BoyWonder1911 Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 I thought the Blue Knights did a good job...their show itself was a bit abstract and vague, and I don't think I really "got" it, but they did do a heck of a job performing it and that's why they got 6th. I'm much more inclined to believe that show theme has much less an effect on score than performance. Cadets did a hell of a job all season, and sure, it was probably the disconnect between the source material and theme that cause them to not medal, but they still scored 95.9 points. That's a lot of points, and you don't get those kinds of scores from not being a #### good performing corps. Am I posting this on the wrong topic? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perc2100 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 I assume someone mentioned Bluecoats 2014 as a brilliant example of KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid). Their show meaning was "stand at/hold instruments & props at an angle." This simple theme plus INCREDIBLE performance from the members propelled the corps to their highest placement ever and is proof that maximizing one's show concept + maximizing performance captions = success: not necessarily some crazy deep show meaning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwillis35 Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 First let me defend these corps and their design teams. What they do isn't easy. The creative platform we know as drum & bugle corps is a combination of music, movement, color, dance, play acting, and more. Design teams are always trying to generate ideas, new ideas, often something refreshing or innovative. Things often look good on paper, but putting ideas on the field is truly demanding. I applaud those efforts, even when the show doesn't sparkle, perhaps loses it's connection from paper to performance and its' communication with the audience. The Blue Devils, masters of the judging sheets, haven't always connected with the crowd, and have won a few titles with shows that left many scratching their head. Now I loved this past summer's show, and I also loved 2014. 2012 and 2013 are forgettable for me. So if the correlation we're trying to draw is that more meaning = winning...well, I'm not so sure. Go back and watch drum corps from the late 70s and early 80s. Many shows didn't have a theme. The corps would play three or four fun charts to a fantastic visual program and people would LOVE it. Corps would stop and play concert numbers (standing still) and people would love it. Yes, shows are judged differently today, and the styles have changed; but entertainment is still the key, whether the theme be light and funny, dark, a deep storyline, a simple idea, or whatever. If you have a great story, like Phantom's 2008 production of Spartacus, then fantastic! If you can simply play four tunes and tie them into a show with fantastic visuals, much like The Cadets "Juxtaposition" show from 2001, then great. In 2003 the Cadets played throwback songs from bygone years -- Fanfare and Allegro [sCV], Malagena [Madison], and Rocky Point Holiday [Garfield]. The show had no theme that I could see other than a corps playing music from past years, two of which were made famous by other corps. They took 3rd place. Pretty good! The main thing is this: you have to make it work. In regard to Cadets 2015, they made the show work and placed top 4. Now, was it as effective as they would have liked? Probably not. The Blue Devils themselves had to tweak their 2015 show (Ink) a lot all the way up to Finals to make it work. Crown had to redo their ending and other sections to make it work, and it mostly did. Many still question the Dies Irae section and whether those changes were good or not. The Bluecoats in 2014 and 2015 came out with shows that I thought were HOME RUNS from the onset of the season. Tilt was just brilliant with almost no design flaws if you ask me. Kinetic Noise was the most modern show I've seen and I even liked the first ending better than the final ending. Tilt was a simple idea about movement that was weaved into powerful music and color. Kinetic Noise was more conceptual, with minimalist music driving visual ideas about sound, sound shaping, clusters, echoes, and using movement to shape those tonal ideas. Judges are NOT looking for themes, or deep meaning, or certain types of shows. That would be unfair. Judges only care that whatever you do, you do it well and sell it. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2muchcoffeeman Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 (edited) I still believe BK called their 2015 show "Because," uh, because they couldn't think of a theme to wrap around their program, and because "Here's a show with terrific music and mesmerizing drill, please enjoy it" was too long for Brandt Crocker to announce. While the show didn't have a theme, it did have cohesion. You don't always need the former to score well, but you do need the latter. BK showed this year that you don't need to give a cohesive program a name -- or at least a name that means anything. Edited October 30, 2015 by 2muchcoffeeman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sagemode67 Posted November 3, 2015 Share Posted November 3, 2015 Personally I like it when a show has a story to tell, but not like how cadets did it in promise with wayyyy to much narration. I'd like to see a show like 95 Bluecoats or Cadets happen again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel3 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Angry? Stop playing junior shrink. You are not good at it. Depth of concept is on the sheet. The judge may disregard original meaning of piece if the corps presents another concept with it. Having been part of a committee which formed the sheets, I know that literalism is not one of the tools used by the DCI judging community who well appreciates nuances. Referring to a composition's original context, even in a subtle or tangential or abstract way, adds depth and meaning. But completely ignoring or negating the composition's original context makes you appear ignorant about the piece. Simple. A good judge automaticaly considers the composition's original context, whether or not the designers choose to honor it in their current interp. The original concept of a composition is information that can't be erased. Ignoring the original context is like trying to un-ring a bell. The original context sheds light on the current design, regardless of current interpretation. It's inescapable. The history of a composition comes with it, regardless of current interp. It's harder to