Tito John Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 I honestly think that people who are incapable of enjoying todays drum corps are simply incapable of enjoying something that doesn't fit their own very narrow definition and doesn't perpetuate an emotional nostalgic connection to what their drum corps experience was. Do you think that you need a connection of some type to drum corps experience in the past to enjoy today's shows? Do you think people walking into a drum corps show for the first time this year or next year would be odds-on to enjoy it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BozzlyB Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) Do you think that you need a connection of some type to drum corps experience in the past to enjoy today's shows?Do you think people walking into a drum corps show for the first time this year or next year would be odds-on to enjoy it? Yes, to varying degrees depending on the person. For me the sound of brass and drums is pretty much all the connection I need to when I marched, to say I need drum corps to very closely mirror my viewing or performing experiencing from 1988-1993 would severely limit my ability to enjoy drum corps shows today. That depends on the person, why they're there, and what their investment in the experience is. Mom and dad showing up to see little Jonny's first drum corps performance are going fall over themselves in love with it. D-bag 13 year old who joined band cause he thought it would be easy and finds himself drug to a "marching band competition" of all things is going to be, like, whatever. Average "Hey Maude lets check out this new drum corps show thingy on friday night cause the fish fry got cancelled" folks may scrunch up their face at anything that doesn't closely resemble a university halftime show, but I don't want that demographic deciding what drum corps is good an what isn't anyway. So, kind of hard to answer your question really. Edited November 9, 2010 by BozzlyB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Yep! I appreciate the sentiment of the OP, welcome thoughts....but like you say, sometimes communication is a function of the receiver not the sender. I agree, good comment by the OP, however, many believe that when attempting to communicate something that is understood, it is incumbent on the SENDER to present the message in a way that has the best chance to have it be so... Going to France and speaking perfectly clear English and then getting mad at the French for not understanding what you're saying would not be a good attempt at communication! Afterall, English contains ~40% French derived words. Some people feel that this is the state of drum corps currently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruckner8 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 I agree, good comment by the OP, however, many believe that when attempting to communicate something that is understood, it is incumbent on the SENDER to present the message in a way that has the best chance to have it be so... Seek first to understand, then to be understood. One of the Seven Habits of Highly Effective People And that's just it. The folks calling for "more recognizable" tunes, and simpler themes don't want to be bothered with any "homework." They want to be understood, lol, they don't want to understand. And that's perfectly fine, btw, since they're paying the bills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjeffeory Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Seek first to understand, then to be understood.One of the Seven Habits of Highly Effective People And that's just it. The folks calling for "more recognizable" tunes, and simpler themes don't want to be bothered with any "homework." They want to be understood, lol, they don't want to understand. And that's perfectly fine, btw, since they're paying the bills. This: Habit 5: Seek First to Understand, then to be Understood Synopsis: Using empathetic listening to be genuinely influenced by a person, which compels them to reciprocate the listening, take an open mind to being influenced by you, which creates an atmosphere of caring, respect, and positive problem solving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madscout96 Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Really?I heard Sondheim on Fresh Air. I could have written a similar post for DCP saying how wonderful it is that so many corps today engage me, treat me as a collaborator. How Bluecoats Metropolis and Criminal made me feel invited. How Cavies Mad World seduced me into theirs. How Cadets Conflict and Resolution had me riding along through all the ups and downs. BD's Constantly Risking Absurdity still makes me constantly smile. Phantom? We are Spartacus. Crown's Grass truly felt greener and its crown duly triple. I was there in the Dark Knight and in Europa with Blue Knights. Blue Star showed me Houdini disappear and the Tour. And more. Had I heard Sondheim say so when I first discovered drum corps in the 70s, I might have said something different. Through the 70s and 80s, I might well have said how the simplicity and sameness of drum corps numbed me. How indulgent of those corps to think I cared so much for Magione. How little regard those corps had for me, the audience, that they would confine the battery to the a narrow strip at the 50 or the guard to such incongruous spinning and regimentation. And more. Really. HH I don't think the OP is saying that ALL drum corps the last 5 years has disconnected itself from the audience, but perhaps too much has. Yes, Spartacus was loved by drum corps fans, as was Carolina's Triple Crown, Cavaliers' Machine, etc. But there were also plenty of shows that failed to draw audiences in upon first (and perhaps, only) viewing. That's a problem. Something I've belived for as long as I've known about drum corps is that a show has to have good stuff on the surface to draw people in. And to make people want to see the show again, there has to be depth. There has to be alot of little things that you just can't catch the first time. Some drum corps audience members go to several shows a year. They want shows with depth. They want to discover something new every time they see the same corps. I think most corps offer shows that do this. But some drum corps audience members go to only one show a year, and will only see each corps once. These people wants shows with substance on the surface because they're not going to have time to see all the little nuances. I don't think that all corps design shows like this. For example: Star of Indiana 1993 had layers and layers of neat stuff going on in their show. But on the surface, watching it for the