GUARDLING Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Michael Cesario would hsave been so much better served if he simply left out his remarks that the new judging sheets would provide more clout to shows that " really engaged the audience ". Or else he should have defined " engage " in a different manner than the conventionally understood manner that would leave fans with what most would assume to be a pleasuable acceptance. While its true that a car accident on the highway does " engage " bypassers and generates interest and curiosity, I don't belive that most fans were thinking " keeps our interest and curiousity " when they were thinking of shows " engaging the audience well " and this would be reflected in the new sheets, presumably over Corps shows that comparatively did not " engage the audience " quite as well. From my perspective, I have seen little to no effect on placements or scores from the older sheets replaced. Which begs the question, why all the ( pardon the bad pun ) hoopla re. the introduction of the new sheets ? In retrospect, Cesaria should have simply said " the new sheets will have change at all re. audience reception, or lack of resception tothe shows. That would have been more honest, direct... and most importantly, more accurate as to the audience impact. youre right...and as I said earlier he..like many are politicians...when sheets were explained to me I actually was told...do what you always do...corps have engaged before and will continue to and doesnt have to mean standing Os or blasts from the past productions. Dont forget the audience and connect as YOU feel you should and do it well...Just how i was told...one can make of it as they want Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Ream Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Michael Cesario would have been so much better served if he simply left out his remarks that the new judging sheets would provide more clout to shows that " really engaged the audience ". Or else he should have defined " engage " in a different manner than the conventionally understood manner that would leave fans with what most would assume to be a pleasuable acceptance. While its true that a car accident on the highway does " engage " bypassers and generates interest and curiosity, I don't belive that most fans were thinking " keeps our interest and curiousity " when they were thinking of shows " engaging the audience well " and this would be reflected in the new sheets, presumably over Corps shows that comparatively did not " engage the audience " quite as well. From my perspective, I have seen little to no effect on placements or scores from the older sheets replaced. Which begs the question, why all the ( pardon the bad pun ) hoopla re. the introduction of the new sheets ? In retrospect, Cesaria should have simply said " the new sheets will have no change at all re. audience reception, or lack of resception to the shows. Fans won't be involved on these new judging sheets any more than they have ever have been.. These sheets are an internal matter in hopes of making it easier for judges to understand the terms and criteria better." THAT would have been more honest, direct... and most importantly, more accurate as to the audience " engagement " with the shows. If DCI is not careful they run the risk of when it comes to going to future shows, fans will think " No, I have another " engagement " that seems to fit my schedule a bit better ". I agree. But I also realize changedoesn't happen overnight. hell we're approaching 10 years of amps and we still have huge balance issues 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 Michael Cesario would have been so much better served if he simply left out his remarks that the new judging sheets would provide more clout to shows that " really engaged the audience ". Or else he should have defined " engage " in a different manner than the conventionally understood manner that would leave fans with what most would assume to be a pleasuable acceptance. While its true that a car accident on the highway does " engage " bypassers and generates interest and curiosity, I don't belive that most fans were thinking " keeps our interest and curiousity " when they were thinking of shows " engaging the audience well " and this would be reflected in the new sheets, presumably over Corps shows that comparatively did not " engage the audience " quite as well. From my perspective, I have seen little to no effect on placements or scores from the older sheets replaced. Which begs the question, why all the ( pardon the bad pun ) hoopla re. the introduction of the new sheets ? In retrospect, Cesaria should have simply said " the new sheets will have no change at all re. audience reception, or lack of resception to the shows. Fans won't be involved on these new judging sheets any more than they have ever have been.. These sheets are an internal matter in hopes of making it easier for judges to understand the terms and criteria better." THAT would have been more honest, direct... and most importantly, more accurate as to the audience " engagement " with the shows. If DCI is not careful they run the risk of when it comes to going to future shows, fans will think " No, I have another " engagement " that seems to fit my schedule a bit better ". Hilarious, and apt, comparison. Question: Isn't it reasonable to think that "Because DCI IS the corps" that they all voted to hire MC for this effort? What would be the rationale for hiring him (we know how "strapped" the corps are and how some want more from themselves) if they didn't intend to follow his advice? Were they simply making a show out of hiring him in order to placate an agitated fan base? What might be the other explanations for why Cesario's message to fans is not the message that seemed to reach the corps, as you alude? Could his goals been confusing? Misunderstood? Might the corps designers regret hiring him in this position? Could they be flat-out ignoring his suggestions? Why? I did hear recently that a certain corps director (whose corps presented a very entertaining show that placed low but was rousingly applauded) was told by a certain senior judge that his show design was an embarrasment to the direction the judging sheets were trying to evolve. Could the judges be complicit in ignoring Cesario's intent as well? