2000Cadet Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 I can identify 5 or 6 other corps besides Cadets who take heat over this same subject. Except many people choose only to show their disdain whenever Cadets make an announcement like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Except many people choose only to show their disdain whenever Cadets make an announcement like this. "...many people..."? Come on Tekk, that's a strawman argument if there ever is one. "The higher you get on the totem pole the more your a-- shows." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 3, 2011 Share Posted January 3, 2011 Absolutely. And when the requested citation is provided, don't read it! Don't think that's fair. Here's a better citation ! Reading this it's clear he's differentiating between old school and new school audiences. But it's a huge leap from his proposal to "A&E will solve DCI's attendance issues". This was never listed as the purpose of the proposal. "The addition of electronics is an attempt to open to the creative community the possibility for MORE. What can they do that will be more interesting, more diverse, and more entertaining" So the stated purpose is not to address declining audience but allow more creativity. Oh... I agree that GH paints a rosy picture of the audience impact. But a quick purview of all the proposals I can find reveals that pretty much everyone who submits a proposal does the same thing. No one's going to say their proposal has a NEGATIVE impact on the audience. Even in the audience impact his language is pretty clear: " We need to do what we believe to be right, we need to hold to the values of creativity that made drum corps what it is today. Equal shares of tradition and innovation, this is the key". It's clear to me that what he's saying is that you need to be just as conscious of the experiences and background of those entering your market as you are of those who've been in the your audience for a very long time. So what's going here. DCP has taken the "audience impact" subsection and re-assigned it to the purpose. Yes GH sees marketing to the marching band world (and it's recent participants) as a good idea. Yes he thinks that's the future of audience of DCI. Yes he thinks A&E will help with that marketing. But no -- he never said A&E's intent is to solve DCI's attendance issues -- either directly or implicitly. People just make #### up. And everyone starts repeating it. And soon enough it becomes DCP gospel. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Unless he comes out directly and says "...up to and NOT including WW, amps, voice, and tarps..." then it's fair to assume that any change is game. isn't it? That said, I like the idea of sourcing specific claims of quotes. It most certainly keeps the hyperbole down (even though the hyperbole is what keeps DCP from getting old and stale sometimes!) So long as it's clear that it's your assumption and not a statement of fact. Pretty clearly that's NOT the case here: question: who said that? answer: george hopkins and others (which absolutely made me crack up as I type this because this: is now indelibly burned into my brain!) And I agree that the outrageous character of many statements is the only reason DCP is worth reading sometimes :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 So what's going here. DCP has taken the "audience impact" subsection and re-assigned it to the purpose. Yes GH sees marketing to the marching band world (and it's recent participants) as a good idea. Yes he thinks that's the future of audience of DCI. Yes he thinks A&E will help with that marketing. But no -- he never said A&E's intent is to solve DCI's attendance issues -- either directly or implicitly. People just make #### up. And everyone starts repeating it. And soon enough it becomes DCP gospel. As the one accused of making this #### up....no, of course he didn't say that "A&E would solve all of DCI's attendance issues". However, IMO, the Hopkins prose clearly implied that A&E would boost audience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Don't think that's fair. Here's a better citation ! Reading this it's clear he's differentiating between old school and new school audiences. But it's a huge leap from his proposal to "A&E will solve DCI's attendance issues". This was never listed as the purpose of the proposal. "The addition of electronics is an attempt to open to the creative community the possibility for MORE. What can they do that will be more interesting, more diverse, and more entertaining" So the stated purpose is not to address declining audience but allow more creativity. Oh... I agree that GH paints a rosy picture of the audience impact. But a quick purview of all the proposals I can find reveals that pretty much everyone who submits a proposal does the same thing. No one's going to say their proposal has a NEGATIVE impact on the audience. Even in the audience impact his language is pretty clear: " We need to do what we believe to be right, we need to hold to the values of creativity that made drum corps what it is today. Equal shares of tradition and innovation, this is the key". It's clear to me that what he's saying is that you need to be just as conscious of the experiences and background of those entering your market as you are of those who've been in the