George Hopkins - soothsayer

[xbones7480]

What's this stupid thread about?

[Stu]

What's this stupid thread about?

George Hopkins calling color guard equipment 'weapons of war'; a teacher at a school making a student take off a NRA shirt depicting hunting; and other PC issues.

[charlie1223]

This thread is founded on complete lies, misrepresentations and sensationalism.

Lets not forget that George Hopkins didn't actually say "weapons of war"... and that he didn't actually say anything... And ACTUALLY the original term was "IMPLEMENTS of war" NOT "Weapons of WAR".

The only instance of "implements of war" being used was in an article/advertisement on the YEA website and it wasn't a direct quote of hopkins and there is no way to say that hopkins even wrote the article himself. And its use in the article was as a descriptive distinguisher from the new guard equipment they were selling. The term in question itself connotates old fashioned, out-dated, militeristic, uncreative, barbaric... and OF COURSE if you are selling something NEW and DIFFERENT (like their HOOKS and BOLTS guard equipment which is the REAL context of what was written) you want to make your competition (sabres and rifles) to look inferior and play up on what distinguishes your product! It's simple marketing.

By a) lying about what was actaully written b) lying that GH actually said it and c) taking it out of the context of AN ADVERTISEMENT... you completely blow up the situation and start injecting vile "politics" and "political correctness" where none actually exists. The drama is manufactured here on DCP not by George, YEA, or anyone else.

Also, this thread happened last month and this discussion is more stupid the 3rd time around...

Edited October 5, 2013 by charlie1223

[garfield]

This thread is founded on complete lies, misrepresentations and sensationalism.

Lets not forget that George Hopkins didn't actually say "weapons of war"... and that he didn't actually say anything... And ACTUALLY the original term was "IMPLEMENTS of war" NOT "Weapons of WAR".

The only instance of "implements of war" being used was in an article/advertisement on the YEA website and it wasn't a direct quote of hopkins and there is no way to say that hopkins even wrote the article himself. And its use in the article was as a descriptive distinguisher from the new guard equipment they were selling. The term in question itself connotates old fashioned, out-dated, militeristic, uncreative, barbaric... and OF COURSE if you are selling something NEW and DIFFERENT (like their HOOKS and BOLTS guard equipment which is the REAL context of what was written) you want to make your competition (sabres and rifles) to look inferior and play up on what distinguishes your product! It's simple marketing.

By a) lying about what was actaully written b) lying that GH actually said it and c) taking it out of the context of AN ADVERTISEMENT... you completely blow up the situation and start injecting vile "politics" and "political correctness" where none actually exists. The drama is manufactured here on DCP not by George, YEA, or anyone else.

Also, this thread happened last month and this discussion is more stupid the 3rd time around...

I appreciate your drama, but you need to do a little more research.

From an interview HERE (http://bluedevils.org/news/story.php?newsID=27 ), GH said (emphasis mine):

"Longer term, more needs to be done to keep drum corps vital, says George Hopkins, Director of the Cadets. In fact, if DCI stays the same and doesn’t play down its military heritage, it will continue to be plagued by declining crowds, he believes.

Interviewed at a picnic hosted by the Blue Devils for the Cadets in Walnut Creek, CA, Hopkins said the call to no more arms should be a serious one for fans who care about drum corps. “We grew up with it, so we don’t think anything about the fact that we use swords and rifles, but people who are new to the event can’t understand why we use weapons,” Hopkins said, citing the example of TV talk show host Rosie O’Donnell, who refused to do a promotion for Blast!, the Broadway-based show that grew from the Star of Indiana, because it uses guns and sabers.

In the Cadets 2001 show there are no rifles. Instead the guard spins the much-talked-about apostrophe like devices. Swords will be the thing next to be replaced by some less warlike performance prop. He hopes to create a sabre-like device that will still require the same kind of skills to toss but doesn’t have the association with violence. But wholesale change, Hopkins says, even in a guard where he has the final say can sometimes take longer than he’d like."

This thread was "founded" on the fact that GH made comments in 2001 about the need to eliminate using "weapons" in order to keep drum corps vital, and that there are indications that society is moving more towards his thinking. Was he a soothsayer? Possibly he was just good at guessing about the future.

But, in that regard, this thread's "founding" statement is possibly more accurate than you give credit.

Edited October 5, 2013 by garfield

[Stu]

... TV talk show host Rosie O’Donnell, who refused to do a promotion for Blast!, the Broadway-based show that grew from the Star of Indiana, because it uses guns and sabers...

And what a great celebrity spokesperson Rosie O'Donnell is for the show Blast. By the way, these stars admit that they carry weapons: Brad Pitt, Angelia Jolie, Eric Clapton, Johnny Depp, Marc Anthony, Miranda Lambert, James Earl Jones, Howard Stern, Whoopi Goldberg, David Spade,… how about GH asking their opinion on the show Blast?

[garfield]

And what a great celebrity spokesperson Rosie O'Donnell is for the show Blast. By the way, these stars admit that they carry weapons: Brad Pitt, Angelia Jolie, Eric Clapton, Johnny Depp, Marc Anthony, Miranda Lambert, James Earl Jones, Howard Stern, Whoopi Goldberg, David Spade,… how about GH asking their opinion on the show Blast?

The point is not that Rosie is a nitwit or, in a more PC tone, "has a different opinion". The point is that Hop saw something societal twelve years ago that prompted him to opine that drum corps should change its ways if it intended to appeal to the mainstream school music community. The fact is that there are increasing numbers of cases where schools, in particular, are taking proactive steps to stop the demonstration or representation of firearms, even in pictures and Pop-Tarts, because of the increasing pressure of a significant portion of society to do so.

The cases are different. Schools are public places. Drum corps is a private organization that sells tickets to willing volunteer purchasers. I think of the Boy Scouts...