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 What might be the other explanations for why Cesario's message to fans is not the message that seemed to reach the corps, as you alude? Could his goals been confusing? Misunderstood? I think the far more plausible answer is that some fans think they understand the ins/outs of drum corps when they really do not. There are clearly several people who post on DCP who think that "general effect" is a synonym of "how much the show makes me cheer really loud." Audience engagement has many interpretations, and as I've said before with the amount of bandwidth BD has gotten this season on DCP alone, I think anyone can agree that their show engaged quite a few different people. At the very least, audience engagement (or however it's worded) is a small portion of the scoring criteria, and even if a judge thought that BD's show didn't engage a lot of fans they would still score very well due to all of the other things they excelled at in 2012. I did hear recently that a certain corps director (whose corps presented a very entertaining show that placed low but was rousingly applauded) was told by a certain senior judge that his show design was an embarrasment to the direction the judging sheets were trying to evolve. Could the judges be complicit in ignoring Cesario's intent as well? Without having any details on this, I think it's hard to take it seriously, or at the very least I personally can't count it as valid (SUPER broad innuendo that it is). There were certainly some shows I saw in 2012 that had a broad audience appeal that I thought were designed very poorly, and again: fan appeal has little/nothing to do with judging criteria. Fan appeal can be a result of a well-designed show, but the two are not automatically intertwined. I think more likely that specific judge couldn't be just being blunt with the corps director: "you can appeal to the fans, but this show design is horrible" type of thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRASSO Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Hilarious, and apt, comparison. Question: Isn't it reasonable to think that "Because DCI IS the corps" that they all voted to hire MC for this effort? What would be the rationale for hiring him (we know how "strapped" the corps are and how some want more from themselves) if they didn't intend to follow his advice? Were they simply making a show out of hiring him in order to placate an agitated fan base? What might be the other explanations for why Cesario's message to fans is not the message that seemed to reach the corps, as you alude? Could his goals been confusing? Misunderstood? Might the corps designers regret hiring him in this position? Could they be flat-out ignoring his suggestions? Why? I did hear recently that a certain corps director (whose corps presented a very entertaining show that placed low but was rousingly applauded) was told by a certain senior judge that his show design was an embarrasment to the direction the judging sheets were trying to evolve. Could the judges be complicit in ignoring Cesario's intent as well? I understand the inner political workings of DCI about as much as I understand the inner workings of the Free Masons. Which is to say.. nada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
actucker Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 This will never end as long as you keep twisting my words into strawmen like this one. Not twisting anything. Do I need to quote you again? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiodb Posted September 8, 2012 Share Posted September 8, 2012 Not twisting anything. Do I need to quote you again? Do as you wish....doesn't matter. I think I was clear enough in my post about a phenomenon that occurs sometimes. And you were clear enough about misrepresenting it as if I claimed it happens all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Dude Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 (edited) Without having any details on this, I think it's hard to take it seriously, or at the very least I personally can't count it as valid (SUPER broad innuendo that it is). There were certainly some shows I saw in 2012 that had a broad audience appeal that I thought were designed very poorly, and again: fan appeal has little/nothing to do with judging criteria. Fan appeal can be a result of a well-designed show, but the two are not automatically intertwined. I think more likely that specific judge couldn't be just being blunt with the corps director: "you can appeal to the fans, but this show design is horrible" type of thing. I bolded the part I wanted to stress. If people are moved by what is perceived as "bad" and if they are not moved by what is considered "good", Houston we have a problem and reality check. Perhaps, and I may be going out on a limb here, but are the judges so far removed from everyday people that they are missing the point? Are they isolating themselves TOO much with the wining and dining and political stuff that goes on behind scenes being TOLD what is good and bad? Perhaps, the show is (I know this is a huge leap here) designed to get a crowd response. Is that what is considered poor today? I shudder to think that may be a possibility. Edited September 9, 2012 by Mello Dude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 I bolded the part I wanted to stress. If people are moved by what is perceived as "bad" and if they are not moved by what is considered "good", Houston we have a problem and reality check. Perhaps, and I may be going out on a limb here, but are the judges so far removed from everyday people that they are missing the point? Are they isolating themselves TOO much with the wining and dining and political stuff that goes on behind scenes being TOLD what is good and bad? Perhaps, the show is (I know this is a huge leap here) designed to get a crowd response. Is that what is considered poor today? I shudder to think that may be a possibility. Except the very next sentences also says that a well designed show can garner a great reaction, just that it is not automatic. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Dude Posted September 9, 2012 Share Posted September 9, 2012 Except the very next sentences also says that a well designed show can garner a great reaction, just that it is not automatic. So let me get this straight, a show that is designed to garner crowd reaction, does, can be considered poor design because it works? Help me with this. 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.