RiseUP79 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 "They will attempt to destroy anything that differs from their concepts. Not being able to create art, they will not understand art." -Onyx 2011 At Onyx, our intent is to create something new using tools from the past in combination with tools of the future and from other idioms. Certainly we anticipated and welcome discussion, controversy and strong opinions both for and against this direction. We do appreciate your participation. For sure, the negative comments usually make DCP more interesting and therefore are expected on this forum. It is sad though, in an activity struggling for support from the outside that we attack one another with such hateful comments. It is even more disheartening when the attackers are directors/parents/performers. Michael Lentz Onyx I will start, unlike many, disclosing my identity: Scott Markham (so I don't appear to hide behind a nickname). Michael, I'm sure this will be removed immediately, because people are typically not allowed to speak their true opinions in these forums. I have been polite and respectful when communicating with you...just trying to pick your brain about where you want to take us, and how we may move forward in regards to how we adjudicate/evaluate..and you have began to speak out/attack me publically. I'm sorry I don't love the show, but I do respect your freedom of choice, success, and contributions...I'm just a little disappointed you have responded in such a negative and combative way. Respectfully, I don't think anyone is attacking you, your staff, or your members. When you choose to try to 'revolutionize' or take great risks, it's going to stir up a lot of discussion; and some of that may be debate or negative opinions. I personally don't think anyone is even talking about your performers; they are challenging your choices and your delivery of those choices...and by taking those great risks, your performers are part of your 'art'. I certainly hope that your students aren't taking the debate or discussions personally. I hope they take great pride in being a part of something that sparks discussion; regardless of medals or not. Many of our beloved groups took huge risks. and never came close to winning...and were/are very proud of their contributions. If you've ever been to a real art gallery, you know that the purpose is to invoke discussion...the artist is very aware of this. They do not stand by their work and claim how 'standard setting' and 'box 6' it is. I strongly believe the activity decides what sets its standard...not the designers forcing opinions about their own creativity. Respectfully, my personal thoughts on the production (my opinion...and hopefully, I'm entitled?) do not really concern the content; it's the forceful delivery/message, then your response to the discussion. You said to me recently (and I quote) "Liking it is not even something I consider when I designed the program.. Moving the art form forward is". But when someone (like me) questions how/why it is 'moving the activity forward', a phrase you are attaching to your art, you seem to chastise them. Finally, I have a GREAT love for this activity...I love that we all look different and have our own voice. For me personally, much of what I love about guard is omitted from your show (which is part of your message). In regards to the whole 'destroying art thing'...don't you consider some may think you may be doing just that by claiming to "set standards" in a way that somewhat strays from what our activity is conventionally about? Your choices (and awards) don't mean I must think the activity will be changed. This is what slightly offends me: you communicated to me recently (and I quote): "Box 6 says "Setting new standards" some guards stand around doing rehashed work and visual ideas and expect new reward." For me, I personally don't want my groups to look like yours...but attacking others is exactly what you are speaking out about. Your new form of art is really in it's birth...two years now...prior to that, some could reference your comment about rehashed work and visual ideas about your past work. Perhaps we are all just in different phases of our creativity and our opinions about where the activity goes...and thank GOD for that. I believe that art is to challenge people...but it is not to force the direction of art. I'm saddened that I contacted you to learn about your process and then discuss the possibility of changes to our evaluation system based on where you see the artform going...and you perceived my discussion as nothing but an attack. I mean no disrespect to your choices, group, or organization. Scott Markham 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrfctTimeOfDay Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) I applaud your well thought-out words and intellectual response. This is exactly what the forums are meant for....to have a discussion (albeit passionate at times)about our activity. I've largely stayed out of this 'topic' b/c there's really no right answer. But I had to let you know that I wish more people would lay out their thoughts and posts like you. Your forethought is greatly appreciated and refreshing! Please keep posting! On a lighter note...I'd love to see someone