status quo. They were determined to step out on their own and in terms of this thread...THEY SUCCEEDED.

[Tom Brace]

Ah, but it is "debatable".

No question that money was one principal reason for the corps electing to run their own championship. But the money situation had been that way for years and years without the corps taking action. In the press of the day, it was said that the outcome of the American Legion rules congress in late 1971 was the last straw that catalyzed the formation of DCI....which indicates that had the AL made enough concessions to the corps, DCI would not have been formed that year. So then what - would it have been formed in 1973? 1974? 1976? Never?

Again, money was certainly a primary reason for creating DCI. Whether it was the primary reason, likely though it may be, is not completely beyond debate.

I think you are not way off on this one. It was money to be sure....but it was also artistic and judication control. In short, they wanted to move from the constraints (all of them) from the VFW and AL circuits.

[BRASSO]

I totally agree here. This was a small band of rebels (to start with) jumping ship and refusing to accept the status quo. They were determined to step out on their own and in terms of this thread...THEY SUCCEEDED.

Well, yes they in fact DID succeed in 1 ) securing higher performance fees for their Corps and 2 ) standardization of judging criteria

And as has been mentioined earlier, DCI succeeded in just about all of their stated early goals via their written charter mission statements.

What is questioned however by some is whether or not those mission statements should have taken on other stated goals ( ie, growth of the DCI membership, growth of the fan base,, and so forth. )

Edited February 10, 2009 by BRASSO

[Tom Brace]

WOW JUST WOW. I know this is your opinion and I respect that. But people need to know that in most cases this was just not true. My dad is a Nam vet. yet he has never joined a VFW or AL Post to this day. My dad's job took him all over the world. Yet some how he always found time to help out the Glassmen anyway he could. In the Glassmen many dad's steeped up to the plate to offer any help they could. Just like dad's today do. And MOM'S. I know a dad whos son age-out in the early 90's yet he still gives up his weekends to work on the buses.

Anyone who knows Glassmen history will tell you that without the Maumee Demons a SR. Corps sponsered by a VFW and AL Post, the Glassmen would not be here today. In 1961 Mr. Ford and a handfull of Maumee Demons started the Maumee Suns. Mr Ford risked a lot and underwrote all the early expenses to develop his dream of a local musical youth organization that reaches out to the local youth. Sounds to me like Mr. Ford was doing this for a tax advantage and not for the kids. NOT. In the early days there were members who marched in the Demons and the Suns. There were times when they where at the same show. So thoses members had to change into different Unis. and in some cases had to change ints. and march with the other Corps.

The Glassmen went inactive from 76-79. When a handfull of Glassmen Alum decided to bring back the Glassmen in 79 they needed a place to practice. WELLLLLLLLL, guess what? It was that same evil VFW Post who sponsered the Maumee Demons in 50's, the Maumee Suns in the 60's, the Glass City Optimist and the Glassmen in the 70's. who opend up their doors and gave the Glassmen a place to practice and start over again for free.

Yes there were money issues. But, I think some would agree that the VFW and AL orgs. did more good then harm to the Drum and Bugle Corps avtivity.

Dean

Dean, I appreciate your thoughts. Yes, I would not deny the VFWs and ALs had an important role in the history of drum corps. Their BIGGEST problem (one that still haunts them today) was the almost blatant refusal to accept those who served in Viet Nam into their ranks. It wasn't that Viet Nam soldiers didn't want a place where they can belong (many motorcycl groups still active today prove that point) it was that they weren't made to feel welcome by their military brothers who returned from wars in Europe, Japan and the Pacific Islands and those from Korea. Funny thing, Korean Police Action returnees were welcomed in most part. It was the age societal and politcal gap between those from previous wars and the Viet Nam conflict returnees that was too wide to navigate for many. This has led to a steady decline in the numbers of VFWs and ALs still functioning today.

You point out the history of one corps...a corps that has had a strong history in central Ohio. One that is still a perennial Top 12 performer. I can cite several other corps (most no longer in existence) who's management and leadership were far less altruistic. Some of these "corps" still hold charters and 501c3s and continue to raise money and reap tax benefits for their leadership...without any thought of restarting a drum corps. I would urge you to look toward another Ohio corps in Marion as an example of which I speak. There are corps in Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri who I happen to know are currently following this same current model. "We once had a drum corps...perhaps someday we will again have a drum corps...for now...let's continue to hold our bingo game and raise money and spend money and reap the tax benefits of managers of a not for profit entity." They, in most cases, NEVER plan to again field a drum corps.

I don't wish to pick a fight, but these institutions are out there and they give the entire activity a black eye. They are not a DCI problem. Many of their histories pre-date DCI. Their lack of fiscal management skill led to their demise...nothing else. PERIOD. I refuse to accept this flimsy strawman argument that DCI destroyed these corps. That is a load of CR@P (hooey).

