Who would travel to see a "ONCE A YEAR" Old Fashioned Drum Cor

[GUARDLING]

I don't think so.

I'm simply suggesting that actually addressing the question... along with all the rest... would at least create a discussion focused on the question.

Admittedly, there is a fine line between the question asked (i.e. Attending a drum corps throwback event once a year), and the topic for which the question falls under (i.e. Retreats). There's a DCP cultural tendency for folks to drift right into the topic and skip over the question itself. My observation of the question does not include all the facts or reasons people are saying no. In fact, I would also argue that their "no" is implied rather than actually stated.

IOW, can we at least answer the question before coming up with all of the "facts or reasons?" I interpret all of the "facts and reasons" offered to be in response to a different question than what was asked. (e.g. Should we bring back retreats? vs. "Whether one would travel to see this style of show once a year?")

wait. Im not getting you again..If a person says NO thats nay saying ..although answering the question..If a person gives a logical reason why something may not be able to be done today , that's not working for you either and again called a naysayer. With all due respect , and I do mean that it does seems like if it's not the answer you like then it's not acceptable..Sorry just observance. IMO

Hoping Im wrong because I do respect the passion.

Edited March 7, 2015 by GUARDLING

[nemesiscorps]

wait. Im not getting you again..If a person says NO thats nay saying ..although answering the question..If a person gives a logical reason why something may not be able to be done today , that's not working for you either and again called a naysayer. With all due respect , and I do mean that it does seems like if it's not the answer you like then it's not acceptable..Sorry just observance. IMO

Hoping Im wrong because I do respect the passion.

Okay, I'll try to be more clear.

I began my initial post in the following manner: "In answer to the question, "yes"...

and then I went on to express my thoughts surrounding retreats, etc. I could likewise have stated "no", and gone on to express my thoughts.

If someone answers "no", that is not what my concern is regarding "naysaying." The question is presented to elicit a "yes", "no", or "maybe" response. After re-reading the OP's question, I note that he/she took the extra effort of using quotations and caps do clarify the question: ..."ONCE A YEAR"...

I'm not suggesting that people can't answer how they choose, I'm pointing out that (IMO) the shark tank culture of DCP is to just start biting in, seemingly blind to what was actually stated.

My reference to naysaying is for those responses that don't bother answering the question, but instead, dive right in on a discussion of the value, practicality, or problems associated with retreats. Whereas a discussion of retreats shouldn't be considered off topic, a failure to actually address/discuss/answer the OP's question within the discussion is problematic IMO. To me it means we'll never find anything that we can agree upon (which would be nice on occasion), because no one is actually listening to each other.

Surely, we can all come up with ample reasons why we would or would not travel to one show per year that was formatted to conclude in an "old school retreat." Where is the discussion on why people would or would not travel to one show per year that was formatted to conclude in an "old school retreat?"

We haven't gotten to that discussion because the "topic" has been shifted toward answering a different question, "Should we bring back old school retreats, and if not, why not?" Many (most) of the responses answer that question with reasonable responses... but that question wasn't asked.

Clearly, my poor choice of words, "naysaying," has led to this current off topic discussion. I should have stated:

DCP pessimism has once again steered us away from the actual question asked, and launched us into a different (though related) discussion.

Edited March 8, 2015 by nemesiscorps

[GUARDLING]

Okay, I'll try to be more clear.

I began my initial post in the following manner: "In answer to the question, "yes"...

and then I went on to express my thoughts surrounding retreats, etc. I could likewise have stated "no", and gone on to express my thoughts.

If someone answers "no", that is not what my concern is regarding "naysaying." The question is presented to elicit a "yes", "no", or "maybe" response. After re-reading the OP's question, I note that he/she took the extra effort of using quotations and caps do clarify the question: ..."ONCE A YEAR"...

I'm not suggesting that people can't answer how they choose, I'm pointing out that (IMO) the shark tank culture of DCP is to just start biting in, seemingly blind to what was actually stated.

My reference to naysaying is for those responses that don't bother answering the question, but instead, dive right in on a discussion of the value, practicality, or problems associated with retreats. Whereas a discussion of retreats shouldn't be considered off topic, a failure to actually address/discuss/answer the OP's question within the discussion is problematic IMO. To me it means we'll never find anything that we can agree upon (which would be nice on occasion), because no one is actually listening to each other.

Surely, we can all come up with ample reasons why we would or would not travel to one show per year that was formatted to conclude in an "old school retreat? Where is the discussion on why people would or would not travel to one show per year that was formatted to conclude in an "old school retreat?"

