One Person's Thoughts on Animal Farm.

[tesmusic]

To be honest, I had high hopes for this program.

Unfortunately, the Animal Farm show seemed to lack any sort of clear definition in show design. It also came off incredibly pretentious and self-serving, which I find pretty pathetic.

The whole baby powder thing was, mildly comical, but again, pretty self-serving.

It almost seemed like they were saying here's our concept, and if you get it, great, if you don't, we don't care, and if people for some bizarre reason believe that that would make them seem deep, inciteful, innovative, well, that's crazy thinking too. Granted, BD's Dada show may be considered along those types of lines, but that concept actually worked because it lived the concept. Animal Farm, not so much.

Here's to hoping they get over themselves in 2015.

[Cappybara]

To be honest, I had high hopes for this program.

Unfortunately, the Animal Farm show seemed to lack any sort of clear definition in show design. It also came off incredibly pretentious and self-serving, which I find pretty pathetic.

The whole baby powder thing was, mildly comical, but again, pretty self-serving.

It almost seemed like they were saying here's our concept, and if you get it, great, if you don't, we don't care, and if people for some bizarre reason believe that that would make them seem deep, inciteful, innovative, well, that's crazy thinking too. Granted, BD's Dada show may be considered along those types of lines, but that concept actually worked because it lived the concept. Animal Farm, not so much.

Here's to hoping they get over themselves in 2015.

I'm curious why you felt that the show lacked any sort of clear definition? Was it because it lacked the actual storyline of animal farm?

[corpsband]

I'm not so sure about that. Why do people think harder is better? Better is better. The way it works is 1st it isnt all about throwing something higher than the next. Who cares, after the 1st 100 tosses how effective are they really? They aren't. It is more about throwing something better, It is about the performers BUT also about many many other things and guard has become MUCH MUCH more than spinning and tossing.

Those things you mentioned about the other captions, there's no difference there either, Do something hard crappy, how much credit is deserved, do something more in line with an individual corps talent and do it well , credit deserved. This also doesn't mean not challenge. A good judge knows very well when a corps is playing it safe.

You are right though....do it cleanly...that is the key and the debate I suppose. For sure BD deserved the guard trophy but not because they toss high, at least its just a part of it BUT they had to do it well, and did. In most cases I do think the guard judges ( not all ) got it right

The design part the how and why MUST also stay a part of the equation. Imagine a guard just going out there throwing crap all over with no rhyme or reason , nothing to do with the program. When done well, no matter what it is, it is rewarded, just like the other captions.

Now if one wants to debate if a guard was cleaner than the next well that's ok, again same as other captions.

IF they just combined the WGI World Class equipment and movement sheets into a single guard sheet, I think the caption would correctly credit "the what" and "the how" and would leave out all the effect and design elements which are properly GE and ENS. IMO the sheet as written is simply an invitation for guard judges to promote themselves to GE judge #3 and -- sadly -- there are only a handful of judges who seem to be able to resist the urge to go there (shocking I know).

I agree there's FAR MORE to "hard" than rotations in a toss (just as there's far more to playing a trumpet than hitting a triple C). But I'd like to see the caption focused on the performers and not the designers. IMO the current sheets fail in that regard.

Guard is NOT like the other captions. A brass line or drum line can outperform the show as a whole. What those performers accomplished *in that caption* is credited.

And the reverse is true as well:

A trumpet line may (by sheer chance) all have 10+ years of formal dance training. They put their horns down and partner dance with the guard with amazing skill and grace. It's the GE moment of the show.

Will the Brass judge credit the dancing? Absolutely not.

Flip this example and guard contribution on trumpets will absolutely be credited by the guard judge. It's effective and appropriate and "good".

As for judges knowing when guards are "playing it safe" , I disagree. I think too many guard judges are perfectly content to reward safe and clean.