wrapped in cellophane riding a bicycle while holding an american flag...now that's art! I will start, unlike many, disclosing my identity: Scott Markham (so I don't appear to hide behind a nickname). Michael, I'm sure this will be removed immediately, because people are typically not allowed to speak their true opinions in these forums. I have been polite and respectful when communicating with you...just trying to pick your brain about where you want to take us, and how we may move forward in regards to how we adjudicate/evaluate..and you have began to speak out/attack me publically. I'm sorry I don't love the show, but I do respect your freedom of choice, success, and contributions...I'm just a little disappointed you have responded in such a negative and combative way. Respectfully, I don't think anyone is attacking you, your staff, or your members. When you choose to try to 'revolutionize' or take great risks, it's going to stir up a lot of discussion; and some of that may be debate or negative opinions. I personally don't think anyone is even talking about your performers; they are challenging your choices and your delivery of those choices...and by taking those great risks, your performers are part of your 'art'. I certainly hope that your students aren't taking the debate or discussions personally. I hope they take great pride in being a part of something that sparks discussion; regardless of medals or not. Many of our beloved groups took huge risks. and never came close to winning...and were/are very proud of their contributions. If you've ever been to a real art gallery, you know that the purpose is to invoke discussion...the artist is very aware of this. They do not stand by their work and claim how 'standard setting' and 'box 6' it is. I strongly believe the activity decides what sets its standard...not the designers forcing opinions about their own creativity. Respectfully, my personal thoughts on the production (my opinion...and hopefully, I'm entitled?) do not really concern the content; it's the forceful delivery/message, then your response to the discussion. You said to me recently (and I quote) "Liking it is not even something I consider when I designed the program.. Moving the art form forward is". But when someone (like me) questions how/why it is 'moving the activity forward', a phrase you are attaching to your art, you seem to chastise them. Finally, I have a GREAT love for this activity...I love that we all look different and have our own voice. For me personally, much of what I love about guard is omitted from your show (which is part of your message). In regards to the whole 'destroying art thing'...don't you consider some may think you may be doing just that by claiming to "set standards" in a way that somewhat strays from what our activity is conventionally about? Your choices (and awards) don't mean I must think the activity will be changed. This is what slightly offends me: you communicated to me recently (and I quote): "Box 6 says "Setting new standards" some guards stand around doing rehashed work and visual ideas and expect new reward." For me, I personally don't want my groups to look like yours...but attacking others is exactly what you are speaking out about. Your new form of art is really in it's birth...two years now...prior to that, some could reference your comment about rehashed work and visual ideas about your past work. Perhaps we are all just in different phases of our creativity and our opinions about where the activity goes...and thank GOD for that. I believe that art is to challenge people...but it is not to force the direction of art. I'm saddened that I contacted you to learn about your process and then discuss the possibility of changes to our evaluation system based on where you see the artform going...and you perceived my discussion as nothing but an attack. I mean no disrespect to your choices, group, or organization. Scott Markham Edited March 31, 2011 by PrfctTimeOfDay 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 I will start, unlike many, disclosing my identity: Scott Markham (so I don't appear to hide behind a nickname). Michael, I'm sure this will be removed immediately, because people are typically not allowed to speak their true opinions in these forums. I have been polite and respectful when communicating with you...just trying to pick your brain about where you want to take us, and how we may move forward in regards to how we adjudicate/evaluate..and you have began to speak out/attack me publically. I'm sorry I don't love the show, but I do respect your freedom of choice, success, and contributions...I'm just a little disappointed you have responded in such a negative and combative way. Respectfully, I don't think anyone is attacking you, your staff, or your members. When you choose to try to 'revolutionize' or take great risks, it's going to stir up a lot of discussion; and some of that may be debate or negative opinions. I personally don't think anyone is even talking about your performers; they are challenging your choices and your delivery of those choices...and by taking those great risks, your performers are part of your 'art'. I certainly hope that your students aren't taking the debate or discussions personally. I hope they take