A GE question

[Lance]

yes, judging is subjective.

there will always be disagreements over scores, and people will take their subjective opinions about them and bonk each other over the head with them in here, all the while claiming they have "the facts" and claiming anybody who disagrees with them has "only opinions."

people from outside the activity would look on it as mass psychosis.

[DrillmanSop06]

Effect on the individuals who created the vocabulary found on the sheets as interpreted by the individuals executing the sheets.

If this is dino rage about a lack of audience engagement, maybe you should go to a show this season before calling into question an entire caption.

[saxfreq1128]

I always took GE to be a measurement of the show's design. Not 'effect' in terms of the effect it has for the individual viewer (weeping, throwing babies, taking a hot dog run, etc), but more whether the design and the performance of that design are effective: does the show's logic flow well within itself? are there moments that feel 'forced,' or like filler just carrying us toward some big moment? are there big moments, and if so, how did the corps pull those off (in terms of both performance and design)? are there a variety of demands being placed on the individual members?

I see it as a way of evaluating the level of what each corps is trying to accomplish, and then putting a number on how well they accomplish whatever that is. Yes, it is subjective -- but I'm sure we all knew that; judging is, by definition, subjective. I think it's maybe more useful to think of GE as the category that meets each corps on its own terms and then tries to think of them in relationship to each other -- in that order. It's the category that allows you to step back from, say, Mozart, Stravinsky and Muddy Waters and say: these are all brilliant, despite being radically different. Whether Rollin' Stone beats Rite of Spring depends on thinking carefully about each work as its own work.

You couldn't determine whether a corps is being effective without giving some serious thought to what it is the corps is trying to do on that field. In that way, we should be thankful that it's subjective and abstract enough not to be able to dismiss entire show designs based on some arbitrarily-defined objective standards about what a drum corps show is supposed to be.

Edited June 19, 2011 by saxfreq1128

[jwillis35]

Wow! 3 thoughtful, non-flaming replies in a row. Is this still DCP? lol.

But to repeat, do you think audience reaction should in any way be factored in?

As much as I want the corps to perform for the audience, and entertain, I also still want trained judges to be the ONLY ones who assign scores. It's better to leave the audience out of it. Too many variables.

You can have 5,000 in the audience who have 5,000 different needs and wants and likes and beliefs, and of course most of those fans will have personal favorites. Assigning scores, or just GE marks, based off of so many uncontrollable variables would be difficult at best, and at worst could cause serious problems at the shows.

It is always best for DCI to allow the audience to show up, enjoy the event, and enjoy the musical/visual experience without asking them to take a greater role in the schematics of placement.

People can make claims that the judges too have preferences, biases, perhaps even personal favorites, but the judges really are trying to be as non-biased and objective as they can. It's always best to have a small body of judges, each one of them dedicated to a specific caption, doing their best to be objective as they grade the corps' performance. There will never be a perfect way, but this is much better than allowing several thousand people to get involved.

Also, to the point of GE: general effect is graded based on whether the show is achieving what the staff says it's supposed to achieve, and it's logical construction and artistry is judged. Audience response is a small part of that, but it's not the end all because of what I said above.

You can be entertaining to the minority in the crowd, and the show can be highly effective, yet just because the majority didn't care for your work does not mean it has less worth or quality. After all, the minority in the crowd should have a voice too, not just the majority. And the two are fluctuating at all times in terms of membership.

So it's necessary to have people with some training in the musical and visual arts to oversee a caption like GE. They have a tough job. They must consider the show's effect on the fans, but must also consider it's artistic construction. Does the show convey what it's supposed to? Does it do this in an artistic manner? Is the show sophisticate enough, demanding enough, and logical enough to reach box 5? Does the general effect flow from one thought to the next? How is it staged? Are the hit points in the show measured and well developed, or is the show fragmented and sloppy?

All this is considered in GE. There will always be debate because it's a tough call. Placements aside, the two corps who over the past 20 years or more that seem to epitomize the quality and needs for a good GE show are the Cavaliers and Cadets. Others jump into that arena from time to time, including the Blue Devils (despite the criticism they receive), but the Cavalier and the Cadets always seem to understand GE. Some years it may not be their best, or clean, or they take some risks; but through the years those two corps have given us some excellent examples to look at.

[BozzlyB]

If it were the judges as individuals, then it would definitely be exclusively subjective.

It is governed by the "sheet," or the rubric of criteria that is delineated on the general effect caption paper. Each "box" has benchmarks that must be cleared and lend themselves to the number. Now number assignment/management is decided by a judges interpretation of the sheet. Because they're human, therein lies a natural flaw. On the grand scheme, it's a fundamental distinction in the competitive aspect of the activity.

Brilliantly stated.

[BRASSO]

yes, judging is subjective.

there will always be disagreements over scores, and people will take their subjective opinions about them and bonk each other over the head with them in here, all the while claiming they have "the facts" and claiming anybody who disagrees with them has "only opinions."

people from outside the activity would look on it as mass psychosis.

Maybe. But but this is like asking... "if a person blows a dog whistle, does it make a sound ? ". It's not like we've got a lot of people " from outside the activity" hearing our dog whistles, ya know ?

Also,.. are you saying that you sense a lot of Drum Corps fan psychotics around you exhibiting " mass psychosis " ? ..... Really ?

Edited June 19, 2011 by BRASSO

[corpsband]

Also, to the point of GE: general effect is graded based on whether the show is achieving what the staff says it's supposed to achieve, and it's logical construction and artistry is judged. Audience response is a small part of that, but it's not the end all because of what I said above.

]

IMO this is an inherently flawed statement.

It's not just about the show meeting the designer's intent -- it's equally about communicating that intent to the audience.

Crediting design absent communication is what many on here are trying to complain about.

GE is NOT (or at least shouldn't be) a caption that's all about the designer. In a performance art (like drum corps) it should be all about communicating to the audience.

"Achieving what the staff says it's supposed to achieve" is IMHO not adequate.

FWIW language to support this is on the sheets -- it's all about how the sheets are being used.

As for audience participation -- I agree with you 100%. Audience judging is great so long as it's just for fun. Their "number" should never get near a sheet :-)

Edited June 19, 2011 by corpsband

[DrillmanSop06]

Oh goody! A flaming...I mean a flamer. No, this isn't a "dino rage" or any rage at all. And, for the record, I'm not calling a Caption into question. Just wanted to hear some intelligent thoughts on the subject. Get back to me if you ever have one. You'll recognize it at once, as it won't sound like your usual mental meanderings.

I think you need to check up on what flaming is and then check your own post for PERSONAL attacks.

[AmFlag61]

Ok, good point Drillman.

Back to the subject; I think my question on the audience reaction needs clarification. I never meant to imply that the crowd should have a vote. What I meant was, should the judges factor in crowd response as an indication of how Effect-ive a performance is?

Edited June 19, 2011 by AmFlag61

[jwillis35]

IMO this is an inherently flawed statement.

It's not just about the show meeting the designer's intent -- it's equally about communicating that intent to the audience.

Yes, I am not saying that the judges ONLY grade on the description given to them by the staff and designers of the show, but they do need to know from the staff exactly what the show is trying to convey. From that point on the judges assess the GE according to set standards, including all those things I spoke of, such as how well was it put together, how artistic and meaningful is the design, content, demand, showmanship and the ability to communicate your ideas, etc. So I am in agreement with you. Once the judges learn about these shows and have a better understanding of them, they can hold the show's content, performance, and construction against the standards listed on the sheets.