If that was so, all of them from that era would have folded. But, some, like the Glassmen you mention, or the Blue Stars, one of my most recent examples....found management who decided their corps history didn't have to end on the rubish heap like these bingo playing fake corps. So, there are examples of corps who are in it for the right reasons.

When some of the legacy folks complain of the number of corps lost...they are eager to blame the costs associated with competing in DCI, the touring, the whatever have you. What they fail to recognize is that corps and their management leaders have choices. They need to act in the best interest of their organizations. And if talented and skillful managers aren't at the top of your organization, then a corps...like any other organization, company, church, government....any other entity...is at increased risk for failure. I won't get overly political here but skillful managers were not obviously at the controls over many things over the past eight years. It has led to a worldwide crisis.

Sorry for the meandering. And yeah...I poked a bit of fun at the VFWs and ALs from the past. It was their lack of foresight that led to the creation of DCI in the first place.

[BayonneBum]

What do you think needs to be done to market it better?

Please take my opinions with a huge grain of salt. I'm not nearly as knowledgeable about the activity as the folk on these forums. In fact, all that I know about modern DC is from this site. All I can relay is my personal relationship with the activity, which started in 1978 and pretty much ended by 1985.

Just from a popularity standpoint (I don't know how much can be attributed to DCI), but I think there should be more focus on the music. And more accessible music. The focus now seems to be on the visual, and the music is an afterthought, there only to drive the visual. Which I think is a turn-off for the masses. Drum Corp started to resemble the ballet. Not that there is anything wrong with that, it's just not as popular as other forms of musical entertainment.

I regret to say that Drum Corp lost me over the decades, or I was just not able to keep up. I know DCA is an alternative, and plan to become a more involved spectator as my work schedule decreases.

I marched in the late 70's and early 80's, and almost every corps played almost complete, identifiable songs (for the most part - if the song was unfamiliar, there was incentive to get a studio recording). Just a few corps, some of them previous champions and some strong contenders, started with the themes rather than the actual (although punctuated) songs. I don't know when this started to change (my guess is around late 80's), but I just couldn't help that my attention turned to other forms of entertainment. Just my opinion.

[Tom Brace]

I guess it's an era thing.

I always thought the corps who were heavily music and not enough visual as kind of not getting what drum corps was actually about.

Any group of quality musicians can sound great standing still. How do they sound while moving? To me...that's what matters. Movement makes drum corps to me. The music is important but the movement is of equal importance.

If I want to pay for a group to arc up and play...I'll plunk down my dollars for the Chicago Symphony (Solti era thank you). I go see drum corps because they move.

[BRASSO]

I guess it's an era thing.

I always thought the corps who were heavily music and not enough visual as kind of not getting what drum corps was actually about.

Any group of quality musicians can sound great standing still. How do they sound while moving? To me...that's what matters. Movement makes drum corps to me. The music is important but the movement is of equal importance.

If I want to pay for a group to arc up and play...I'll plunk down my dollars for the Chicago Symphony (Solti era thank you). I go see drum corps because they move.

I might ask... if a quality group of musicians , as you say, " sound great ", then why make them move ? If folks want their " great musicians " to ( in some cases ) to run on the field from position to position, then a case could be made that you are not emphasiing their musicianship.... you are simply emphasizing the ability of musicians to sprint in unison. Some people ( like Tom ) want to see how well their musicians can sprint, or provide unique body movements to show off their physicality, or form visual patterns. Which is fine. However, it appears that much of the general public prefers their " great musicians " to remain mostly stationary and to play pleasing music over rapid movements and snippet note playing while moving at a high degree of velocity from position to position.

If Drum Corps want to make the visual paramount over pleasing music, then why not simply change the name from " Drum Corps " or " Band " to perhaps "Visual and Velocity Movement Bands " instead ? In this way, fans will understand that these events are visual spectacles accompanied on occassion with musical note playing or musical snippets of songs strung together to fit the predominent visual spectacle ? Wouldn't this name change make make more sense as it would more aptly describe the entertainment vehicle before us ? At one time, these were called " Drum and Bugle Corps ". The name implies as a given that the instruments and their playing took preference... and the visual component was an adjunct auxillary to these instruments in the show performance. Otherwise we would have called these units " Visual Corps with Drums and Bugles " If the musicianship is now increasingly subservient to the visual, or even if it shares equal billing, then wouldn't callling the entertainment genre " Visual and Velocity Movement Bands " seem most fitting now ? If the genre is changing... or has changed..... and people state they are for " change " then why have we still kept the name " Drum Corps " , and not changed the name as well ?

Edited February 11, 2009 by BRASSO