Are todays guard styles hurting

[Mello Dude]

jpaul wrote:

First, let's dispense with the idea that there is any objective measure of good/bad when it comes to any form of art or expression. There are merely preferences and the concepts we use to explain/support our preferences. For every person who posts "I like "X" because . . ." there is someone else ready to reply with "You're kidding. I hate "X" because . . ." In the end it doesn't matter. You like what you like and different people like different things. The end.

Yet, drum corps and yes guard, is a judged competition. Someone is making these exact decisions, albeit probably not quite using that terminology. So yes, there is good and bad as judged by DCI, and yes in the end it DOES matter as reflected by the score. Is one considered a dino by pointing out reality?

[BRASSO]

It's an opinion. If you disagree, so be it.

OK. Make the case. (BTW, I never said that criticism of contemporary drum corps was a problem. I was referring to the motivation behind the criticism. It's a subtle, yet important distinction, IMO. And I have NEVER waved a pom pom.)

That's not what I said.

Yes, we're ALL entitled to express our opinions. I never said otherwise. I expressed mine.

You said above that people who criticise ( quote ) " do more harm to the activity than they realize ". That's is where I expressed my opinion to that remark as being " nonsense ",as well.

Edited March 11, 2010 by BRASSO

[byline]

Actually I relived the past last year in the present by SCV. Learn my friend, learn....

True enough. It was a contemporary show design, but with a strong dose of Santa Clara's heritage and classic style blended in. They serve as a great example of how corps can strike that balance.

[byline]

Not all guards " pretty much have the same style ". It really depends on who is doing guard, and what " style" and what " emotion " they are attempting to portray. Lots of times, the theme dictates the style used. But not always. Some themes require a different syylistic approach, and some Guard instructors hit a home run regarding providing the guard with the correct stylistic approach that matches the theme, but some staff misfire when the stylistic approach really doesn't match well the music and theme selected for that year by that Corps.

Except that it used to be that you really could tell which region a guard was from, just by looking at how they did their equipment work. One simple example: Midwest guards did "push" spins. Eastern guards did "drop" spins. California guards used a lot more extensions in their equipment work and tended to have a "softer" visual style than the "Wham, bam, thank you ma'am!" style of the Midwest guards and the crisp, clean, not quite so "in your face" style of the Eastern guards. You could also look at elements like tosses and basic angles, and clearly see where a guard was from. It wasn't defined by the "emotion" a guard projected, but more literally in the actual elements a guard performed. That's an area where I do agree that guards have lost a lot of their individuality; the elements are much more homogeneous than they used to be, mainly because instructors move around so much, and they're all using the same basic stuff.

Edited March 11, 2010 by byline

[GMichael1230]

I'm not much of a colorguard person but:

The Garfield Cadets 1987 solo male dancer was fantastic.

...and I thought he ruined the show....

G

[Jimisback]

Actually they can't. Because what I'm responding to is in the present and clinging to the past is never a good thing. I'm being progressive and appreciating what I have in front of me because the past can never be returned to. Ofcourse we must learn from past, understand that past, appreciate the past but we cannot live in the past. Thats what dinosaurs do, and so everything that they experience in the present loses its sense of reality so nothing to them is what it truly is. The present becomes just as smoky as the past and they suffer from an inabiltity to connect substantially with either.

So, while its okay to say that the changes over the few years have been negative, its not fair to put a blind eye on the present because of that. All we have is the present and if you ignore that... well... you're left with a bunch of grumpy dinosaurs.

Clinging to the past is NEVER a good thing? Please explain why it is always a bad thing then.

[jpaul]

Yet, drum corps and yes guard, is a judged competition. Someone is making these exact decisions, albeit probably not quite using that terminology. So yes, there is good and bad as judged by DCI, and yes in the end it DOES matter as reflected by the score. Is one considered a dino by pointing out reality?

Have you ever noticed that judges don't always agree with one another, and that fans often don't agree with judges? That's because it's all opinion. Judges are educated and use a detailed set of criteria in an effort to make it more objective (or at least get their opinons to line up a little more consistently with one another) but it's still an opinion.

