Does entertaining to the audience mean not credited by judges?

[CVSoprano]

great point about the critics awards. look at the movies that grossed the most all time...how many won Oscars?

The general idea of audience appeal =/= critical acclaim is often the case, but...

Return of the King much? :) Just sayin'...

[MikeN]

The general idea of audience appeal =/= critical acclaim is often the case, but...

Return of the King much? :) Just sayin'...

And the three highest-rated (by number of eyeballs) Academy Award broadcasts in recent memory were the years of Titanic, Return of the King and Avatar - when the movies that audiences found to be their favorite were being hugely rewarded for their artistic and technical merit.

Mike

[ajwdad]

Did they happen to play trumpet and mello?

trumpet and percussion

[ajwdad]

I go to shows "just" to see corps. I am in no way associated with any corps and really don't have a favorite corps year in and year out. I know I'm in the minority, but I bet there are more drum corps fans like me than what your post leads to believe.

I'll take you up on that bet. To put numbers behind it, I would bet that in the course of a year, less than 50% of the seats sold go to people not associated in some fashion with drum corp. As stated before, the outreach marketing is pretty bad.

[Newseditor44]

What ?? First of all..the judges are giving numbers, based on the performance...for the people marching the shows. They are there trying to perfect the program because its a competition and scores are assesed based on a confirmed, known, set of criteria. Who cares about us and what we enjoy...yes its fun to watch a show, why perform if theres no audience, blah blah blah..bottom line, its about them, not us.

Second, Figure skating judges have multiple camera angles and instant replay for assesing the critera and elements of a figure skaters performance, they do indeed have the ability to observe and make a judjement on things wee se and things we dont.

G

The judging criteria is highly subjective, based on the eye of the beholder, which makes the results questionable. Figure skating is based on more strict criteria with a list of skills or moves that must be demonstrated by the performer.

And, I CARE! When I'm shelling out $25 bucks a seat I want to be entertained. If I'm not going to be entertained then I'm going to spend my money elsewhere. Just because it's there doesn't mean I have to like it, and doesn't mean I have to support it with my money.

[GMichael1230]

The judging criteria is highly subjective, based on the eye of the beholder, which makes the results questionable. Figure skating is based on more strict criteria with a list of skills or moves that must be demonstrated by the performer.

And, I CARE! When I'm shelling out $25 bucks a seat I want to be entertained. If I'm not going to be entertained then I'm going to spend my money elsewhere. Just because it's there doesn't mean I have to like it, and doesn't mean I have to support it with my money.

It was a magnified figure of speech, used to try and make a point.

G

[corpsband]

I think a lot of people continue to confuse effect with affect. I mentioned early in this thread that a show has an affect on the audience, it has an impact one way or another which can be determined by the reaction: golf clap vs. standing O or something in between. That's not GE. Effect has many meanings, but in this instance, it refers to a result or the way something turns out. So GE is basically how well all the musical or visual elements fit together as a whole, reflecting the established, agreed upon judging criteria. It really doesn't have anything to do with the crowd's response.

I think lots of people are under the misapprehension that General Effect has nothing to do with the audience. This myth is perpetrated constantly (by otherwise knowledgeable people). GE was developed with the express purpose of capturing the "it works" phenomenon everyone is very familiar with but which -- when you try to describe it exactly -- is very slippery.

Here's WGI's attempt at it:

(I suspect DCI's judging manual closely mirrors this definition)

• WHAT IS GENERAL EFFECT?
  
• General Effect is the creative and appealing design of the show combined with the performance and communication of the program.
  
• These two elements together produce what we call “Entertainment Value” or General Effect.
  
• General Effect is a part of the judging system that rewards the extent the audience is interested, involved, entertained, or emotionally engaged in the program.
  

As you can see it is actually centered on the audience -- specifically how the design and performers keep the audience connected via the triad of effect components (aesthetic, intellectual, and emotional).

While it's true that GE is not equivalent to "crowd favorite" (ie. it is not a popularity contest) , the entire caption pivots on how the performers communicate with the audience. A performance which does not engage the audience is not generating effect. It is *not* just about entertainment but entertainment is certainly a factor.