great pride in being a part of something that sparks discussion; regardless of medals or not. Many of our beloved groups took huge risks. and never came close to winning...and were/are very proud of their contributions. If you've ever been to a real art gallery, you know that the purpose is to invoke discussion...the artist is very aware of this. They do not stand by their work and claim how 'standard setting' and 'box 6' it is. I strongly believe the activity decides what sets its standard...not the designers forcing opinions about their own creativity. Respectfully, my personal thoughts on the production (my opinion...and hopefully, I'm entitled?) do not really concern the content; it's the forceful delivery/message, then your response to the discussion. You said to me recently (and I quote) "Liking it is not even something I consider when I designed the program.. Moving the art form forward is". But when someone (like me) questions how/why it is 'moving the activity forward', a phrase you are attaching to your art, you seem to chastise them. Finally, I have a GREAT love for this activity...I love that we all look different and have our own voice. For me personally, much of what I love about guard is omitted from your show (which is part of your message). In regards to the whole 'destroying art thing'...don't you consider some may think you may be doing just that by claiming to "set standards" in a way that somewhat strays from what our activity is conventionally about? Your choices (and awards) don't mean I must think the activity will be changed. This is what slightly offends me: you communicated to me recently (and I quote): "Box 6 says "Setting new standards" some guards stand around doing rehashed work and visual ideas and expect new reward." For me, I personally don't want my groups to look like yours...but attacking others is exactly what you are speaking out about. Your new form of art is really in it's birth...two years now...prior to that, some could reference your comment about rehashed work and visual ideas about your past work. Perhaps we are all just in different phases of our creativity and our opinions about where the activity goes...and thank GOD for that. I believe that art is to challenge people...but it is not to force the direction of art. I'm saddened that I contacted you to learn about your process and then discuss the possibility of changes to our evaluation system based on where you see the artform going...and you perceived my discussion as nothing but an attack. I mean no disrespect to your choices, group, or organization. Scott Markham All I can say is........Bravo!!!!!!!! and not just your opinions on shows etc etc but to have the guts to actually talk..There isn't one Judge and I know them all that would dare speak their mind for fear of losing their pay check. For this alone I applaud you. You are right you will probably be removed, but I and many will be glad we saw it while this was here. You are also right that the forums are what this is for. I also agree that looking back it doesn't seem anyone was attacking the performers of any guard just maybe design choice or direction which we ALL have a right to do. Some here and you could look back ,don't want us to do that either and it really is mearly because they themselves have been the ones benefiting from the blanket of friendship amoung the higher archey of the activity. All I can say is from a forum that usually doesn't get alot of activity there seems to be more interest this year on several subjects and that's a good thing. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKYR_FA1986 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 (edited) I will start, unlike many, disclosing my identity: Scott Markham (so I don't appear to hide behind a nickname). Michael, I'm sure this will be removed immediately, because people are typically not allowed to speak their true opinions in these forums. I have been polite and respectful when communicating with you...just trying to pick your brain about where you want to take us, and how we may move forward in regards to how we adjudicate/evaluate..and you have began to speak out/attack me publically. I'm sorry I don't love the show, but I do respect your freedom of choice, success, and contributions...I'm just a little disappointed you have responded in such a negative and combative way. Respectfully, I don't think anyone is attacking you, your staff, or your members. When you choose to try to 'revolutionize' or take great risks, it's going to stir up a lot of discussion; and some of that may be debate or negative opinions. I personally don't think anyone is even talking about your performers; they are challenging your choices and your delivery of those choices...and by taking those great risks, your performers are part of your 'art'. I certainly hope that your students aren't taking the debate or discussions personally. I hope they take great pride in being a part of something that sparks discussion; regardless of medals or not. Many of our beloved groups took huge risks. and never came close to winning...and were/are very proud of their contributions. If you've ever been to a real art gallery, you know that the purpose is to invoke discussion...the artist is very aware of