We haven't gotten to that discussion because the "topic" has been shifted toward answering a different question, "Should we bring back old school retreats, and if not, why not?" Many (most) of the responses answer that question with reasonable responses... but that question wasn't asked.

Clearly, my poor voice of words, "naysaying," has led to this current off topic discussion. I should have stated:

DCP pessimism has once again steered us away from the actual question asked, and launched us into a different (though related) discussion.

No i understand and agree with your view sometimes on how it is here BUT I do think what you highlighted, ( some of which I stated as reasons ) is answering the question as well as giving a reason instead of a blunt NO I HATE RETREATS OR WHATEVER with no explanation ( although as I do remember many did hate them..lol ok as well as some loved them )

[nemesiscorps]

No i understand and agree with your view sometimes on how it is here BUT I do think what you highlighted, ( some of which I stated as reasons ) is answering the question as well as giving a reason instead of a blunt NO I HATE RETREATS OR WHATEVER with no explanation ( although as I do remember many did hate them..lol ok as well as some loved them )

I get your point, that the answer to the question was implied within the various responses.

As I think about it, what touched a nerve with me is my perception that seemingly whenever any thought or suggestion related to "tradition," past practice, or "legacy" aspects of the activity emerge, "it's on!"

I guess my "naysaying" reference was in regard to that aspect of discussions surrounding issues that some perceive as being "non-progressive."

(RANT ALERT)

We all seem to acknowledge that this is a niche activity, but we don't seem to ask ourselves why is it that what we know to be such a great activity does not gain more mainstream traction or notoriety, even within most mainstream music, dance, and theatrical circles? You say "drum corps" and people still go, "What's that?"

It clearly doesn't matter if drum corps emerges and has a wide, lasting impact on Broadway (Blast!), movies (Monsters Inc. and others), contemporary stage performance (STOMP!, Blue Man Group, Canadian Brass Theater, etc.), the Olympics (1980, 1996), the entire marching band activity (from "corps style" shows to current BOA innovations), WGI Percussion/WGI Winds; appearances with major orchestras, numerous mainstream celebrity connections, etc.

No one but us knows what drum corps is, and we continually argue internally over everything, and continue to struggle among ourselves in trying to describe or define who we are. We can't seem to come together on anything. Internally, we've spent so much of the last two decades arguing and trying to progress ourselves that we've all but brought ourselves to the point of obscurity. Meanwhile, "Honey Boo Boo" and too many other useless niche activities continue to gain momentum, despite all of the reasons we like to cite for drum corps' lack of relevance (the economy, the internet, kids have a lot of choices today, blah, blah, blah). All of the other activities seem to be moving right along, youth sports; youth theater; youth orchestras/jazz programs; dance troupes; music education ensembles (middle school, high school, college); etc. Most people at least know what those activities are.

Drum corps is one of the greatest things ever, but we are severely fractured internally to the point where fans from the past don't recognize it (let alone value it), and fans of today still can't explain it or how it differs from much else that's out there, and we know what happens to a house divided. Some would say it's already fallen.

Even marching bands have the well known distinction of being called "band geeks." We aren't relevant enough to even get labeled. Is there any sense of fraternity left in this activity?

"Can't we all just get along?"

Back on topic...

Where's that old school retreat show? I'm there.

Edited March 8, 2015 by nemesiscorps

[GUARDLING]

I get your point, that the answer to the question was implied within the various responses.

As I think about it, what touched a nerve with me is my perception that seemingly whenever any thought or suggestion related to "tradition," past practice, or "legacy" aspects of the activity emerge, "it's on!"

I guess my "naysaying" reference was in regard to that aspect of discussions surrounding issues that some perceive as being "non-progressive."

(RANT ALERT)

We all seem to acknowledge that this is a niche activity, but we don't seem to ask ourselves why is it that what we know to be such a great activity does not gain more mainstream traction or notoriety, even within most mainstream music, dance, and theatrical circles? You say "drum corps" and people still go, "What's that?"

It clearly doesn't matter if drum corps emerges and has a wide, lasting impact on Broadway (Blast!), movies (Monsters Inc. and others), contemporary stage performance (STOMP!, Blue Man Group, Canadian Brass Theater, etc.), the Olympics (1980, 1996), the entire marching band activity (from "corps style" shows to current BOA innovations), WGI Percussion/WGI Winds; appearances with major orchestras, numerous mainstream celebrity connections, etc.

No one but us knows what drum corps is, and we continually argue internally over everything, and continue to struggle among ourselves in trying to describe or define who we are. We can't seem to come together on anything. Internally, we've spent so much of the last two decades arguing and trying to progress ourselves that we've all but brought ourselves to the point of obscurity. Meanwhile, "Honey Boo Boo" and too many other useless niche activities continue to gain momentum, despite all of the reasons we like to cite for drum corps' lack of relevance (the economy, the internet, kids have a lot of choices today, blah, blah, blah). All of the other activities seem to be moving right along, youth sports; youth theater; youth orchestras/jazz programs; dance troupes; music education ensembles (middle school, high school, college); etc. Most people at least know what those activities are.