Yes, DCI judges proclaim rankings and ratings based on the scoring system. It's the system that the activity has agreed to use as the standard. That doesn't make it objective. If you used a different scoring system, or different judges, or an audience vote you might very well get a different result. Even how much it matters is open for debate.

I don't really know what you're asking in your last question. First "dino" is not my term. Secondly, which "reality" are you referring to?

You said above that people who criticise ( quote ) " do more harm to the activity than they realize ". That's is where I expressed my opinion to that remark as being " nonsense ",as well.

First I said this:

(Personally, I think people who harp on how bad everything is now and how much better it was before do more to harm the activity (that they say they love) than they realize. If you're busy complaining about how bad it is then you're not doing anything to make it better, are you.)

Then I said this:

(BTW, I never said that criticism of contemporary drum corps was a problem. I was referring to the motivation behind the criticism. It's a subtle, yet important distinction, IMO.)

It's not criticism in general that I think is a problem. In fact, I think it's healthy. It's the automatic negative reaction to things that are new just because they're new and different from what used to be that I think is a problem. You're oversimplifying my intent to make your argument.

[byline]

...and I thought he ruined the show....

I didn't think he ruined it, but by the same token, I didn't feel he added a whole lot, either. It was almost as if he was supposed to be a distraction from a color guard that was weaker, technically, than their fellow guards in the other top-scoring corps. (And there were reasons for that, not the least of which was Garfield fielding practically no guard the year before.)

Now, get an entire guard dancing the way he did? That's impressive.

[GMichael1230]

I didn't think he ruined it, but by the same token, I didn't feel he added a whole lot, either. It was almost as if he was supposed to be a distraction from a color guard that was weaker, technically, than their fellow guards in the other top-scoring corps. (And there were reasons for that, not the least of which was Garfield fielding practically no guard the year before.)

Now, get an entire guard dancing the way he did? That's impressive.

I felt that even though he was an "alvim Ailey" dancer, his moves were mechqanical, bombastic, cumbersome and overbearing...yes, they guard was weak due to the lack of a guard the year prior, however, the solo dancer to the extreme was just to harsh on the eyes...

G

[BRASSO]

Have you ever noticed that judges don't always agree with one another, and that fans often don't agree with judges? That's because it's all opinion. Judges are educated and use a detailed set of criteria in an effort to make it more objective (or at least get their opinons to line up a little more consistently with one another) but it's still an opinion.

Yes, DCI judges proclaim rankings and ratings based on the scoring system. It's the system that the activity has agreed to use as the standard. That doesn't make it objective. If you used a different scoring system, or different judges, or an audience vote you might very well get a different result. Even how much it matters is open for debate.

I don't really know what you're asking in your last question. First "dino" is not my term. Secondly, which "reality" are you referring to?

First I said this:

Then I said this:

It's not criticism in general that I think is a problem. In fact, I think it's healthy. It's the automatic negative reaction to things that are new just because they're new and different from what used to be that I think is a problem. You're oversimplifying my intent to make your argument.

I havn't met anyone that has had "a negative reaction to things ( Drum Corps ) that are new just because it is new and different from what used to be ". Maybe there are such people. I just havn't heard of them or met them, that's all. The ones I 've met have seen show (s), and didn't like them because for whatever reason it did little for them. These are fans that certainly at one time were not impervious or unaccepting of " new things". At one time we do know that they did embrace " new things ". For example, the first time they found Drum Corps and were almost instantly were taken it by it all. Anyone that rejects someting " new " just because it is " new " and " not what they are used to " , just doesn't seem very bright. If you have encountered such people, just pay no attention to them. If they don't like something " new " simply because it is is " new " and" different from what they have been used to" then they probably still use dial up phone internet ( if they've even come around to computers, that is ), have a VCR, a TV with rabbit ears, and 8 track cassettes, etc and so forth..... who cares what this handful of backward nitwits you've apparently met in your travels thinks.

Edited March 11, 2010 by BRASSO