this. They do not stand by their work and claim how 'standard setting' and 'box 6' it is. I strongly believe the activity decides what sets its standard...not the designers forcing opinions about their own creativity. Respectfully, my personal thoughts on the production (my opinion...and hopefully, I'm entitled?) do not really concern the content; it's the forceful delivery/message, then your response to the discussion. You said to me recently (and I quote) "Liking it is not even something I consider when I designed the program.. Moving the art form forward is". But when someone (like me) questions how/why it is 'moving the activity forward', a phrase you are attaching to your art, you seem to chastise them. Finally, I have a GREAT love for this activity...I love that we all look different and have our own voice. For me personally, much of what I love about guard is omitted from your show (which is part of your message). In regards to the whole 'destroying art thing'...don't you consider some may think you may be doing just that by claiming to "set standards" in a way that somewhat strays from what our activity is conventionally about? Your choices (and awards) don't mean I must think the activity will be changed. This is what slightly offends me: you communicated to me recently (and I quote): "Box 6 says "Setting new standards" some guards stand around doing rehashed work and visual ideas and expect new reward." For me, I personally don't want my groups to look like yours...but attacking others is exactly what you are speaking out about. Your new form of art is really in it's birth...two years now...prior to that, some could reference your comment about rehashed work and visual ideas about your past work. Perhaps we are all just in different phases of our creativity and our opinions about where the activity goes...and thank GOD for that. I believe that art is to challenge people...but it is not to force the direction of art. I'm saddened that I contacted you to learn about your process and then discuss the possibility of changes to our evaluation system based on where you see the artform going...and you perceived my discussion as nothing but an attack. I mean no disrespect to your choices, group, or organization. Scott Markham I have no idea who you are Scott Markham but I do understand and appreciate your pen. Very well said. I applaud you. Good Luck to all the competing guards. I will be checking WGI.org for scores. I had been going back and forth about purchasing a fan network subscription but Mr Lentz has convinced me to spend my money elsewhere. Edited March 31, 2011 by TKYR_FA1986 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 I will start, unlike many, disclosing my identity: Scott Markham (so I don't appear to hide behind a nickname). Michael, I'm sure this will be removed immediately, because people are typically not allowed to speak their true opinions in these forums. I have been polite and respectful when communicating with you...just trying to pick your brain about where you want to take us, and how we may move forward in regards to how we adjudicate/evaluate..and you have began to speak out/attack me publically. I'm sorry I don't love the show, but I do respect your freedom of choice, success, and contributions...I'm just a little disappointed you have responded in such a negative and combative way. Respectfully, I don't think anyone is attacking you, your staff, or your members. When you choose to try to 'revolutionize' or take great risks, it's going to stir up a lot of discussion; and some of that may be debate or negative opinions. I personally don't think anyone is even talking about your performers; they are challenging your choices and your delivery of those choices...and by taking those great risks, your performers are part of your 'art'. I certainly hope that your students aren't taking the debate or discussions personally. I hope they take great pride in being a part of something that sparks discussion; regardless of medals or not. Many of our beloved groups took huge risks. and never came close to winning...and were/are very proud of their contributions. If you've ever been to a real art gallery, you know that the purpose is to invoke discussion...the artist is very aware of this. They do not stand by their work and claim how 'standard setting' and 'box 6' it is. I strongly believe the activity decides what sets its standard...not the designers forcing opinions about their own creativity. Respectfully, my personal thoughts on the production (my opinion...and hopefully, I'm entitled?) do not really concern the content; it's the forceful delivery/message, then your response to the discussion. You said to me recently (and I quote) "Liking it is not even something I consider when I designed the program.. Moving the art form forward is". But when someone (like me) questions how/why it is 'moving the activity forward', a phrase you are attaching to your art, you seem to chastise them. Finally, I have a GREAT love for this activity...I love that we all look different and have our own voice. For me personally, much of what I love about guard is omitted from your show (which is part of your message). In regards to the whole 'destroying art thing'...don't you consider some may think