One Person's Thoughts on Animal Farm.

[N.E. Brigand]

Boston had an entertaining show, and for a "dark" show I think it got some decent responses from the crowds throughout the year (admittedly, I'm judging this primarily from watching FN). The show wasn't a complete mess visually, but they never seemed to get to the polishing/refining phase by finals week. Hopefully their staff will take this into account when they design next year's show.

It was quite well received in both Pittsburgh and Massillon, with signficant applause both during the show and at the end. To be sure, other corps garnered more applause at both locations.

[N.E. Brigand]

So there it is. Do I think BAC deserved to be in 10th? YES. Do I think the show was a risk? For sure. Do I think in the long run the kids and maybe a few others were sold a bill of goods by certain staff? FOR SURE. I actually liked the theme and thought it could be a very cool, dark, and different approach and was excited to see it, BUT also felt the talent, and yes, there was a lot of talent, was wasted . A corps that's still making changes in the 11th hour is not thinking how those things are going to be clean and or didn't pay attention along the way.

I'm curious about what changes Boston is thought to have made at the end? As far as I can tell, their problem was just the opposite: they made very few changes this year; had they done so, they might have scored higher. Maybe. Someone else, rightly I think, called Boston "stubborn" for not watering down a show that, right after the Akron cinema-cast, I said on these forums would be very hard to clean. (I don't necessarily use "stubborn" pejoratively: how amazing it would have been for them to have cleaned this show; it may have been worth the attempt. The impressive thing is how consistently they managed to improve their score until Atlanta; if they had been able to keep up that pace--as they did last year until Prelims--they would in fact have moved up a couple places, relative to their competition, whose scores had not been improving as quickly. Does anyone really prefer "Rise", which scored two placements and more than one point higher, to "Animal Farm"?) But I can think of just three or four major changes to Boston's show this year, all of them in place by halfway through the season:

1. At Ft. Wayne, they changed the moving block formation (before the ballad) from a regimented form to a more bestial free-for-all; I could actually hear a judge in the booth praising this change.

2. Also at Ft. Wayne, they debuted the new, post-"Conquest" ending.

3. Around San Antonio, they began miking the solo that opens the ballad.

4. Also around San Antonio, they reworked the ballad so that the drill was easier to clean.

Everything added in Finals week was cosmetic: the fences along the front sideline (actually first used at Pittsburgh), the BAC banners (first used at Massillon), the "All drum corps are created equal..." voiceover (Prelims, but very hard to hear in the "Big Loud and Live" broadcast), the "All animals are created equal..." painted on the DM stands (Finals), and the drum major's baby powder (Finals). All of those changes seem likely to have been planned from the beginning. Had Boston cleaned as much as they hoped to, nobody would be complaining about these points.

Is there anything significant I'm forgetting?

(Edit: I forgot the red masks, which were in place by at least Atlanta, I think. And I totally didn't see the DCI flags, used only in Finals, because I watched that on high-camera. Again, both of these are cosmetic. Adding them should have taken almost no time from cleaning.)

Speaking of the baby powder: contrary to many, I thought it was a nice bit of levity in which the corps made fun of their own past mistake.

Edited August 15, 2014 by N.E. Brigand

[Geneva]

I guess I should have read this before the end of the season. It may have made the Crusaders' show more interesting to me. Then again, maybe not. I don't think a drum corps show should require a primer to appreciate. I prefer symbolism on a more emotional level as with the Blue Knights show.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Geneva

[GUARDLING]

I'm curious about what changes Boston is thought to have made at the end? As far as I can tell, their problem was just the opposite: they made very few changes this year; had they done so, they might have scored higher. Maybe. Someone else, rightly I think, called Boston "stubborn" for not watering down a show that, right after the Akron cinema-cast, I said on these forums would be very hard to clean. (I don't necessarily use "stubborn" pejoratively: how amazing it would have been for them to have cleaned this show; it may have been worth the attempt. The impressive thing is how consistently they managed to improve their score until Atlanta; if they had been able to keep up that pace--as they did last year until Prelims--they would in fact have moved up a couple places, relative to their competition, whose scores had not been improving as quickly. Does anyone really prefer "Rise", which scored two placements and more than one point higher, to "Animal Farm"?) But I can think of just three or four major changes to Boston's show this year, all of them in place by halfway through the season:

1. At Ft. Wayne, they changed the moving block formation (before the ballad) from a regimented form to a more bestial free-for-all; I could actually hear a judge in the booth praising this change.

2. Also at Ft. Wayne, they debuted the new, post-"Conquest" ending.

3. Around San Antonio, they began miking the solo that opens the ballad.

4. Also around San Antonio, they reworked the ballad so that the drill was easier to clean.

Everything added in Finals week was cosmetic: the fences along the front sideline (actually first used at Pittsburgh), the BAC banners (first used at Massillon), the "All drum corps are created equal..." voiceover (Prelims, but very hard to hear in the "Big Loud and Live" broadcast), the "All animals are created equal..." painted on the DM stands (Finals), and the drum major's baby powder (Finals). All of those changes seem likely to have been planned from the beginning. Had Boston cleaned as much as they hoped to, nobody would be complaining about these points.

