skajerk Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 hmmmm... still waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 You sure do, it's called the playoffs. and he said the regular season, as I did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 The changes you're referring to really aren't but six or so years old (Bb maybe a decade) at most, so let's not saddle those folks and their system with 20 years of decline. ok, to a point I'll agree. Hop and Gibbs for sure a while as well as Orwoll. Jeff was at Cavies, now at SCV. Probably missing some others, I dont make a habit to remember where everyone has been and where......But then again, we all know Feidler votes no and does yes. I'll answer the question anyway. Who's to blame? Not Hopkins, Gibbs or Fiedler. Everyone else. how about all of the above? As I've been saying, the reduced numbers in drum corps aren't the result of 00s programming and rules any more than they are because of 70s-80s programming and rules. The declines reflect changes in the society around us, changes in demographics, geography and even choice and taste. Those changes aren't unique to drum corps. They have afflicted the broad 'arts' category profoundly, forcing regional symphonies and ballets to cut back and close. On the other hand, they have sponsored massive growth and improvement in high school band programs, a trend which ironically hurt drum corps by providing a substitute for certain young people who otherwise might have sought out corps. agree with a lot and have said so....but you think programming played no part at all? there you're wrong. Whether you agree with the specifics of the Hopkins-Gibbs-Fiedler agenda is beside the point. The point is they have recognized that drum corps can't be more of an anachronism than it already is. It has to evolve to meet the changing expectations of the society around it, the society that MUST support it. The alternative was and is an accelerated decline. so evolving means promote the top 8 and #### everyone else right? Cause that's what this is planned to do HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 This is reference to "socialism" (from World English Dictionary) Socialism: an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels Reread to me that part I highlighted? In the context I was referring to in my original post it was used with exactly the correct connotation. AND... I never said that last part you mentioned. You made that up. aha...and here is where you try to put words in our mouth and as a result fail. at no time did we say anything about all getting paid the same. Why? Because they don't get paid the same now at regular show. no one here is saying they should get the same paycheck. we're just saying 9-23 shouldn't be frozen out of shows outside of semis and finals because they are 9-23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 ...The rise of competitive HS marching band demonstrates why "changing society" cannot be made the scapegoat for the decline in drum corps participation. It also underscores where the real trouble lie$. Follow the money. One of the reasons drum corps sprang up like weeds back in the day is because the activity was cost-effective by design. The military veterans' organizations that organized it picked equipment that was effective for field usage, but also inexpensive. But over the decades, as music educators and others have tweaked drum corps to better match their personal preferences, the cost of equipping such a corps has risen again and again....and corps have folded by the hundreds, often citing the increasing financial challenges as their cause of death. Eventually, some of these same people discovered another way to produce something similar to drum corps. The "corps-style" HS marching band developed in earnest in the 1970s. Building on the established foundation of scholastic music program budgets, these marching band programs were the path of least resistance in dealing with the costs of equipping a marching music ensemble. As such, their numbers grew dramatically throughout the '70s, '80s and '90s. I think we agree on this. The rise of the suburban high school marching band coincided with the migration to the suburbs of many of the communities who previously supported drum corps. Only now (in the 70s and 80s) those communities were dispersed. And they were amid a society less inclined to traditional institutions, including drum corps. Parents invested in high schools and their bands rather than veterans groups and churches and their corps. The choice was made all the easier by the economic imbalance of public funding versus parent pockets or fund-raising. If we agree on the facts (I think we do), then we ought to agree on the conclusions. For me, that's changing society changing the nature of drum corps in all its aspects - from participation and numbers to geography and finance and even instrumentation and programming. When the activity was grounded by traditional organizations such as VFW and AE, the inertia favored the status quo. Once the activity was more independent, the intertia favored change, which is how we got here. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 ...but you think programming played no part at all? there you're wrong. so evolving means promote the top 8 and #### everyone else right? Cause that's what this is planned to do Programming played no part? I'd be foolish to say that no fan or potential member was turned off by programming. I believe, however, that the impact of programming on the number of fans and corps was minor in comparison to influences beyond drum corps proper. My wife is right. We're geeks. Band geeks. They can please us and disappoint us. Explaining us isn't so easy. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted December 22, 2010 Share Posted December 22, 2010 Programming played no part? I'd be foolish to say that no fan or potential member was turned off by programming. I believe, however, that the impact of programming on the number of fans and corps was minor in comparison to influences beyond drum corps proper. My wife is right. We're geeks. Band geeks. They can please us and disappoint us. Explaining us isn't so easy. HH no explaining isn't easy. But, enough of these guys, especially the "leaders" who are looked up to have been guiding the ship for a long time. And lately, it seems like they're blinded by the fog before the iceberg appears 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.