you may be doing just that by claiming to "set standards" in a way that somewhat strays from what our activity is conventionally about? Your choices (and awards) don't mean I must think the activity will be changed. This is what slightly offends me: you communicated to me recently (and I quote): "Box 6 says "Setting new standards" some guards stand around doing rehashed work and visual ideas and expect new reward." For me, I personally don't want my groups to look like yours...but attacking others is exactly what you are speaking out about. Your new form of art is really in it's birth...two years now...prior to that, some could reference your comment about rehashed work and visual ideas about your past work. Perhaps we are all just in different phases of our creativity and our opinions about where the activity goes...and thank GOD for that. I believe that art is to challenge people...but it is not to force the direction of art. I'm saddened that I contacted you to learn about your process and then discuss the possibility of changes to our evaluation system based on where you see the artform going...and you perceived my discussion as nothing but an attack. I mean no disrespect to your choices, group, or organization. Scott Markham Scott- I don't know you from Adam, but thank you so much for this eloquent, candid response. I agree with you that Mr. Lentz has chosen to (in his choice of design) make his "art" less about the equipment and more about (from my understanding anyway) the performance of the written program. I don't like it, but after reading your thoughts I think that I will be able to view Onyx's program with a very different perspective and I am thankful to you for helping me be able to do that. All the best to Onyx as they defend their Independent World class title at WGI (which I whole heartedly felt they deserved!) - I'll be there watching/waiting to see what transpires. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnZ Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Good morning all. We have taken a lengthy and detailed look at the content of this thread and believe it still has value to the activity and potential for some positive conversation. As long as it remains on track and continues to adhere to the community guidelines, we see no reason for it not to continue. I am sorry for the delay, and appreciate your understanding and support. Z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 (edited) So this is the "infamous" Onxy thread????? *shrug* Imagined much worse.... LOL, first DCA Finals (1979) my parents went to had two guys in front of them who weren't fans of one corps. As that corps came out, one guy announced loudly "Here comes.... time to take a leak!" and walked out. Either different crowd or different era as most people laughed. As for "I'm sure this will be removed immediately, because people are typically not allowed to speak their true opinions in these forums.". Scott/RiseUp - big difference between is how the opinion is expressed and how respect is given to the other side. Your post is a great example of voicing your displeasure in a positive <$1 to JohnZ> manner. Need that on the DCI threads for some issues. Edited April 6, 2011 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaylogan Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I just wanted to say that I felt compelled to buy a membership to WGI fan network to see the Onyx show, just from looking at this thread. I had never paid attention to WGI before, being mostly absorbed by DCI. But I have to say, the Onyx show is amazing! Never seen anything like it. Same with the show from 2010. Glad I checked it out. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKYR_FA1986 Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I just wanted to say that I felt compelled to buy a membership to WGI fan network to see the Onyx show, just from looking at this thread. I had never paid attention to WGI before, being mostly absorbed by DCI. But I have to say, the Onyx show is amazing! Never seen anything like it. Same with the show from 2010. Glad I checked it out. I would love to know what you found amazing it about it? You say you have never paid attention to WGI before so to what are you comparing it? I've decided to no longer make negative comments about this show, but I will say, I would be ###### if I were a member/staff of the guards in 3rd, or 4th place. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
POSITIVenrgy Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 I would love to know what you found amazing it about it? You say you have never paid attention to WGI before so to what are you comparing it? I've decided to no longer make negative comments about this show, but I will say, I would be ###### if I were a member/staff of the guards in 3rd, or 4th place. Once again, I completely agree with you. I am a big fan of dance, and modern dance in particular. For me, that is what I find compelling and impressive about Onyx this year. I love to see the skilled dancers in WGI, but I especially love to see the incredible equipment work...... that, to me is what WGI is about. That being said... GO SCV! And, Corona.... you guys have my heart! 2 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.