Is there anything significant I'm forgetting?

Speaking of the baby powder: contrary to many, I thought it was a nice bit of levity in which the corps made fun of their own past mistake.

Im not really going to get into it much here. It's done and time to move on and these were choices of the BC staff.. Even cosmetic, in a situation that deserved attention to things making them actually better is a choice. Do we add, do we clean, will one actually make improvements in scoring or placements? Valuable time!

Many , and I do mean many didn't even get the BAC tarps at the end. I actually got a call from a home DCI party asking me " why" I said WHY you asking me?..lol

You are right though about maybe watering down. I don't like the term " water down " only because it makes it sound like LESS THAN or INFERIOR TO, which it isn't. IMO and obviously the judging community, re- writes, not compromise the integrity of the design BUT to set the MMs up for success could have been a huge benefit.

Maybe changes should have been worded additions,doesn't really matter though IMO.

It's a great corps and I do think the possibilities could have been endless. JMO

Edited August 15, 2014 by GUARDLING

[N.E. Brigand]

This is entirely false. I just watched it, it's heard loud and clear. Don't believe everything you hear on the internet. :)

Yes, it's perfectly clear on the Semis video. It's less clear on the Prelims video, especially the first half. In my notebook from the "Big Loud and Live" broadcast, I wrote: "Is there a voice just before Conquest? 'Some animals are more equal than others?'" But that wasn't DCI trying to censor the message! The cinema screening had lots of audio issues, particularly as related to sounds from the pit.

On a tangent, I just notice that the soloist at the top of the ballad doesn't sound miked on the Semis video.

[N.E. Brigand]

I think some of that was changes being made throughout the season chewing into cleaning time in rehearsals and there were so many elements of that show that would need serious cleaning. If they had the show they ended with on day one, they probably could have cleaned it a good deal more and gotten it much higher. But we all know it doesn't work that way!

Again, what changes are those? Looking back at the Akron video, I find that astonishingly little was changed (compare to Madison!), and the little that was changed ought to have made the show easier and thus cleaner. All the late changes I listed a few posts above should have taken almost no time away from cleaning. All the (not very) big changes had been in place for several weeks.

For instance, the closing drill wasn't changed to accommodate the "B A C" banners. You can compare videos from Finals week to that from, say, Atlanta. It looks like they'd been leaving a spot for those banners since Ft. Wayne. All that was needed logistically was: (1) remember to bring the banners to the field when loading in; and (2) have six guard members pause from flag work to unfurl the banners, which takes about ten seconds. Ten seconds of unfurling banners is easier than ten seconds of flag work. Thus that change, apparently planned for many weeks, was easy to incorporate and probably made the show a little bit cleaner.

(Also it reinforces the theme, since there was "B A C" drill near the beginning of the show.)

[N.E. Brigand]

I'm not really going to get into it much here. It's done and time to move on, and these were choices of the BC staff. Even cosmetic, in a situation that deserved attention to things making them actually better is a choice. Do we add, do we clean, will one actually make improvements in scoring or placements? Valuable time! Many, and I do mean many, didn't even get the BAC tarps at the end. I actually got a call from a home DCI party asking me "why"? I said, WHY you asking me? lol.

You are right though about maybe watering down. I don't like the term "water down", only because it makes it sound like LESS THAN or INFERIOR TO, which it isn't. IMO, and obviously the judging community, sees re-writes, not as compromising the integrity of the design, BUT to set the MMs up for success could have been a huge benefit. Maybe my "changes" should have been worded as "additions". Doesn't really matter though, IMO.

It's a great corps and I do think the possibilities could have been endless. JMO.

Well obviously no one's going to make you defend your position now (although I can't recall you suggesting any particular change during the season, so it's not clear where you're "moving on" from ), but to my eyes, it looks like Boston did almost nothing but clean all summer long, to no avail, apparently because, as your second paragraph sort of suggests, cleaning alone was never going to be enough for a show so fiendishly difficult. All the late cosmetic changes they did make appear (1) to have been planned since the beginning and (2) to have taken almost no time from rehearsal. The few structural changes they made earlier were relatively small and seemingly all to the purpose, as you say of "setting the MMs up for success".

