Dekalb TOC

[quietcity]

Whether you like the stage or not like the stage, like the narrative or hate the narrative; those kids are performing the hell out of that show. I've always thought highly of the audience of this activity in figuring things out. These show concepts presented by some very good drum corps are not hard to grasp if you just sit there (objectively) and watch/listen. Why does that seem to get lost on DCP? And if you haven't noticed BD and Cadets are the front runners and have been since they came out the gate. I'm still sticking with this is a two pony race, is your pony in the race? Mine is.

Irving

Fan of the Arts

But this is just the point. The concept of the Cadet's show is easy to grasp. What I object to is the way that the show spoon-feeds the concept to the audience. It is as though the designers do not quite believe we will "get it" unless they spell everything out explicitly. I think this approach demonstrates a certain lack of regard for the audience's intelligence.

And this is part of a trend. Ever since the Cadets incorporated narration, they have tended to be overly literal and heavy-handed in the use of it, at the expense of the backing music. "This I believe" is still the worst offender, but this year's musical show is also harmed by the ever-intrusive jumble of spoken and recorded voices.

Edited July 14, 2014 by quietcity

[brichtimp]

That is what I said. That is what N.E. Brigand said, er, typed.

Last year some people complained about Crown using narration, meaning particularly the love story section.

Other people defended Crown with the argument that they were only being faithful to their source material, Philip Glass's Einstein on the Beach.

There was a major flaw with that response. It also applies to such defenses of Cadets' show.

That is what I said.

Re the verbals in Crown 13......the whole love story angle was something I had to get past because the playing was so glorious in that show...but, there was little connection to Zarathustra other than to showcase that brass sound....so lots of disparate elements....unlike the more cohesive Cadets approach this year, IMHO.

[corpsband]

So it makes sense to do it in the Lincoln part, because it mirrors the original Copland piece. But when The Cadets choose to carry that along to talk about FDR and Kennedy, and use that iconic "this is what he said" line to tie it back to the Lincoln piece...it's not sufficient? Just because Copland didn't have Roosevelt Portrait and Kennedy Portrait, too, and because some of the FDR and Kennedy quotes are actual audio clips of their actual voices? C'mon...

Agree. People complaining here are just looking for a reason to complain. The narration for the Cadets is very effective (whether you 'enjoy' narration or not'). The narrative weaves together the storyline and the repeated phrase lends continuity to the design. Like it or not -- it works well.

[corpsband]

But this is just the point. The concept of the Cadet's show is easy to grasp. What I object to is the way that the show spoon-feeds the concept to the audience. It is as though the designers do not quite believe we will "get it" unless they spells everything out explicitly. I think this approach demonstrates a certain lack of regard for the audience.

And this is part of a trend. Ever since the Cadets incorporated narration, they have tended to be overly literal and heavy-handed in the use of it, at the expense of the backing music. "This I believe" is still the worst offender, but this year's musical show is also harmed by the ever-intrusive jumble of spoken and recorded voices.

Actually without the narration the show is just 3 Copland pieces. You don't have a concept at all.

[quietcity]

Actually without the narration the show is just 3 Copland pieces. You don't have a concept at all.

I don't think narration is necessary to get across a concept. In fact, most corps manage without narration. What I am saying is that Cadet's narration is not very artful. Sure, it works, but so does a McDonald's menu. There are more sophisticated ways to use words in the conveyance of an artistic idea.

[George Dixon]

I don't think narration is necessary to get across a concept. In fact, most corps manage without narration. What I am saying is that Cadet's narration is not very artful. Sure, it works, but so does a McDonald's menu. There are more sophisticated ways to use words in the conveyance of an artistic idea.

and we'll just have to completely disagree - the narration was professionally written and is woven perfectly into the musical package. It is a part of the whole

then the narrator - what a voice! the strongest narrator seen in the activity thus far

the "concept" is one of the "promise of America" and how that's been woven into our leaders' speeches throughout our history / so it calls for narration - the snippets of speeches

if you don't like it - that's fine - but "not artful" I simply don't see that, neither do the GE judges...

and it is timely - is the "promise of America" still alive today? Many young folks (ie: of MARCHING AGE) can't even get a decent job in their chosen field -- the American dream is becoming a costly and hard to reach "promise"

so we'll just disagree.

[corpsband]

I don't think narration is necessary to get across a concept. In fact, most corps manage without narration. What I am saying is that Cadet's narration is not very artful. Sure, it works, but so does a McDonald's menu. There are more sophisticated ways to use words in the conveyance of an artistic idea.

And that's not what I said. I agree: narration is not necessary to get across a concept. What I said was: it's necessary for *this* program. The show concept is built around the quotes. Whether or not they could have done the same concept in some more "sophisticated" way (which reads to me as "in a way quietcity would appreciate more") ) is irrelevant. They chose to design the show this way and it works.

Edited July 14, 2014 by corpsband

[George Dixon]

And that's not what I said. I agree: narration is not necessary to get across a concept. What I said was: it's necessary for *this* program. The show concept is built around the quotes. Whether or not they could have done the same concept in some more "sophisticated" way (which reads to me as "in a way quitecity would appreciate more") ) is irrelevant. They chose to design the show this way and it works.

exactly. Thanks for being so succinct

[cowtown]

I did not know that was a reference to the original piece. I have not heard that piece in over 30 years, to me, it’s like Peter and the Wolf, the sort of things for kids that you don’t really go back to later on because you have moved on to real stuff

So yeah, for those in the audience that are not familiar with the reference, now you know how it plays, is that what you want? It’s not my fault for not getting it, the burden is on the ‘artist’..

I counted 3 drones last night, Blue Stars. Cavies and Regiment all sent them off during their shows.

Kind of cool but even though they were not over the audience’s head, if it were to crap out and fall at an angle…not sure that’s the best judgment

[geluf]

I did not know that was a reference to the original piece. I have not heard that piece in over 30 years, to me, it’s like Peter and the Wolf, the sort of things for kids that you don’t really go back to later on because you have moved on to real stuff

Yes. "Lincoln Portrait" isn't "real stuff".

Sure. *That's* the issue.