How important do you think the name of a show is and why?

[Corps_Efan]

So many corps with Blue in the name...

[drumcorpsfever]

7 minutes ago, BRASSO said:

 If one wanted to be cynical, they could say that the name of the Corps is far more important in the scores than the name they give to their show in any season. But I try, as hard as it is sometimes, not to become cynical.

 I don't even think the Judges care if the theme is coherent or not. I really don't. I don't think a coherent theme/ message is important to placements and scores in the least. I see no evidence with this... or conversely, that an incoherent, dysfunctional, confused theme and/ or messaging is any impediment at all to a Corps scores/ placements.

Agreed.  All the withholding show titles until the very end of spring training is nothing more than hype.   It means nothing to judges.   It generates fan interest and the corps have fun with it ... and then there's the Bluecoats...

[drumcorpsfever]

Just now, Corps_Efan said:

So many corps with Blue in the name...

It's not the name on the back of the jacket, it's the corps on the field that counts!

[drumcorpsfever]

As a Bluecoats fan, my favorite title of all time is TILT.  The title said exactly what the show was about.  Ironic in that show was really devoid of a thematic storyline, and yet TILT was exactly what they did.   From tilting the field, to horn placement, to the ramps, sashes, and sounds - this was an incredible title and show "concept."   

Edited August 6, 2017 by drumcorpsfever

[mboogey73]

I honestly couldn't care less what the show title is or even what the concept is. At the end of the day I either like what I see and what I hear, or I don't.  It's that simple. 

[Schnitzel]

I would certainly think the Effect judges could be influenced by show titles.  In fact, titles set expectations and context for what subsequently happens in the show.  Some are literal narratives, some representational, many abstract, and some cases no discernable relationship exists.  A program can definitely be interesting/effective without a stated organizational premise, but typically, a good title gives the spectator some level of insight (real or imagined) into the logic of "why" a corps does what it does.  There have been design teams that follow some concrete idea/framework in all aspects of design, and conversely, there have been titles chosen (or changed) after-the-fact.  Likely everything in-between, as well.  Being that one of the bigger issues in the medium is lack of clarity/motivation/unity of design elements, anything that brings associative meaning to a production is helpful to both the enjoyment and assessment of a performance.

[Tim K]

The importance of the name depends on the corps and the show and it can vary from year to year. Blue Knights at least for me, has very sublime, often crazy show names and themes, yet I'm often intrigued by what they do. Titles often have more than one meaning. "Accused" or "Guilty" might be a better titles and more accurate (though less intriguing) for BAC's show, but with Chris Isaak's song playing such an important role, the history, along with the way "wicked" is used in the Boston area (we think the show is wicked pissah which means great, in other parts of the country wicked pissah would refer to an evil dog who pees on your rose bushes), "Wicked Games" fits perfectly. 

However, when I think of championship shows I've loved: Cadets and "Angels and Demons" in 2011, Crown and "E=MC2 in 2013, or BD and "Felliniesque" in 2014, no title or story line was needed. Great music and design said it all.

[BRASSO]

 For some perspective, for many years, Corps had no themes/ messagings at all... the absence of which meant not a thing to people's levels pf enjoyment of the respective Corps performances. That said, I'm of the opinion that if a Corps does indeed choose to have a concept theme or a storyline theme, then it dam well should make some sense to most people in attendance. Dance/ Music/  Singing, etc in the Cinema, Theatre, Stage, the Performing Arts needs to communicate in the non verbal manner what the spoken word could not. Otherwise, whats the point ? Why then have themes at all  ? Then audiences are no longer presented with the frustrating dilemna to have to try and figure out the convoluted, pseudo intellectual, psychobabble of a theme that you have chosen for yourself with your performance.

Edited August 6, 2017 by BRASSO

[N.E. Brigand]

1 hour ago, Corps_Efan said:

But don't judges take crowd reaction into account?

Audience engagement is on the effect sheets, but in practical terms, I believe the judge is meant to think, "If I were in the audience, would I be engaged?"

I took a group of family and friends to Massillon three years ago. Seven of them liked "Tilt" best. Five of them liked "Out of this World" best. Three of them liked "Scheherazade: Words 2 Live By" best. So a plurality for Bluecoats, but a majority liked another show more. At any given show, almost every performance will be someone's favorite. So to the degree that a judge considers engagement, she has a fairly free hand to imagine herself most engaged by any corps.

[mjoakes]

For the most part, I assume the show titles and themes are a combination of marketing posturing by the corps (regardless of whether this is effective) and devices to appeal to or engage the members. Neither of those things are bad from my perspective.

There are plenty of themes and titles that I don't like, a subset of which I think one can sensibly argue don't make much sense. But I think the same thing about some individuals' preferences for beer.

I like or dislike a show based on what I see and hear, and the theme and titles don't matter. This year, I've no idea what theme Vanguard is trying to communicate, but I love their show. No idea, either, what Crown is doing, and the show is a disappointment for me (though I recognize they perform it very well).