build depth of concept in a production if the original context of fhe music composition is completely negated. A show design that refers to the original artistic intent in some subtle way is likely to be more authentic and have more gravitas, and more depth, more thematic allignment, regardless if the interpretation is literal. Deeper if the original composers are consulted. Deeper if people from the era or story or original social context are consulted and included as part of the production. Deeper if the show theme impacts the performer's lives in current, real-world activities and ways of living. These are basic production concepts, and foundational principles of aesthetics. Let me know if you're having trouble grasping this and I can recommend some books for you on the subject. Maybe it will help if they ask you to "form the sheets" again. Edited November 19, 2015 by Channel3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel3 Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Judges are NOT looking for themes, or deep meaning, or certain types of shows. That would be unfair. Judges only care that whatever you do, you do it well and sell it. Um, yes they do judge on meaning. It's on the judges' score sheets under "depth of concept." Exploring echoes and wave patterns is simply not as deep or resonant a concept as "Children can teach us to listen again if we return to our storybooks." There's just no comparison. Get what I mean, jelly bean? There's no humanity in wave theory as BC presented it. There's no emotional resonance. There's no relatability to the purpose and meaning of our lives. A show doesn't need characters or narration or recordings, it needs humanity to win. It needs a relatable pattern with emotional resonance in order to win the depth of concept category. Edited November 4, 2015 by Channel3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobias Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 (edited) Referring to a composition's original context, even in a subtle or tangential or abstract way, adds depth and meaning. Ignoring or negating the composition's original context takes it away. Simple. A good judge automaticaly considers the composition's original context, whether or not the designers choose to honor it in their current interp. The original concept of a composition is information that can't be erased. Ignoring the original context is like trying to un-ring a bell. The original context sheds light on the current design, regardless of current interpretation. It's inescapable. The history of a composition comes with it, regardless of current interp. It's harder to build depth of concept in a production if the original context of fhe music composition is completely negated. A show design that refers to the original artistic intent in some subtle way is likely to be more authentic and have more gravitas, and more depth, more thematic allignment, regardless if the interpretation is literal. Deeper if the original composers are consulted. Deeper if people from the era or story or original social context are consulted and included as part of the production. Deeper if the show theme impacts the performer's lives in current, real-world activities and ways of living. These are basic production concepts, and foundational principles of aesthetics. Let me know if you're having trouble grasping this and I can recommend some books for you on the subject. Maybe it will help if they ask you to "form the sheets" again. I tend to agree with you where I have disagreed in the past. Cadets 2015 were a prime example. From a pure "drum corps" perspective they were astounding. Marched, moved and played gloriously. Demand higher than anyone else no question BUT ended in a distant 4 th place. What you said is why that happened. They lost it in GE because they chose to use a simple "concept" which eventually could not go any deeper than what it did. You could only form so many Xs on the field. Hopefully we'll see that type of talent out of Allentown next season with a more artistic vehicle. Edited November 4, 2015 by Tobias Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shempy Posted November 5, 2015 Share Posted November 5, 2015 Referring to a composition's original context, even in a subtle or tangential or abstract way, adds depth and meaning. Ignoring or negating the composition's original context takes it away. Simple. So when the Cavaliers played "Church: Renewing Vows" by Wynton Marsalis in 2006, was their show made lesser because they took a piece whose original context was a love story and contextualized it as the workings of a machine? Was Tilt a less effective show because The Hymn of Axciom was stripped of its original meaning of computer surveillance and databases? As shows become more design-centric, the original context of pieces becomes less important, and what the corps do with those pieces becomes more important. All your artistic sensibilities and semantic posturing mean very little. I do agree that Power of Ten left me wanting some depth, but to demand that it reflect Shostakovich's original image of Stalin's regime is absolute bunk. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channel3 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I feel like I'm listening to Vince McMahon in that episode of South Park where he's judging wrestlers on their ability to convey storytelling and their acting chops rather than their wrestling. It's not theater, it's drum corps. If a corps wants to do a play, great, that's their choice and they might be judged on that aspect, but theater isn't our medium, marching and playing loud music is. Theme helps me, as an audience member, stay connected. However a corps decides to do that, good for them as long as it works. I'm just as happy seeing Faust help Gretchen go to Heaven as I am seeing a bunch of extremely dizzy Cavaliers spin around during Spin Cycle or a bunch of Bluecoats Tilt everything to the side. Yes, you should tie your show together so me, audience member, doesn't think "wo, where the heck did this come from." But I came here to hear loud music and watch fast drill, so if you want to tie everything together with a reenactment of Game of Thrones or just sample a few lyrics from a Beatles song, I'm fine with it! By the way, if any of the abstract shows I mentioned had a story that I somehow missed, as someone who has watched at least one drum corps show every day for more than a decade, maybe designers have over thought things? Until this thread, I didn't even know there was a clown in BD 14. Drum corps has become theatre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.