But this myth that the audience doesn't matter in GE has gained widespread traction; you hear it in the most remarkable places. A show "works" because the design has created the opportunity and the members have realized the opportunity through their performance.

[BRASSO]

I think lots of people are under the misapprehension that General Effect has nothing to do with the audience. This myth is perpetrated constantly (by otherwise knowledgeable people). GE was developed with the express purpose of capturing the "it works" phenomenon everyone is very familiar with but which -- when you try to describe it exactly -- is very slippery.

Here's WGI's attempt at it:

(I suspect DCI's judging manual closely mirrors this definition)

• WHAT IS GENERAL EFFECT?
  
• General Effect is the creative and appealing design of the show combined with the performance and communication of the program.
  
• These two elements together produce what we call “Entertainment Value” or General Effect.
  
• General Effect is a part of the judging system that rewards the extent the audience is interested, involved, entertained, or emotionally engaged in the program.
  

As you can see it is actually centered on the audience -- specifically how the design and performers keep the audience connected via the triad of effect components (aesthetic, intellectual, and emotional).

While it's true that GE is not equivalent to "crowd favorite" (ie. it is not a popularity contest) , the entire caption pivots on how the performers communicate with the audience. A performance which does not engage the audience is not generating effect. It is *not* just about entertainment but entertainment is certainly a factor.

But this myth that the audience doesn't matter in GE has gained widespread traction; you hear it in the most remarkable places. A show "works" because the design has created the opportunity and the members have realized the opportunity through their performance.

This is GE WGI you've cite here. GE in DCI is defined differently. WGI is not judging musician played music. It is judging what is essentially a visual show performance. In DCI, the General Effect captions places a HUGE amount of value upon the ability of the music and visual components to work in a seemless way. For example, a Corps could play interesting music (that the audience appears to like), but if in the opinion of the GE judge the Visual side, including the Guard work, did not appear well integrated with that music, the GE caption suffers. 2009 Phantom Regiment is one ilustration of this. The audience is essentially a non factor in any of the judged captions. A corps that has a visually striking show where the music played is well integrated and well coordinated with the visual will score very high irrespective on whether or not the show connects, emotionally, intellectually, or aestetically with the audience. 2010 Blue Devils are a good illustration of this. The GE judge is looking for " Effect " not on the audience but on HIM or HER ( the judge ), and the judge is looking for a fully integrated, seemless, show visually and musically above all else in the GE Caption. ( hope this helps )

Edited July 30, 2010 by BRASSO

[HockeyDad]

I think lots of people are under the misapprehension that General Effect has nothing to do with the audience. This myth is perpetrated constantly (by otherwise knowledgeable people). GE was developed with the express purpose of capturing the "it works" phenomenon everyone is very familiar with but which -- when you try to describe it exactly -- is very slippery.

Here's WGI's attempt at it:

(I suspect DCI's judging manual closely mirrors this definition)

You said "mirrors"

[do.it.up.]

This is GE WGI you've cite here. GE in DCI is defined differently. WGI is not judging musician played music. It is judging what is essentially a visual show performance. In DCI, the General Effect captions places a HUGE amount of value upon the ability of the music and visual components to work in a seemless way. For example, a Corps could play interesting music (that the audience appears to like), but if in the opinion of the GE judge the Visual side, including the Guard work, did not appear well integrated with that music, the GE caption suffers. 2009 Phantom Regiment is one ilustration of this. The audience is essentially a non factor in any of the judged captions. A corps that has a visually striking show where the music played is well integrated and well coordinated with the visual will score very high irrespective on whether or not the show connects, emotionally, intellectually, or aestetically with the audience. 2010 Blue Devils are a good illustration of this. The GE judge is looking for " Effect " not on the audience but on HIM or HER ( the judge ), and the judge is looking for a fully integrated, seemless, show visually and musically above all else in the GE Caption. ( hope this helps )

Not judging musician played music? What about the winter drumlines? Or even the concert percussion ensembles? I think this is a great way to describe GE. Thank you for posting this, corpsband.