On a tangent, no one has yet mentioned that for a tenth-place finish, Boston's score was remarkably high. Here's where they fit historically:

1. 89.100 -- Suncoast Sound, "Symphonic Dances for the Contemporary Child" (1988)

2. 88.950 -- Madison Scouts, untitled ("Slaughter on 10th Avenue" and "Rhapsody in Blue") (2010)

2. 88.950 -- Boston Crusaders, "Animal Farm" (2014)

4. 88.225 -- Blue Knights, "A Midsummer Knight's Dream" (2005)

5. 87.750 -- Glassmen, "The Journey of One" (2009)

5. 87.750 -- Blue Knights, "NoBeginningNoEnd" (2013)

[Liahona]

well as an outsider without an agenda I felt Boston was the dirtiest corps in the Top 12 - and I don't think it was very close

feet were a mess - most of which I blame on some god-awful drill and horrific decision making in terms of staging the show

but I guess everyone has their own viewpoint...

I also felt the G7, the baby powder and the rest of it was pretty sophomoric (to be kind)

it was like an unoriginal, unattainable version of a BOA Tarpon Springs show combined with Suncoast Sound's Dances for the Contemporary Child

Well obviously no one's going to make you defend your position now (although I can't recall you suggesting any particular change during the season, so it's not clear where you're "moving on" from ), but to my eyes, it looks like Boston did almost nothing but clean all summer long, to no avail, apparently because, as your second paragraph sort of suggests, cleaning alone was never going to be enough for a show so fiendishly difficult. All the late cosmetic changes they did make appear (1) to have been planned since the beginning and (2) to have taken almost no time from rehearsal. The few structural changes they made earlier were relatively small and seemingly all to the purpose, as you say of "setting the MMs up for success".

On a tangent, no one has yet mentioned that for a tenth-place finish, Boston's score was remarkably high. Here's where they fit historically:

1. 89.100 -- Suncoast Sound, "Symphonic Dances for the Contemporary Child" (1988)

2. 88.950 -- Madison Scouts, untitled ("Slaughter on 10th Avenue" and "Rhapsody in Blue") (2010)

2. 88.950 -- Boston Crusaders, "Animal Farm" (2014)

4. 88.225 -- Blue Knights, "A Midsummer Knight's Dream" (2005)

5. 87.750 -- Glassmen, "The Journey of One" (2009)

5. 87.750 -- Blue Knights, "NoBeginningNoEnd" (2013)

I just thought this to be so ironic...LOL

[GUARDLING]

Well obviously no one's going to make you defend your position now (although I can't recall you suggesting any particular change during the season, so it's not clear where you're "moving on" from ), but to my eyes, it looks like Boston did almost nothing but clean all summer long, to no avail, apparently because, as your second paragraph sort of suggests, cleaning alone was never going to be enough for a show so fiendishly difficult. All the late cosmetic changes they did make appear (1) to have been planned since the beginning and (2) to have taken almost no time from rehearsal. The few structural changes they made earlier were relatively small and seemingly all to the purpose, as you say of "setting the MMs up for success".

On a tangent, no one has yet mentioned that for a tenth-place finish, Boston's score was remarkably high. Here's where they fit historically:

1. 89.100 -- Suncoast Sound, "Symphonic Dances for the Contemporary Child" (1988)

2. 88.950 -- Madison Scouts, untitled ("Slaughter on 10th Avenue" and "Rhapsody in Blue") (2010)

2. 88.950 -- Boston Crusaders, "Animal Farm" (2014)

4. 88.225 -- Blue Knights, "A Midsummer Knight's Dream" (2005)

5. 87.750 -- Glassmen, "The Journey of One" (2009)

5. 87.750 -- Blue Knights, "NoBeginningNoEnd" (2013)

Youre right about that they did clean and it did get better just not enough. There were many trying to defend the harder is better theory and also used that as a reason for the cleaning process. Doesn't work that way. At some point decisions need to be made and IMO a staff's job is to make their students look the best they can. This is JMO and the BC staff made their decision apparently. Staff dynamics play a big part in all things also. Personalities can certainly get in the way of the vision.

Edited August 15, 2014 by GUARDLING

[PhillipSopper]

Youre right about that they did clean and it did get better just not enough. There were many trying to defend the harder is better theory and also used that as a reason for the cleaning process. Doesn't work that way. At some point decisions need to be made and IMO a staff's job is to make their students look the best they can. This is JMO and the BC staff made their decision apparently. Staff dynamics play a big part in all things also. Personalities can certainly get in the way of the vision.

Try as you might, your spammish and blatant critiques of this corps just don't cut it. If you hadn't an agenda, I'd perhaps let it fly. You spread false and nasty rumors about their marching members back in 07-08, on this very website, which technically were in violation of HIPAA Laws. I hope you 'teach' better than you write and you lead a better example than that which you represent in your posts. The all-too-many first person singulars and self-promoting perhaps bely a deep insecurity? Will you be consultant prima-uno for the Crusaders' 75th Anniversary Plans? We here, in our private convos, certainly hope so.

So, Mary Queen of shots, give it a rest. Bless your litle heart, darling.