If you have to explain it....

[besson57]

...Then it's probably a drum corps show I want to see.

This silly anti-intellectual trope of "design isn't effective if you have to explain it" is crap. I don't want to watch drum corps shows dumbed down to the least common denominator.

I want to see shows that speaks on different levels. I want to see a show that's entertaining and emotional without knowing anything about it going in. I ALSO want a multi-layered, nuanced, erudite, and meaningful show that's chock-full of subtle cues to a broader theme and deeper connection. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and I'm tired of seeing this silly criticism that learning more about a design means a show sucks.

[Bobby L. Collins]

There's a fine line between learning more about a design and having it shoved down your throat for 12 minutes....to the detriment of the activity.

Edited August 9, 2017 by Bobby L. Collins

[Liahona]

7 minutes ago, besson57 said:

...Then it's probably a drum corps show I want to see.

This silly anti-intellectual trope of "design isn't effective if you have to explain it" is crap. I don't want to watch drum corps shows dumbed down to the least common denominator.

I want to see shows that speaks on different levels. I want to see a show that's entertaining and emotional without knowing anything about it going in. I ALSO want a multi-layered, nuanced, erudite, and meaningful show that's chock-full of subtle cues to a broader theme and deeper connection. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and I'm tired of seeing this silly criticism that learning more about a design means a show sucks.

[luv4corps]

16 minutes ago, besson57 said:

...Then it's probably a drum corps show I want to see.

This silly anti-intellectual trope of "design isn't effective if you have to explain it" is crap. I don't want to watch drum corps shows dumbed down to the least common denominator.

I want to see shows that speaks on different levels. I want to see a show that's entertaining and emotional without knowing anything about it going in. I ALSO want a multi-layered, nuanced, erudite, and meaningful show that's chock-full of subtle cues to a broader theme and deeper connection. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and I'm tired of seeing this silly criticism that learning more about a design means a show sucks.

Me too.

[N.E. Brigand]

7 minutes ago, Bobby L. Collins said:

There's a fine line between learning more about a design and having it shoved down your throat for 12 minutes....to the detriment of the activity.

This. Most audience members are only going to see any given show just once. Even if they like it, they have other things to do in their lives and aren't going to watch it again (even on Youtube) or look up its meaning. For drum corps to thrive, that audience needs to "get it", at least on a superficial level, on the first (and only) viewing and appreciate most of what they get. Now it's true that everyone comes into a show with different backgrounds and experiences. What person A finds baffling may be perfectly clear to person B. For instance, I know very little and care even less about Kanye West, but lots of younger audience members doubtless recognized the various quotes in Guardians' show last night. The trick is to try to be appealing to as many audience members as possible. Know who's out there, and if you think what you're doing may stretch them too far past their comfort zone, find ways to make it more accessible.

[N.E. Brigand]

19 minutes ago, besson57 said:

...Then it's probably a drum corps show I want to see.

This silly anti-intellectual trope of "design isn't effective if you have to explain it" is crap. I don't want to watch drum corps shows dumbed down to the least common denominator.

I want to see shows that speaks on different levels. I want to see a show that's entertaining and emotional without knowing anything about it going in. I ALSO want a multi-layered, nuanced, erudite, and meaningful show that's chock-full of subtle cues to a broader theme and deeper connection. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and I'm tired of seeing this silly criticism that learning more about a design means a show sucks.

Sure. That's why I've quoted Britney Spears at Sundance in response to Stu and Brasso and others from time to time.

On the other hand, lots of would-be artists, including some in drum corps, aren't nearly so intellectual as they think they are.

[ThePlanets]

To highlight the extremes there are the people that say "oh if you don't like ABCs show this year than you must not understand it"... quite condescending...then there are the people that say "it's not a real drum corps show if you have to read the program and do research to understand it"... it's like being in the middle of a heated political debate that I want no part of.

 

What it comes down to for me really is...do I enjoy the show or not.  I love BKs i and to read and learn more about the concept is so cool to me.  The more I learn about it the more I like it.

Learning about Crown's design is helpful but that doesn't mean I have to like it...haha although seeing Crown live made me change my tune. WOW they are good!

Edited August 9, 2017 by ThePlanets

[cube]

I like shows that are so good on a surface level that they encourage you to look further into it, and actually find something there.

[StunnedMonkey]

2 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said:

Sure. That's why I've quoted Britney Spears at Sundance in response to Stu and Brasso and others from time to time.

On the other hand, lots of would-be artists, including some in drum corps, aren't nearly so intellectual as they think they are.

 

Of course, there was a day when Drum and Bugle Corp didn't consider itself to be an intellectual pursuit. Some of those rough looking dudes in the Bridgemen would've shoved that libretto you know where. 

[Bobby L. Collins]

I'm with you on one regard, however.  I too don't like seeing things dumbed down to the lowest denominator.  That's what's happened to my college alma mater's band.  I hate it, and it it makes me angry.

But I think I can speak for just about all the dinosaurs when I say that no one is asking for that in drum corps.  What we're asking for is to lay off the esoteric, high-concept preachiness.  I mean, we get it.  A very small number of individuals who call the shots want drum corps to evolve into a higher art form, which absolutely no one asked for.  Sure, plenty of yes-men are rolling with it....that's what they do.  But consider this.  Isn't it possible that the only thing worse than catering to the lowest denominator is perhaps making the activity inaccessible to even the common denominator?  Sometimes...... just sometimes.......it's okay for a production to not have a deep underlying message that results in a spiritual awakening in the spectator.  Sometimes......it's okay for a corps to just play some banging tunes while they march some banging drill.  That was the draw to drum corps prior to George Hopkins and Michael Cesario rewriting the book; music in motion, not avant-garde performance art.

As far as I know, there is no rule in place (at least not yet) that stipulates a corps' production is REQUIRED to speak to the spectator's abstract feelings and cause him/her to experience a transcendental epiphany.  That kind of stuff may speak to you, but it does not speak to me, nor to anyone I know personally.  And I don't think it's fair to lump us into the "lowest denominator" because we don't support DCI's conscious choice to sabotage itself with its growing inaccessibility to the rest of the world.

I used to work at Disney Concert Hall and The Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles.  Day after day, week after week, I listened to concert patrons and subscribers praise 21st century art music (Phillip Glass, Arvo Part, and basically any American Prize Winners) and gush about how great it is, yet day after day, week after week, those same patrons were no where to be seen when those composers' works were being performed to near-empty audiences.  Meanwhile, just about every one of Dudamel's Mahler cycle concerts was a sellout, as were any other classic work prior to the New Vienna School (which I very much hold in parallel with modern drum corps).  Those people were NOT the lowest denominator.  Those people were the ones keeping the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra in operation.  And they didn't want to listen to cacaphonous 12-tone noise.....they wanted listen to good music.  And that's all I want in my drum corps; good music, good marching, good spinning and tossing.  

Bottom line, if I want to be preached at, I'll go to church.  But I'll be darned if I'm going to PAY to be preached at inside a football stadium, when all I really want is to be entertained. Drum corps throughout the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s entertain me.  A handful of shows from the 21st century entertain me.  But this move towards autotuned spandex and avant-garde inaccessibility......in my eyes, that is the opposite of entertainment.  That is punishment for a crime I did not commit.