MikeD Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Well to be fair in the observation here, there is wide spread confusion and disagreements even within the judging ranks on General Effect captions too... not just the fans that you just became critical of here with this comment. "General Effect" is THE singular most subjective caption in an already subjective filled judging spreadsheet of captions. The reason that there was an overhaul in the judging sheets this past season were not because of any confusion on the part of the fans. The overhaul was to help clarify things for the judges themselves. It is a judge oriented overhaul, not a fan oriented overhaul. The fans are as confused and in the dark as ever, MikeD. Oh, I am not trying to be critical of fans...I just think, as you say, that they are as "in the dark as ever" when it comes to the term GE. Because of that lack of 'light', they misuse the term in describing shows. When a person says "This show has no GE."...they are usually saying "This show does not enterain me." It may be packed full of what the Effect sheets are asking for, yet for that person, the show has no 'GE'...i.e. 'entertainment value'. It is not a failing of fans...it is just a common misue of a term...more a verbal shortcut than anything else. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Oh, I am not trying to be critical of fans...I just think, as you say, that they are as "in the dark as ever" when it comes to the term GE. Because of that lack of 'light', they misuse the term in describing shows. When a person says "This show has no GE."...they are usually saying "This show does not enterain me." It may be packed full of what the Effect sheets are asking for, yet for that person, the show has no 'GE'...i.e. 'entertainment value'. It is not a failing of fans...it is just a common misue of a term...more a verbal shortcut than anything else. this is very true. this is why )for an judge anyway) a criteria is a must but interpretaion can always be a hot mess.....no matter who you talk to you can get a different explanation of what constitutes effect and usually its never what the criteria says Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeybabay Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 A few thoughts: The early days of Effect came into being when drum corps started to evolve from being merely a military activity to a creative one. Not just in terms of tossing a flag vs an honor guard. But asymmetrical drill, pit voiceings, (yes) electronics, et al. The argument back then was how to compare "demand" which was on a technical sheet vs. playing it safe and marching a block drill. So the concept of how "effective" something was, then added to give credit for those that began to think outside the box of that time. Flash forward years ahead with huge creative forces and the GE has become the driving force in judging what is now considered a "pageantry" art form. The new sheets are an attempt to move forward, yet also gravitate back to some of the original intentions. Proficiency and Visual are looking at things from mainly the old aspect; how clean, training and well designed is the show. BUT, they are have actually added a small reference back in regarding "audience engagement" to both GE sheets. (I know DCA has also been really pushing this component with a whole subcaption devoted to connection and engagement that is separate and stands on its own.) I'm sure the intent is that shows have gotten to the point where there is so much content squeezed in - that needs to be given credit - that the audience/ entertainment factor has gotten overshadowed. You see the same equivalent being argued in figure skating and gymnastics of content vs. art. We have all seen it where there is an incredible WOW factor, but you wonder why???? So with DCI trying to really analyze how to keep both the corps growing while maintaining an audience in the stands, the new language comes into play. The trick though is how to interpret that? The wall of sound? The audience on it's feet? A dramatic theatrical moment? Most would say it is this obvious "connection" thing live at the actual event. But that could and will be argued for years. It is going to take a while for the judges to both unlearn and apply this new criteria on a consistent basis. But we need to give them credit for trying... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) A few thoughts: The early days of Effect came into being when drum corps started to evolve from being merely a military activity to a creative one. Not just in terms of tossing a flag vs an honor guard. But asymmetrical drill, pit voiceings, (yes) electronics, et al. The argument back then was how to compare "demand" which was on a technical sheet vs. playing it safe and marching a block drill. So the concept of how "effective" something was, then added to give credit for those that began to think outside the box of that time. Flash forward years ahead with huge creative forces and the GE has become the driving force in judging what is now considered a "pageantry" art form. The new sheets are an attempt to move forward, yet also gravitate back to some of the original intentions. Proficiency and Visual are looking at things from mainly the old aspect; how clean, training and well designed is the show. BUT, they are have actually added a small reference back in regarding "audience engagement" to both GE sheets. (I know DCA has also been really pushing this component with a whole subcaption devoted to connection and engagement that is separate and stands on its own.) I'm sure the intent is that shows have gotten to the point where there is so much content squeezed in - that needs to be given credit - that the audience/ entertainment factor has gotten overshadowed. You see the same equivalent being argued in figure skating and gymnastics of content vs. art. We have all seen it where there is an incredible WOW factor, but you wonder why???? So with DCI trying to really analyze how to keep both the corps growing while maintaining an audience in the stands, the new language comes into play. The trick though is how to interpret that? The wall of sound? The audience on it's feet? A dramatic theatrical moment? Most would say it is this obvious "connection" thing live at the actual event. But that could and will be argued for years. It is going to take a while for the judges to both unlearn and apply this new criteria on a consistent basis. But we need to give them credit for trying... youre right Interp. will always be an issue, especially when it comes to a judge verses an audiance....heres some examples, An audiance loves that wall of LOUD, a company front, a rifle toss etc etc..I can't tell you how many judges look at some of theose things and say ' So What " and dive much deeper into how the front was formed , was it a surprise, was it done well or just an attempt, did it fit musically , did the guard contribute to it...very different from just a plain ole reaction and could have very different results Edited July 31, 2012 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywhopper Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) Re entertainment, DCI as a group addressed this after BD 2010. The Scouts presented a proposal to add an "Entertainment Effect" caption to GE (and split GE into 15pts Music, 15pts Visual, and 10pts