Drum corps is one of the greatest things ever, but we are severely fractured internally to the point where fans from the past don't recognize it (let alone value it), and fans of today still can't explain it or how it differs from much else that's out there, and we know what happens to a house divided. Some would say it's already fallen.

Even marching bands have the well known distinction of being called "band geeks." We aren't relevant enough to even get labeled. Is there any sense of fraternity left in this activity?

"Can't we all just get along?"

Back on topic...

Where's that old school retreat show? I'm there.

I totally agree on pretty much everything you are saying about arguing. TOTALLY, we are the only activity that devours it's own, loses respect for a winner virtually the second they are announced and disrespect success of the past. NOW , with that said, as one who was also from the past but still very much involved. I myself have chosen to move forward, respect my past but not let it hold back my future.

I think the most conflict is not coming from those still involved from the past but those who are not other than spectators or casual participants in the activity. im not sure if it's not because there are some differences from what some remember, or a million other reasons one can come up with but conflict can also come from those who don't want to acknowledge the past ever happened and how great it might have been and also how we wouldnt have today without yesterday. Maybe it's all of the above. For me I dont believe everything we do today is good and should be looked at but i feel the same of the past. Hopefully i do not look at today through those rose colored glasses and pray I do not of the past also.

I do think there are more who love confrontation and the internet provides a forum to do so. MANY, i know who do so on line NEVER are as aggressive in person. Easy, over a computer I suppose and much harder face to face for some.

Now that this rant also left topic:

As much at first many years ago hated to just see drum majors on retreat, today I wouldnt want to see those long drawn out retreats. For me , even at championships, it's like, ok lets get on with it. Drive to a show because of the tradition, never.

Edited March 8, 2015 by GUARDLING

[MikeD]

There's nothing wrong with saying "no" if you're asking a question.

But as you stated, "The question was whether one would travel to see this style of show once a year." Here is a summary of some of the Page 1 responses, which actually don't answer the question, but instead, clearly lean pessimistic toward something not even proposed:

"... dwelling in the past"

"Can’t do it due to timing"

"look how many people leave, including older fans before the encore performance"

"... shows aren't just on the weekend like many years ago"

"In today's world one doesn't even have to wait for scores..."

"... the show structure is not very flexible, certainly not to the "extremes" of requiring corps to alter their post-show customs."

"Some corps leave early(ish), some corps give their members' free time post-show, some corps might send their equipment truck(s) ahead of the corps early after the performance, etc."

I consider the above responses as typical DCP naysaying or pessimism toward anything even suggesting tradition, and thus, moving the discussion beyond the question to the point of critical analysis of past vs. present practice. As a result, the actual question doesn't even get off the ground.

In truth, I'd have no problem if the question were actually answered and supported or discussed with additional related comments, as each of the above comments appropriately fit within the context of a discussion, but again, as you've noted, none of those responses answer the question, but instead... as usual... the comments offer critical commentary (imo, darts) to the simple question suggesting traveling to one show per year, formatted to include a "grand finale style" conclusion to the event (e.g. "Shark Tank"). Ironically, even on the t.v. show itself, the lure is to see people get ripped apart, and/or to see them triumph or survive in the tank. As it relates to DCP dialog, there's lots of ripping here, not much triumph... IMO.

If the OP's question would have been, "What do you think about bringing back traditional retreats for shows?", then naturally, we're off and away on pluses and minuses related to that question. But instead, as usual, we're in shark tank mode without even addressing the essence of the question.

In a reply to me, you said:

"If someone fails to see the point, rather than naysaying, why not take on more of a "help me see the point" attitude? "

Most of the quotes you gave above did exactly what you asked..they gave you reasons why they thought the idea would not work.

Timing...shows during the week...fans leave prior to retreat...scores available online...corps leave before the scores to get on to the next destination...those things are not 'nay saying'...they are reasons why the people who stated them believe the idea to be a non-starter. You may not agree with their thoughts, but they did provide you with their own POV.

[nemesiscorps]

In a reply to me, you said:

"If someone fails to see the point, rather than naysaying, why not take on more of a "help me see the point" attitude? "

Most of the quotes you gave above did exactly what you asked..they gave you reasons why they thought the idea would not work.