your audience for a very long time. So what's going here. DCP has taken the "audience impact" subsection and re-assigned it to the purpose. Yes GH sees marketing to the marching band world (and it's recent participants) as a good idea. Yes he thinks that's the future of audience of DCI. Yes he thinks A&E will help with that marketing. But no -- he never said A&E's intent is to solve DCI's attendance issues -- either directly or implicitly. People just make #### up. And everyone starts repeating it. And soon enough it becomes DCP gospel. Couple of observations: How do we discuss current issues? Being able to read the actual proposal verbiage is very good, but these are examples from three years ago. How do we apply what we know the proposers have actually said to what it actually happening today? Just because his proposal (THE Proposal) was shot down doesn't mean he's changed how he feels and what he sees as the future. We can only make conjecture of the intent of his current proposals (re: the G7 proposal) in the light of his previous writings. I'll say it again: He's way too savvy to put himself into a singular box that, if dismissed, will eliminate his push entirely. Next, I think you need to read again the Audience Impact paragraphs. This is a proposal for electronics and in the Audience Impact section, under "Future audiences" he says "There are 20,000 marching bands; there are 2 million young people in marching bands; DCI needs to go after these young people as our primary audience." Again, in the confines of this proposal he is clearly suggesting that Electronics will be a factor in attracting those young kids to the activity. I don't know how you can separate the proposal from the claim; clearly the passage of this proposal will help attract those fans. Not THE factor, but clearly one of several that he sees in aligning the activity with scholastic music. Disclosure: I LOVE the Cadets. I even admire GH for many of the things he's brought to the activity, to his kids, and to me. This is not a rant against GH, this is a disagreement of the impact of his vision. I would make these statement regardless of who presented them (except the I Love part... ). OK, Tekk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 As the one accused of making this #### up....no, of course he didn't say that "A&E would solve all of DCI's attendance issues". However, IMO, the Hopkins prose clearly implied that A&E would boost audience. Perhaps you're inferring it (perhaps I might even agree with that inference). But it's a leap to "the whole point of A&E is to boost audience attendance". It's more about trying to stay (in his mind) relevant to future audiences. He's quite correct to point out that those entering the audience pool have a significantly different experiential background than those departing (even if he doesn't necessarily understand it). It's pretty clear that his intent is to try to focus on the part of the audience coming "in" not the part of the audience aging "out". He does (out of the blue) say "Tomorrow – Our audience, as it grows, has a base in youth. " Is that what you're pinning the inference on? IMO it's just bad writing. He's clearly talking about appealing to the incoming audience vs. the outgoing audience throughout the whole section; he doesn't talk about expanding the audience at all in the rest of it. It's just bad writing -- he was looking for " as it evolves" or something similar. Take the proposal and put it in the light of the G7 ppt presentation and I can see how you might make the leap (as part of his" vision" for the future of drumcorps). But the proposal as put forth never said "A&E will grow the audience". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Except many people choose only to show their disdain whenever Cadets make an announcement like this. Yes, because we're out to get you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) Maybe the Directors don't really give a crap if an audience shows up or not. This is pretty much a band festival as it is. You take away relatives and recent age-outs, and what do you have left? Not much. This is a small activity that's been driven smaller IMO, because its reach has narrowed to music majors almost exclusively. It is now a rather snobby "art," where we get into fights over the bore size of a G vs. a Bb instrument. Or the mallet technique of a grounded marimba. Nobody watches, face it. More people saw the Wyoming high school all star band at the Rose Parade than will see the "G8" over the next several years put together. So...while we're busy being all full of ourselves, we're grinding ourselves into oblivion. No, not the piece by Piazzolla (let's argue whose version stays more true to the composer's intent), but the actual "who cares anymore, it's boring" kind. Edited January 4, 2011 by HockeyDad 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Words have meanings or what they represent is meaningless. We wonder why so many things are "relative" to what whatever that person "thinks" is true to them is why we are in such deep doodoo in this country IMHO. Hell, I might as well think that the Constitution of the United States is a framework for a English Style Monarchy because that's what "I" believe despite realities. Wow. relativity is just science 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.