93 Star vs. 88 Madison

[Pete Freedman]

Interesting discussion about props. In standard showbiz parlance all guard equipment would be considered props. And as the activity continues to approach the rest of the performing arts world, maybe they should be called props. But in this activity the standard "guard equipment props" are clearly different from what might be called staging props. But the gray area in between is continuous so it's hard (and maybe pointless) to draw a line between them.

First there's the question of alternates that clearly mimic traditional guard equipment, such as the Cadets' alternates and various poles like Star's and others.

Going further, there is more clearly non-standard guard equipment that are carried per guard member but that can't easily be used in a traditional flag/sabre/rifle way, such as Star's triangles and such things as umbrellas and propellers (and half-taxicabs).

And then there are staging props like Bluecoats' wedges, various doors, huts, guillotines, backdrops, etc.

So while the difference between a sabre and Baba Yaga's Hut is obvious, there is no clear line dividing them. What that proves, I'm not sure...

[Pete Freedman]

I sense that both shows were controversial at the announcement of scores. Madison because no-one knew who had won the day before, and Star because of the unprecedented innovation, the preexisting hatred for Star, and the .1 difference (and a couple of big drops by Cadets, although Star had some too, and anyway they don't count as much as newbies often think they should.) And probably the fact that some believed Star left DCI because of that loss (although Bill Cook later claimed the decision to tour with Canadian Brass had already been made).

So maybe both shows carry an outsized sense of drama beyond the show itself.

[BRASSO]

for uniqueness and controversy, Star pales to the Bridgemen in this aspect of" uniqueness" and in " controversy" . The Bridgenen took the whole suburban ethos thing in DCI at the time and turned it on its head. Star's uniforms in 93 were very conservative . Bridgemen were like nothing else with their uniforms, nor with even the way they entered the stadium. They were incredibly revolutionary in "uniqueness" for their time, They did not exude a military presence or demeanor at all. By choice . They were met in some environs in a very hostile fashion .,, especially away from the East Coast . The corps was chock full of minorities in its Corps , unlike Star ( and many other DCI top corps )that had few if any minorities in its Corps. The music by Bridgemen was drawn of inspiration from the sounds of the inner city.,. Unlike anything else that was being played at the time which at the time was filled with compositions from White European composers , If the topic is" uniqueness " the Bridgemen were unlike any other corps of its day at that time , in my personal assessment

Edited February 6, 2015 by BRASSO

[boxingfred]

You're close....

BD's first lost was semifinals (not Finals) by over a point to Madison (clearly the best on Friday night). Garfield faced Madison just once that year before KC and won by 0.1. "Going into finals," they were not 2 points behind Star, PR, Garfield. They were 0.5 behind SCV by that point. 1988 was the first of 2 years of a failed judging system to save $. No one will convince me that Madison would have won under the current mathematical judging system---and I'll die believing Phantom Regiment would have beaten 1989 SCV today (given the less weight to overall drums and more to music ensemble). But what's done is done. Both were popular winners.

If I recall Semifinals scores were not announced So,the we didn't know semifinals scores until after. Also, I'm wasn't always talking about head to head competition every time but competing on the same day.

[BRASSO]

Interesting discussion about props. In standard showbiz parlance all guard equipment would be considered props. And as the activity continues to approach the rest of the performing arts world, maybe they should be called props. But in this activity the standard "guard equipment props" are clearly different from what might be called staging props. But the gray area in between is continuous so it's hard (and maybe pointless) to draw a line between them.

...

. I think we all here should be able to agree that there really isn't much clearly accepted nomenclatures for much of anything on the DCI field anymore. There is no standard accepted nomenclature of even what these musical units are. Are they Marching Bands ? Are they Drum & Bugle Corps ? Or something else again ? Well , it really depends on who you ask and what their own personal definitions are. So if most people can't even agree on what these units are, it's not hard to understand that what the definition of a " prop" is would likewise he open to wide definition. As such, I gave my definition of a "prop"above and under the circumstances it seems to fit as well, if not better than any other definition of a "prop", As such for me, Star did not use show. " props. " in their 93 show .But if you believe that Star 93 used " props. " in their ' 93 show because iit fits your definition of a show " prop " that's totally acceptable and perfectly fine by me, and for the reasons I just gave. Edited February 6, 2015 by BRASSO

[boxingfred]

Sometimes when you present something new, it doesn't get credit until years after.( when someone else does it) You have to realize that Star 93 was presenting something new to DCI audiences and some judges. They took what Academie Musicale and L'Insolite did with body movement and visual expression( in class A now open class) and put it on the big stage in world class!

Star 93 was unique, they were Avant Guard. They got boo'd, They were chastised, Now champions are doing what they did. Like the 2006 Cadets or 2004 Crown.People crapped over their shows but, now Corps are singing, Talking, carrying benches ( even jumping off of them) Props and Characters of all shapes and sizes. And, its excepted and winning now!

Cadets 93 were great! Star 93 was ahead of the curve!

Edited February 6, 2015 by boxingfred

[GUARDLING]

Interesting discussion about props. In standard showbiz parlance all guard equipment would be considered props. And as the activity continues to approach the rest of the performing arts world, maybe they should be called props. But in this activity the standard "guard equipment props" are clearly different from what might be called staging props. But the gray area in between is continuous so it's hard (and maybe pointless) to draw a line between them.

First there's the question of alternates that clearly mimic traditional guard equipment, such as the Cadets' alternates and various poles like Star's and others.

Going further, there is more clearly non-standard guard equipment that are carried per guard member but that can't easily be used in a traditional flag/sabre/rifle way, such as Star's triangles and such things as umbrellas and propellers (and half-taxicabs).

And then there are staging props like Bluecoats' wedges, various doors, huts, guillotines, backdrops, etc.

So while the difference between a sabre and Baba Yaga's Hut is obvious, there is no clear line dividing them. What that proves, I'm not sure...

I'll say it again.even as far as a definition on what is or isnt a prop.or what a guard uses for effect , are we looking through 1993 eyes? or looking at 1993 through 2015 eyes. VERY DIFFERENT.

Edited February 6, 2015 by GUARDLING

[boxingfred]

I can't take the Pepsi challenge with Madison 88 and Star 93.

How about: SCV 2004 v SCV 2014- Scheherazade

Cadets 1984 v 1994 v 2009- West Side Story

[tesmusic]

I can't take the Pepsi challenge with Madison 88 and Star 93.

How about: SCV 2004 v SCV 2014- Scheherazade

Cadets 1984 v 1994 v 2009- West Side Story

Now those are logical comparisons!

[jthomas666]

I'll PM you.

I wouldn't mind hearing about this as well, please.