Timing...shows during the week...fans leave prior to retreat...scores available online...corps leave before the scores to get on to the next destination...those things are not 'nay saying'...they are reasons why the people who stated them believe the idea to be a non-starter. You may not agree with their thoughts, but they did provide you with their own POV.

You're missing the point Mike.

Yes, they gave reasons why the idea wouldn't work... but he didn't ask if anyone thought the idea would work. He asked: "Would you travel to see a "ONCE A YEAR" Old Fashioned Drum Corps Show? That's it.

As I said, engaging in discussion is presumably the whole point behind DCP, so what they offered is relevant and even appropriate to the discussion. However, IMO those responses took things immediately away from his inquiry, skipping right over the question and into pessimistic commentary on retreats. We never even got to the discussion of if people would travel to a single, annual event like that.

One would hope that the intent of the OP would be addressed, at least at the onset of the discussion, but we seem to be so culturally dysfunctional that we either don't see, or refuse to acknowledge what's objectively stated, even with his use quotations and caps; "ONCE A YEAR"...

At least on Shark Tank they listen and then respond to the information presented before they start chomping away.

[GUARDLING]

You're missing the point Mike.

Yes, they gave reasons why the idea wouldn't work... but he didn't ask if anyone thought the idea would work. He asked: "Would you travel to see a "ONCE A YEAR" Old Fashioned Drum Corps Show? That's it.

As I said, engaging in discussion is presumably the whole point behind DCP, so what they offered is relevant and even appropriate to the discussion. However, IMO those responses took things immediately away from his inquiry, skipping right over the question and into pessimistic commentary on retreats. We never even got to the discussion of if people would travel to a single, annual event like that.

One would hope that the intent of the OP would be addressed, at least at the onset of the discussion, but we seem to be so culturally dysfunctional that we either don't see, or refuse to acknowledge what's objectively stated, even with his use quotations and caps; "ONCE A YEAR"...

At least on Shark Tank they listen and then respond to the information presented before they start chomping away.

You are equating the word NO with pessimistic and if it could work or not. I think NO for most it just means maybe they don't care to see it happen period.

Or more to the question, they wouldn't care to travel for this reason. "ONCE A YEAR " or not...just a guess

Edited March 8, 2015 by GUARDLING

[nemesiscorps]

You are equating the word NO with pessimistic to if it could work or not. I think NO for most it just means maybe they don't care to see it happen period.

Or more the the question, they wouldn't care to travel for this reason. "ONCE A YEAR " or not

I don't think I'm equating "no" with pessimistic. I do believe that people are entitled to their opinion, as I certainly have mine.

There's nothing wrong with saying, "No, I don't enjoy retreats, especially retreats that are formatted from decades ago. I'd prefer things as they are now, or some discussion around new ideas." One could also say, "No, I don't like traveling at all. If the show was nearby, sure, but no, I wouldn't travel solely because of an old fashioned theme to the show." Neither of those responses are necessarily pessimistic, but they are on point to the OP's question. And again, it would be fine to go on with, "As it relates to retreats in general...." but that didn't happen.

First, I'm classifying/equating/interpreting some of the responses as pessimistic because of some of the language used in critiquing the concept of retreats (i.e. "dwelling in the past"). Second, I'm classifying/equating/interpreting some of the responses as pessimistic because they didn't even acknowledge the specificity of the question, as I've previously stated.

In the context of DCP dead horse topics, those responses certainly don't sound optimistic to me.

Edited March 8, 2015 by nemesiscorps

[GUARDLING]

I don't think I'm equating "no" with pessimistic. I do believe that people are entitled to their opinion, as I certainly have mine.

There's nothing wrong with saying, "No, I don't enjoy retreats, especially retreats that are formatted from decades ago. I'd prefer things as they are now, or some discussion around new ideas." One could also say, "No, I don't like traveling at all. If the show was nearby, sure, but no, I wouldn't travel solely because of an old fashioned theme to the show." Neither of those responses are necessarily pessimistic.

First, I'm classifying/equating/interpreting some of the responses as pessimistic because of some of the language used in critiquing the concept of retreats (i.e. "dwelling in the past"). Second, I'm classifying/equating/interpreting some of the responses as pessimistic because they didn't even acknowledge the specificity of the question, as I've previously stated.

In the context of DCP dead horse topics, those responses certainly don't sound optimistic to me.

but you see for some dwelling in the past is a reason for them and maybe a good for ( for them ) for every person you may ask who says no there can be yet another reason. I don't think it makes anyone right or wrong just what they like or want ( in their opinions)..but anyway again for me I do remember seeing all the corps on the field as scores are announced and thats cool verses a few majors BUT the whole process as it was ( playing on and off ) etc etc.or again to the question would I travel even once for this or because of this no.