DESIGNER'S TOOLBOX - SETUPS

[Channel3]

As someone who regularly analyzes drum corp shows for my job, and who tries to express my thoughts in the simplest way possible...sometimes a show is just a show and sometimes what's going on down on the field is just fun and meant to be enjoyed.

We can analyze an ice cube until it melts, but we'd still be just talking about water in one form or another.

And why hasn't a corps presented a show yet titled, "Melt"?

The score sheet criterion "Depth of Concept" is the catalyst for DCI's transformation from its 30 year larval stage into a legitimate performance art. It should be a journalist's dream.

[Tobias]

Abstraction should be used as a potent spice. Cleary this over-regimented medium is deliciously wrong for dada. That made the show look like one of those massively over-mechanized art installations at airports. A fluid bird made of rust belt parts. Computer generated poetry. It was one more nail in the coffin of military bearing in this art form, soon to be replaced with a sleeker non-military unison.

Rewrite of Spring was too abstract for this medium, with no tie to the performers themselves. Why were these performers doing this ballet? Voltaire at least had avante guard artists in common at its thematic core.

Agreed. Some of the top shows are over intellectualized for football fields. Concepts should be tangible to the medium with nuances to keep multiple views interesting. They should have a beginning, development of the concept and a resolution of the concept. Layering nuances for depth, interest, twists and turns perhaps, but resolution needs to happen.

Tilt as simple as it was had the sound bend at the end as a musical tilted climax.

Inferno as much as it looked like a bad HS caliber show most of season to me, wound up getting members into character and by season's end had a stunning albeit predictable resolution and the show erupted.

Cadets POT 2015 never resolved into anything because what can it resolve into? If they developed the concept of superhuman abilities reaching the max (10 ing it out).. Then maybe but there was never a beginning, development and resolution. (Just ####### great drumcorps). Lessons learned I'm sure.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Tobias

[Cappybara]

This is an example of the black and white binary thinking that prevails on here. Look at the language. "Old Timer. Newbie." "Scenario A or Scenario B." It's fun to see it on this message board-- it's mostly because musicians are more left brained and numeric than they let on. Notice how this post separates audiences into two camps: shows that completely stand alone and shows that don't at all. "Either a show will stand on its own with no background information or not." Black. White. For here. To go. Hot. Cold. Day. Night. All. Nothing. Win. Lose.

The best shows work on both levels- - instantly accessible, but deeper upon further viewing and research. A mixture of the two is best, and that's the designer's challenge.

Completely agree with you

[Stu]

This is an example of the black and white binary thinking that prevails on here. Look at the language. "Old Timer. Newbie." "Scenario A or Scenario B." It's fun to see it on this message board-- it's mostly because musicians are more left brained and numeric than they let on. Notice how this post separates audiences into two camps: shows that completely stand alone and shows that don't at all. "Either a show will stand on its own with no background information or not." Black. White. For here. To go. Hot. Cold. Day. Night. All. Nothing. Win. Lose.

The best shows work on both levels- - instantly accessible, but deeper upon further viewing and research. A mixture of the two is best, and that's the designer's challenge.

You did not even notice what I posted about The Cadets show Angles and Demons being brilliant on multiple levels, but just fixated on misrepresenting my post about what I believe a typical non-artistic person sitting in the stands would likely enjoy more (an easy to get show or a deep thought with Jack Handy show). And by pointing out my vernacular in a way that is rather condescending says a lot about you.. Combine that with your postings of academic type lists called Designer Toolboxes indicates that you believe that you, and only those who agree with you, are correct and others like me who hold different views than you are therefore incorrect. Whereas I believe that both of us are engaging in a discussion of 'opinion', and thus I believe that both of our opinions hold equal validity. By the way, all evaluation of art is nothing more than opinion. Two plus Two in Base Ten will always equal Four; that is a Fact. However, you stating that the best shows (fill in the blanks) along with listing items in your toolboxes and belittling my views is, um, oh yeah, merely opinion; and your opinions are neither less valid nor more valid than the opinions of all who post on this site.

[Stu]

The score sheet criterion "Depth of Concept" is the catalyst for DCI's transformation from its 30 year larval stage into a legitimate performance art. It should be a journalist's dream.

The next time you attend the premier of a new work written by a renowned composer entitled 'Symphony Number _' which is being performed by a major orchestra, please make it a point to go to the green room and state the following to the composer, "You need more Depth of Concept as a catalyst in order to transform out of the larval stage into producing a piece of legitimate performance art". I wonder what the response will be from the composer?

[DrumManTx]

Nvm. Not worth my time.

Edited May 26, 2016 by DrumManTx

[mingusmonk]

Nvm. Not worth my time.

I did the same thing. But caught it before I clicked post.

[N.E. Brigand]

BTW, I think DCI can do a better job of providing info on #7 [semifinals Show Coordinator Spiel]. I love to hear the designer's and arranger's perspective. Often times, it's easy to miss things the corps is attempting to convey. Getting the insider perspective adds a deeper layer of understanding and enjoyment to the show.

Hear, hear. I'm not sure what the process is now, but DCI ought to let the designers know in advance what they're going to be asked about, so that they can prep the most informative answer possible. (And not ask off-the-cuff questions like "What does BAC stand for?" that have to be answered in a way that leaves half the audience confused about why the interviewers are laughing.)

It perhaps should be noted that Channel3 slipped up a little here: it's Quarterfinals not Semifinals.

[Michael Boo]

The score sheet criterion "Depth of Concept" is the catalyst for DCI's transformation from its 30 year larval stage into a legitimate performance art. It should be a journalist's dream.

The line between dreams and nightmares is astoundingly thin.

[Channel3]

The next time you attend the premier of a new work written by a renowned composer entitled 'Symphony Number _' which is being performed by a major orchestra, please make it a point to go to the green room and state the following to the composer, "You need more Depth of Concept as a catalyst in order to transform out of the larval stage into producing a piece of legitimate performance art". I wonder what the response will be from the composer?

I'd just simply read his program notes to get an idea why the symphony was performing the piece and any of the composer's points of view on the piece itself. That's how symphonies convey their thematic argument for performing a piece-- through the printed program. Have you ever read one? It's all typewritten beforehand and discussed outside the concert venue. There's nothing visually to interpret at a concert, so you probably wouldn't say "depth of concept".

But drum corps is not simply a two dimensional concert, right? It's a three dimensional performance art with visuals. And when you add visuals, you add interpretive symbolism, layers of meaning and even full blown story. It's not a two dimensional medium like a symphony. When you add visuals to any audio medium, like music videos, you enter the realm of story, with all the obligations that come with storytelling, and you add all the complexities of why you're visually interpreting the piece the way you are and what it means. I feel like i'm explaining the difference between songs and music videos in the 1980's.

Personally I think the reason you're so hostile in your responses regarding this is because you haven't grasped the very most basic symbolism. Things don't represent other things in your view of the world. You have no basis for interpretation. Start here. Here's a basic primer. Things represent other things. Music contains patterns that mean other things. Sometimes music isn't representational, but for the most part when it's paired with visuals like in drum corps, it means more than meets the eye. Here's a quiz:

What does the color red mean? What does it represent? In biology? In religion? In politics?

What does angular motion mean? What does it represent? In dance? In science?

What does flowing motion mean? What does it represent? In sex? In bodies of water?

What does the ground represent in literature and the arts?

Answer these honestly. This is a good test. See if you can do it. One of my friends is an accountant and can't do it.