corpsband Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 I don't know... What are you trying to say? That's language right off an Effect Sheet. The point being that all the arguments people are making here against the new caption proposal apply equally to current GE captions *as written*. All the things people are saying: impossible to judge will be too strongly affected by composition of audience will lead to safe shows all apply to the current GE captions. Which brings me right back to where I started -- this proposal does nothing more the emphasize things which are already on sheets but are being ignored. Why are they ignored? IMO because judges have lost sight of the intent of the effect captions and have focused entirely on smaller parts of the subcaption language that is there to assist the judge in evaluating the higher order intent. In effect (pun intended) they have lost sight of the forest for the trees. There's nothing at all new in the proposal -- it's conceptually all from GE. In many places GE is defined as entertainment value. People are freaking out over language which is already part of the rubric. Remember -- entertainment: an activity which diverts (redirects) one's attention. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Well that wasn't the only option I gave. And my second choice was close the mark... You're giving me an awful lot of credit for understanding the DCP mindset. Not sure I deserve it! HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 ... Which brings me right back to where I started -- this proposal does nothing more the emphasize things which are already on sheets but are being ignored. Why are they ignored? IMO because judges have lost sight of the intent of the effect captions and have focused entirely on smaller parts of the subcaption language that is there to assist the judge in evaluating the higher order intent... Is it that? Or is it that judges rightly feel unqualified to judge macro-effect as in entertainment? Saying the show delivered the effect programmed seems a more manageable task than evaluating whether the general effect was to entertain. I'm not disputing your contention. Rather as you likely gathered, I'm further explaining why I doubt the efficacy of the entertainment caption. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Is it that? Or is it that judges rightly feel unqualified to judge macro-effect as in entertainment? Saying the show delivered the effect programmed seems a more manageable task than evaluating whether the general effect was to entertain. I'm not disputing your contention. Rather as you likely gathered, I'm further explaining why I doubt the efficacy of the entertainment caption. I really hate the word entertainment (as it's popular conception overwhelms any other). Did you take the audience with you on your journey through the show? Did you hold their attention? Did you "have them" or "lose them"? Did your programmed moments work ? Did you successfully bring the audience from one moment to the next? These are universal concepts in every performance art. It's no surprise that drum corps tries to embody them in its judging system. Personally I always liken well written effect to being manipulated. If at the end of a performance I traveled where the show took me without any volition, I will applaud like crazy. Because to me -- that's effect :-) Granted I'm a willing subject. But I think most drum corps audiences are as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 No, and that's exactly my point. How can you judge, and give point values to the infinite ways in which to entertain the crowd?! Impossible. It's called "subjective judging". That's what we already do now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 IIRC, in 76 the crowd in Philly sat on ther hands for Cavies, let loose for the (east coast) Bridgemen & 27. I believe you were there. Do you think this impacted your score? But, heck, this might be Pioneer's best chance yet. Just pack the stands with fans. Best of all, no age limit. In fact, you could really buy the score so long as you buy the tickets. And if every corps takes that tact, isn't that the point? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Boo Posted January 14, 2011 Author Share Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) IIRC, in 76 the crowd in Philly sat on ther hands for Cavies, let loose for the (east coast) Bridgemen & 27. I believe you were there. Do you think this impacted your score? ... I was there, indeed, as I was marching The Cavaliers. However, I remember a good response at the World Championship in Philadelphia. We also had a great response at World Open Prelims at the Manning Bowl in Lynn, MA. However, after the corps beat 27th Lancers in Prelims, we finished our opener in Finals and it appeared that practically NO ONE clapped at the end of the piece. It was the single most surreal moment I experienced in my three years with the corps. It was as if we were performing for a stadium full of mannequins; it was truly bizarre. However, I don't believe it affected the score. The judges would have witnessed the difference between Prelims and Finals and known what was going on, since it wasn't just polite applause...it was the total absence of applause. Now, if anyone who witnessed our first several shows in 1977 (before we took off a couple weeks, got rid of some music that didn't work...okay, got rid of a lot of music that didn't work) had sat on their hands and even told us to utilize the rest of the season to do charity work for the downtrodden...that we would have comprehended. After being the 18th corps to break 80.00 (at the last show before DCI World Championship Prelims), the only thing I remember being sweeter than making it into Finals in the middle third of the pack was the generous gift of flowers sent to us by 27th Lancers' guard, congratulating us on not giving up. Sometimes, members of corps themselves are more generous than some (not all) of their supporters. Edited January 14, 2011 by Michael Boo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) There better be a HUGE discussion about this with designers at the Janual. I wonder what THEY (the ones with the power to control shows) actually think about this proposal. Are they as worried about it as I am? Do they feel that they are threatened or limited by this? If I'm a DCI designer, the first thing I'd think about is the audience hands down, then the judging criteria. I mean, if that isn't your first innate thought process then give the steering wheel to someone else. I don't know how we reached a point where we need this kind of intervention... Appealing to the Audience IMO should be beyond just trying to receive more points in a caption. This proposal just FEEDS at the idea that judging requirements should dictate how shows are designed. It only perpetuates the kind of behavior that got us in this mess. We don't just need a change in the judging, we need a change in drum corps ethics. No matter how many regulations you put on the banking world nothing will prevent violations like a good, honest man. To the best of my knowledge there are no meetings planned with designers. Of course, the ones with the power to control shows will be there hammering out issues for 14 hours a day then, presumably, they will take the results of the meetings back to their designers to build the show. If you were a "DCI designer" the first thing you'd think about is how to win a show. If that metric allows, or requires, you to address audience impact then you'd, of course, consider the audience. The point of judging criteria is to establish that paradigm, and the corps that best conforms to that paradigm is the one that wins. With that win comes money, sponsorship, power and, in all likelihood, the assurance of your job next year. Your altruistic hope of a change in drum corps ethics is honorable, to be sure. But it would be hollow hope if your design style didn't advance the corps towards a medal and you were out of a job. This relatively minor addition to the judging sheets is nothing more than the method GH has used to move the activity in the direction that he has wanted: NUDGE. It is THAT process that has gotten us "to where we are now". And if there weren't judging requirements to dictate how shows are designed, why have them judged at all? Without competitive judging it would only be an exhibition activity, and how many seats would that sell? Edited January 14, 2011 by garfield 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 ...And if there weren't judging requirements to dictate how shows are designed, why have them judged at all? Without competitive judging it would only be an exhibition activity, and how many seats would that sell? Maybe I'm misunderstanding? Since when have we tried to control the content of shows through judging? I thought the judging was supposed to reflect performance and not to drive any agenda. HH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glory Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 (edited) Did you take the audience with you on your journey through the show? Did you hold their attention? Did you "have them" or "lose them"? Did your programmed moments work ? Did you successfully bring the audience from one moment to the next? You know, this is almost criteria I could live with. Could we just call it GE? HH Edited January 14, 2011 by glory 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.