But, as we conjure and apply new ideas to grow drum corps, it is simply a matter of numbers of attendees before a first-time viewer is "offended" at having to witness "violent" things such as representations of a rifle, and subjecting the children on the field to such a violent mentality. A self-promoting lawyer could attempt to make his bones on attacking a change to impress those who would cheer the effort. It takes money to defend oneself. And I think of the Boy Scouts.

Ironically, if played right, the activity might grow as a result of holding fast to its military history, guns and reference shows and all. Getting just that portion of society who appreciate the history and think the issue is moronic to see a show is a lot more people than we now have.

Now that I think about it, the Boy Scouts were attacked, and eventually crippled, by the gay lobby. Maybe using the reverse of that argument might be the best defense that DCI has against the anti-weapon lobby.

Edited October 5, 2013 by garfield

[Tim K]

I think I can understand some of unease with the use of rifles, though as an earlier post will attest, I understand the point of view while not necessarily agreeing with it. Last December, there was a thread shows we will never see, and I made a post that saluted the NRA and suggested songs such as "Everybody Run, the Home Coming Queen's Got a Gun." It was not political and others added their choice of music. A few days alter Newtown, CT lost a classroom full of first graders and what was funny a few days earlier was in my opinion, in poor taste and I removed the post. It didn't change my beliefs about rifles being appropriate for drum corps, but it did remind me that the threat of gun violence is very real and people take it seriously.

Now as far as Mr. Hopkins' comments regarding "weapons" in an old interview, he's always shared his opinions and when he's right he's a leader and champion and when he's wrong, well DCP has many posts that let him know he is only human. Now as far as drum corps audiences shrinking due to militaristic corps, first of all we have to look at where marchers hail from, and in many cases they are states classified as "red states" which are usually more conservative and even in the Northeast, high school ROTC programs are growing. Also a fair number of kids who have marched have entered the military, at least according to the recruiters at Indy, so I do not think the military styled shows are making audiences shrink any more than dancing color guards and musical members doing body movements is making crowds shrink. My guess is that at shows in the Northeast, anywhere from 80-90% of the people in attendance are alums of marching units. My guess would be that in Wisconsin and Illinois, the numbers are similar as well as in California. Fewer corps means fewer alums, so if you want the audience to grow at shows, get kids involved at an earlier age and encourage alums to attend shows.

Now to be fair to Mr. Hopkins, Cadets alums seem to be a huge presence at many shows, not just Cadets sponsored shows, but also DCI East.

[charlie1223]

I appreciate your drama, but you need to do a little more research.

From an interview HERE (http://bluedevils.org/news/story.php?newsID=27 ), GH said (emphasis mine):

"Longer term, more needs to be done to keep drum corps vital, says George Hopkins, Director of the Cadets. In fact, if DCI stays the same and doesnt play down its military heritage, it will continue to be plagued by declining crowds, he believes.

Interviewed at a picnic hosted by the Blue Devils for the Cadets in Walnut Creek, CA, Hopkins said the call to no more arms should be a serious one for fans who care about drum corps. We grew up with it, so we dont think anything about the fact that we use swords and rifles, but people who are new to the event cant understand why we use weapons, Hopkins said, citing the example of TV talk show host Rosie ODonnell, who refused to do a promotion for Blast!, the Broadway-based show that grew from the Star of Indiana, because it uses guns and sabers.

In the Cadets 2001 show there are no rifles. Instead the guard spins the much-talked-about apostrophe like devices. Swords will be the thing next to be replaced by some less warlike performance prop. He hopes to create a sabre-like device that will still require the same kind of skills to toss but doesnt have the association with violence. But wholesale change, Hopkins says, even in a guard where he has the final say can sometimes take longer than hed like."

This thread was "founded" on the fact that GH made comments in 2001 about the need to eliminate using "weapons" in order to keep drum corps vital, and that there are indications that society is moving more towards his thinking. Was he a soothsayer? Possibly he was just good at guessing about the future.

But, in that regard, this thread's "founding" statement is possibly more accurate than you give credit.

Tell me were George Hopkins is quoted as saying "weapons of war?" Please tell me where this is because it is not in this article. This is what I was speaking to and this is what is be constantly spewed in this discussion.

And c'mon Garfield! we know "weapons" is the common monicker for guard equipment. The fact that he used that term should be as controversial as him calling a marimba a keyboard. Seriously?

It's clear he swings one way or the other on the issue of guard equipment. This is NOT what I was referring to. But people are not adequately representing his position and what he ACTUALLY said. Specifically Stu.

Edited October 5, 2013 by charlie1223

[Pete Freedman]

...

The fact is that there are increasing numbers of cases where schools, in particular, are taking proactive steps to stop the demonstration or representation of firearms, even in pictures and Pop-Tarts, because of the increasing pressure of a significant portion of society to do so.

...

Those two examples are not cases in which schools took "proactive steps to stop the demonstration or representation of firearms". In the pictures case the teacher believed the pictures delivered to him/her by two students on a science assignment were a deliberate threat to him/her. The school agreed. It was the threat that violated the policy. Not the images.

In the Pop-Tarts case it was a series of behaviors that led to the action. The other behaviors were not made public. This happens all the time. Little kids, even preschool kids, get expelled for repeated unacceptable behaviors toward others. Particularly when the behaviors are encouraged by parents, which I have seen myself. I'm not saying that happened in this case, but the fact that we don't know the reason for the expulsion means it's a non-issue.

Ironically, if played right, the activity might grow as a result of holding fast to its military history, guns and reference shows and all. Getting just that portion of society who appreciate the history and think the issue is moronic to see a show is a lot more people than we now have.

[Pete Freedman]

Has a school color guard ever been directed by school administrators to stop using rifles?