Edited October 9, 2014 by corpsband

[GUARDLING]

IF they just combined the WGI World Class equipment and movement sheets into a single guard sheet, I think the caption would correctly credit "the what" and "the how" and would leave out all the effect and design elements which are properly GE and ENS. IMO the sheet as written is simply an invitation for guard judges to promote themselves to GE judge #3 and -- sadly -- there are only a handful of judges who seem to be able to resist the urge to go there (shocking I know).

I agree there's FAR MORE to "hard" than rotations in a toss (just as there's far more to playing a trumpet than hitting a triple C). But I'd like to see the caption focused on the performers and not the designers. IMO the current sheets fail in that regard.

I think it still needs to be a combination of both other wise we are going to see some lame poorly put together shows. We cant take a step back in this. I do agree that there can be more added to the sheets to specifically pin down some elements BUT I do think that is taken into consideration with SOME of the judges. MAybe its better education or accountability for the JUDGE is whats needed even if the judge has been around since dirt.

[tesmusic]

I'm curious why you felt that the show lacked any sort of clear definition? Was it because it lacked the actual storyline of animal farm?

So it's a show about the concept of Animal Farm, so the guard acts foolish wish masks on, they hint at baby powder, the make a G7 making a reference as to that being an evil empire and that means the concept was well designed and cohesive.

Once again, it's self-serving smoke and mirrors crap, and not at an elite level either.

[cjf20]

So it's a show about the concept of Animal Farm, so the guard acts foolish wish masks on, they hint at baby powder, the make a G7 making a reference as to that being an evil empire and that means the concept was well designed and cohesive.

Once again, it's self-serving smoke and mirrors crap, and not at an elite level either.

Your statement is completely irrelevant, you just throw a whole bunch of random insults in and it really is pathetic, who gave you the right to talk down/belittle/insult the BAC membership. (And when did they use smoke and mirrors do enlighten me oh smart one)

[Narrow]

So it's a show about the concept of Animal Farm, so the guard acts foolish wish masks on, they hint at baby powder, the make a G7 making a reference as to that being an evil empire and that means the concept was well designed and cohesive.

Once again, it's self-serving smoke and mirrors crap, and not at an elite level either.

There's a lot more to the show than that. Sure the show's not your cup of tea, but you sound like you're taking it too personal. If you pay attention you can see the Animal Farm story line, from the beginning chaotic uprising to the Beast of England anthem hints and reoccurring windmill imagery, to the pig's corruption of power and Boxer's death, and lastly to the dark and political ending. If I need to lay it out even more for you to figure it out I don't mind.

[GUARDLING]

Your statement is completely irrelevant, you just throw a whole bunch of random insults in and it really is pathetic, who gave you the right to talk down/belittle/insult the BAC membership. (And when did they use smoke and mirrors do enlighten me oh smart one)

all corps have taken critiques. NO corps has taken more from the general public than BD and Cadets. BAC doesnt take anything compared to those two

[xandandl]

but BAC always does and always has taken any negative comment very personally rather than to step back, reflect, and glean any wisdom no matter how negative. Reaction is not always the best action.

Here's hoping a different perspective allows them a wonderful anniversary season.

Edited October 9, 2014 by xandandl

[tesmusic]

Your statement is completely irrelevant, you just throw a whole bunch of random insults in and it really is pathetic, who gave you the right to talk down/belittle/insult the BAC membership. (And when did they use smoke and mirrors do enlighten me oh smart one)

Are you serious right now?

Who gives me the right? Um, DCP, a forum which allows members to post topics and give their opinions.

As for criticizing the membership of BAC, read my posts again. You'll find that my comments are geared toward the fact that they were trying to do a show utilizing the concept of the book "Animal Farm" and I feel they missed the mark. My comments about the lack of cohesiveness stems from their lack of true storytelling and concept, but instead uses "smoke and mirrors" such as the whole animal constume head things, the G7 form, the baby powder. In other words, gimmicks to buck the system or the norm.

Thank you for referring to me as the smart one, I won't go there though and give you a nickname.