first time, I didn't like it at all. But there were things in that show that couldn't keep me away next time I had a chance to see them. Now of course that show is a classic. But if I had only seen that show once, I would remember it as being not very entertaining. Cavaliers 2006, on the other hand, grabbed my attention right away and I loved it upon seeing it for the first time. It had a simple one-word theme, "Machine". Easy to relate to. But there was also so much going on below the surface that I was intrigued every other time I saw it that year. So, to sum it up, I think a show should be easy for most viewers to relate to and get into when they see it for the first time, but there needs to be enough there for people to see beyond first impressions also. You reach and challenge more audience members that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironlips Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) Having been a "student" of Sondheim for many years, I listened to the NPR interview, and bought the book (Finishing the Hat) yesterday. It would be a mistake to conclude that all of his music is written for the casual listener. Certainly much of it (Funny Thing Happened, Gypsy) is quite light and old school Broadway, but Sunday in the Park, Company, Frogs, Sweeney Todd and most of the others invite a listener to peel them apart like an onion. Melodically, harmonically and especially lyrically they are deliciously multi-layered while continuing to resonate on the physical and emotional planes. At any of these levels they can be appreciated and deeply satisfying. A drum corps show that can do that would hold my interest. Few of them have those layers, unfortunately, and that is their weakness. To be entertaining and intellectual at one and the same time is the ideal. Mr. Sondheim has that skill. We should listen to him. My friend and colleague, Chuck Naffier, did a wonderful job of bringing Steven Sondheim's music to life with the Colts. Edited November 9, 2010 by ironlips Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrangerx Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 (edited) Some come to drum corps for the music. Some come to drum corps for the visual fireworks. Some come to drum corps for the performance excellence. Some come to drum corps for their kids. Some come to drum corps out of habit. Some come to drum corps in search of something new. Some come to drum corps to perform. Some come to drum corps to win. Myself, I am seduced by the passion and energy of a great performance. That seduction is even more intense when I care about the music. So, when Harry mentions certain specific performances of the past several years, I agree with him to a great degree based on what I like. What I don't enjoy is when corps attempt these same conceptual constructs, but with less ability or vision, and then we in the audience sit on our hands -- not because the performers lacked intention, but because the product and the emotional connection fell short. Intellectual Effect is all fine and good. But, it's not the only valid form of effect, nor even the most important connection in a performance activity that claims to be musically educational. In keeping with the Topic Heading. . . in Sondheim's "Sunday In The Park With George", one line speaks to me artistically as well as practically. "Work is what you do for other people. . . Art is what you do for yourself." Take that for what it's worth. If your goal is to connect with the audience, then do it. If you wonder why the audience doesn't go crazy for your show, look at it through their eyes. They see you once. Maybe twice. If you have to still explain it, you're not programming for most people. You are programming primarily for Intellectual Effect, based on repeated viewings by a small segment of repeat viewers and judges. But don't expect people to pay for the privilege of seeing your "Art" and then be told they are not working hard enough to understand you. Artistically, there is no right or wrong here. But there is an "ideal" and a "real" world of communication between a performing group and an audience. In the 80's, Don Angelica encouraged experimentation -- breaking us out of the Chuck Mangione "Children of Sanchez" mode -- and asked the drum corps judging world to reward the "Jeremiah Symphony", Berlioz, new wind band music like "Variations on a Korean Folk Song" and Rutter music. He pushed for variety and difficult repertoire. But he did not push the activity away from melody. (On a side note: a few corps playing Chuck Mangione music in 1979 for the most part (with nods to the '76 Blue Devils), didn't mean that was the only type of drum corps in the 70's. Try Gustav Holst, Rachmaninov, Kachaturian, Stan Kenton, Stravinsky, John Williams, Claude Bolling, Buddy Rich, and Patrick Williams for starters. . . ) If we think that the ink drying on the next great wind ensemble piece by Frank Ticheli or Eric Whitacre or Stephen Melillo somehow has greater appeal or intrinsic "value" than anything else, then we are mistaking "technique" for music, and faster tempos for "more worthwhile music". Want hard? Try playing "Danny Boy" well enough to make people cry. In a hundred years, people will still know "Danny Boy". Wanna take bets on the rest? Congratulations. We're a smart bunch of people. But the self-congratulatory attitudes do not grow the activity. Inviting more people into the party "emotionally" will go a long way in growing the base, and developing life-long connections. Just my thoughts, from someone in a position to do something about it. Chuck Naffier Sondheim Fan Edited November 9, 2010 by man of the ages Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeN Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 At any of these levels they can be appreciated and deeply satisfying. A drum corps show that can do that would hold my interest. Few of them have those layers, unfortunately, and that is their weakness. To be entertaining and intellectual at one and the same time is the ideal. Mr. Sondheim has that skill. We should listen to him. My friend and colleague, Chuck Naffier, did a wonderful job of bringing Steven Sondheim's music to life with the Colts. I would have to argue, though, that drum corps by it's very definition cannot be quite as subtle. It's 4-part brass barbershop choir, hammering away at you from 35 yards away. There's just not as much you can do with that as with an orcehstra. (And sorry - just saw Chuck's reply - right on!) Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bawker Posted November 9, 2010 Share Posted November 9, 2010 Chuck: . . .an excellent post, sir. 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.