Entertainment). Here's the article about all the rule change proposals and a PDF of the rule change proposal itself including the proposed new sheet and criteria. Then check out this article and particularly listen to Michael Cesario's statement about the idea of "entertainment" (and note the "fake intellect on a football field" and references to "entertainment" and Blue Devils' 2010 show specifically as a "game changer"). The EE caption vote was "tabled" in favor of handing it off to a "task force", which eventuaully came up with the new sheets we're using this year, but which notably don't mention entertainment, although the GE captions do pull some criteria from the Scouts' proposed EE caption. Whatever impact the new sheets have on judging, though, is just as opaque to the audience as it ever was, it seems to me. So to answer the question of "how would entertainment be judged", here are Jim Mason's and Chris Komnick's ideas, from the proposed EE sheet: THE PRODUCTION* The AUDIENCE is invested in the production and REACTS accordingly * Display the CONCEPT clearly * PACING engages the audience and leads them through the production * CONTRAST adds variety and expressiveness in order to create effect and maintain interest for the audience * CREATIVITY and ORIGINALITY is the ability to capture the imagination of the audience using ideas, methods, interpretations, etc... THE PERFORMERS * Exhibit an effective level of COMMUNICATION with the audience * To display a high level of EXCELLENCE to the audience * Convey EMOTION or a range of emotions to enhance the effectiveness for the audience * EXPRESSION explores nuance/detail, shape/contour etc... while displaying for the audience theatricality, showmanship, etc... * PROFESSIONALISM creating a stage presence and an understanding of their responsibilities, roles, and identities while projecting those elements to the audience Edited July 31, 2012 by skywhopper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeybabay Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 youre right Interp. will always be an issue, especially when it comes to a judge verses an audiance....heres some examples, An audiance loves that wall of LOUD, a company front, a rifle toss etc etc..I can't tell you how many judges look at some of theose things and say ' So What " and dive much deeper into how the front was formed , was it a surprise, was it done well or just an attempt, did it fit musically , did the guard contribute to it...very different from just a plain ole reaction and could have very different results And if it was a "well oiled machine" all the parts should run separately to operate as a whole. Your example above could be viewed as a great "bump" on the GE sheet, but then torn down on the Visual sheet as bad construction. If working correctly, the corps on tops should be the one that factors in each caption for a whole. But when looking at most ordinals, you can see a commonality factor. (Although I give much credit that this year has not played out nearly as rote.) I'd agree that some captions can blend over into another. But the point should be that each is a unique facet of the show and therefore should stand on its own. Guard and Percussion seem to easily stand on their own and buck the "trends". But often, the others tend to rank across the board. Could be because some judges do multiple assignments and do not easily adjust their roles??? I know I do a lot of judging myself and a recent conversation some of us had; regarding high school bands. There are so many different sheets for various regions, that it is indeed a hard task to deliver on the exact intention of the words on the sheet. You can only base it on what you know and then try to define by the semantics/ details in B&W before you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) youre right Interp. will always be an issue, especially when it comes to a judge verses an audiance....heres some examples, An audiance loves that wall of LOUD, a company front, a rifle toss etc etc..I can't tell you how many judges look at some of theose things and say ' So What " and dive much deeper into how the front was formed , was it a surprise, was it done well or just an attempt, did it fit musically , did the guard contribute to it...very different from just a plain ole reaction and could have very different results True. One could say many fans are looking at the general effect of the show on them, while judges are looking at the minutia of HOW the effect was generated. Fans tend to be end result oriented, while judges are process oriented, based upon how the judges sheets are to be utlized as they understand the DCI guidelines. Judges have a much more difficult task as they are looking at the bark on the individual trees, while most fans are looking at the panorama of the forest itself. Some of us though ( like me sometimes ) when looking out before us just get lost in the foreign woods without a compass and have to cell call the Rangers. Edited July 31, 2012 by BRASSO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) True. One could say many fans are looking at the general effect of the show on them, while judges are looking at the minutia of HOW the effect was generated. Fans tend to be end result oriented, while judges are process oriented, based upon how the judges sheets are to be utlized as they inderstand the DCI guidelines. Judges have a much more difficult task as they are looking at the bark on the individual trees, while most fans are looking at the panorama of the forest itself. Some of us though ( like me sometimes ) when looking out before us just get lost in the foreign woods without a compass and have to cell call the Rangers. exactly....you said it better than me.......its also why the bridge from Audience to judge may never meet or be understood....I think if we give ourselves the chance we can maybe understand both BUT also need to understand we are looking at things differently which could or could not have the same resluts. Edited July 31, 2012 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Great post. I was really hoping DCI would shamelessly steal from the WGI effect sheets when they retooled things last year, and was very disappointed when they didn't. If DCI had included the phrases you quoted above, I really think we'd have seen vastly different programs than we're seeing now, and not just from the obvious target in Blue. I will say that the onus is still on the people judging, and how they interpret and apply the criteria on the sheets. That's evident in the band circuit I judge in one that, ironically, includes entertainment on the GE sheets. Just because the words are there, doesn't mean that criteria is applied correctly. It's all in the training. If the training of the judges is poor, the criteria won't be applied correctly, or at all. If training is done well, the reverse will be true. even in WGI there is blurriness. Really, the key IMO to a truly effective show is one that touches on all aspects of the triad, and not rely on one third too heavily. Too often shows are designed now to max out intellectually, but the aesthtic and emotional pieces are mssing, yet, they get box 5 numbers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madisonphan Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I voted yes and yes! 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.