Jump to content

The Entertainment Proposal... The one that didn't pass


Recommended Posts

That's why I've argued that the fan vote should be tied only to the distribution of the appearance fees and not to the scores. Just as movies that please critics or peers win awards while movies that please audiences make money ... and sometimes the two overlap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Total Effect is a great idea. I can get behind that. It's probably what the GE Music/Visual should have been since the beginning. It can also give a little more credit to a show whose whole is larger than the sum of its parts.

having dealt with some "total effect" options in the fall, all it really ends up being is ( hopefully) a music person and a visual person doing the sheet, and then their preferences and background comes to the forefront, like you see on music ensemble now if it's a brass guy or a percussion guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I've argued that the fan vote should be tied only to the distribution of the appearance fees and not to the scores. Just as movies that please critics or peers win awards while movies that please audiences make money ... and sometimes the two overlap.

sorry, but the days of not knowing what you're going to get for showing up is a much needed thing of the past. There's no way a corps can estimate for budgetary purposes, especially in a situation like we've had before where fuel prices spike mid season

Link to comment
Share on other sites

funny. When i saw the 2nd place corps, while the show was not overly loved, people paid attention, so don't mistake silence as not being engaged. i was engaged, mainly because i wasn't high enough to get it

:ninja:

You do mean "high enough" in the stands to get it, right Jeff?

:ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I've argued that the fan vote should be tied only to the distribution of the appearance fees and not to the scores. Just as movies that please critics or peers win awards while movies that please audiences make money ... and sometimes the two overlap.

Sorry, but the days of not knowing what you're going to get for showing up is a much-needed thing of the past. There's no way a corps can estimate for budgetary purposes, especially in a situation like we've had before where fuel prices spike mid season

There's a way to balance those issues: make this year's payout dependent on last year's fan preferences. That way corps will know in advance how much money to expect. Or maybe we don't do this with appearance fees but with the paybacks that DCI makes to corps after the season: people have said on these forums that money is tied to how corps have scored in past seasons. I think it would make more sense for money to be tied to the fans' decisions than to the judges' decisions, since the money comes from the fans not the judges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't somehow quantify "entertainment appeal" of shows, but we *can* quantify "intellectual engagement" of shows (GE)?

Mike

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. Mike for the win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a way to balance those issues: make this year's payout dependent on last year's fan preferences. That way corps will know in advance how much money to expect. Or maybe we don't do this with appearance fees but with the paybacks that DCI makes to corps after the season: people have said on these forums that money is tied to how corps have scored in past seasons. I think it would make more sense for money to be tied to the fans' decisions than to the judges' decisions, since the money comes from the fans not the judges.

Corps settle financially with DCI at the end of every season. Restricting those funds to pay out the following season is no different that settling at the end of this season. What you're talking about is changing the payout structure to reflect something other than the order of finish per judge's score. Because the corps establish the judging rules according to "how they want to be judged", and because the payout system is established by those corps that have that self-proclaimed "biggest impact", and because the number of winning corps is so focused among a small group of corps, you'll never wrest that payout schedule decision from those top-finishing corps whoever they are.

In the end, a corps like Surf that got rousing fan applause everywhere it went last year would, under your proposal, get a bigger piece of the payout pie even though they finished at the bottom of the rankings per judge's scores.

That suggests that Surf (for example) is "better" than XXX (highest judged corps) and that concept will simply never be rationalized nor accepted by those top-placing corps. And maybe for good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't somehow quantify "entertainment appeal" of shows, but we *can* quantify "intellectual engagement" of shows (GE)?

Yes. That's a pretty easy distinction, as has been talked about often on DCP. It is much easier to quantify "intellectual engagement" when looking at a rubric and seeing how a performance engages. Entertainment, however, is purely subjective.

I don't know. I too was thinking of movies, where Vertigo (1958) was named the best film of all time in the once-a-decade poll conducted by Sight & Sound magazine in 2012. Most people here would probably agree that the films on the Sight & Sound lists appear to represent "intellectual" choices. Yet in 1962, Vertigo didn't even crack the 30. Even in 2012, a Sight & Sound of film directors only has Vertigo in seventh place. (I personally agree with the critics of 1962 and would keep it off the list entirely.) Do we ever see a DCI Finals in which one GE judge puts a corps in first place and another GE judge puts the same group in seventh place? If a panel of drum corps experts looks back in fifty years upon the 2013 season, re-ranking the corps based on the "intellectual" standards of their day, will they award, say, Jersey Surf, as the best? What's intellectual to one person can seem muddle-headed to another. In 1974, the late, great film critic Stanley Kauffmann, commenting on Francis Ford Coppola's two films of the year, The Godfather Part II and The Conversation, said (I'm paraphrasing from memory): "He gets into trouble when he thinks, or when he thinks he's thinking".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corps settle financially with DCI at the end of every season. Restricting those funds to pay out the following season is no different that settling at the end of this season. What you're talking about is changing the payout structure to reflect something other than the order of finish per judge's score. Because the corps establish the judging rules according to "how they want to be judged", and because the payout system is established by those corps that have that self-proclaimed "biggest impact", and because the number of winning corps is so focused among a small group of corps, you'll never wrest that payout schedule decision from those top-finishing corps whoever they are.

In the end, a corps like Surf that got rousing fan applause everywhere it went last year would, under your proposal, get a bigger piece of the payout pie even though they finished at the bottom of the rankings per judge's scores.

That suggests that Surf (for example) is "better" than XXX (highest judged corps) and that concept will simply never be rationalized nor accepted by those top-placing corps. And maybe for good reason.

I know it will never change. I'm just suggesting that the corps who bring in the money should reap the financial rewards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it will never change. I'm just suggesting that the corps who bring in the money should reap the financial rewards.

As did the G7.

I'd like to know a metric that can accurately measure this as, in my experience, it's difficult or impossible to quantify. If DCI polled every single attendee at every show, plus the online fans, and came up with the actual fan reasons for attending the show, and the majority of responses were "...to see the (insert show headliner)" then I'd believe the results.

How about an annual award for the corps that demonstrably impacts the most young participants from their complete programs regardless of their finishing place or score?

Edited by garfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...