What is Innovative about Babylon?

[Cappybara]

13 minutes ago, Tommeee said:

Yes, it sounds like many people aren't answering your question.

There are things about the SCV show that remind me of recent Bluecoats, and also remind me of mid-90's Madison Scouts.  So, not necessarily "innovative" in my opinion.  Maybe the props are innovative, in the number of different ways they are used.  But the drill is actually taking a big step back, again in my opinion.  I liked Pete Weber's drill way better.  

Innovative or not, I think it is an awesome spectacle to see/hear, especially live.  I won't get to see it live again, but I sure am anxious to see it in the theater on Thursday!

These pretty much match my thoughts as well. And you're right, not too many actual answers

[HockeyDad]

How you know your show's doing really well:  the poo pooers come out to proclaim they don't see what the big deal is. 

[Box5Opinion]

in·no·va·tion

ˌinəˈvāSH(ə)n/

noun

 

1. the action or process of innovating.

   synonyms:

   change, alteration, revolution, upheaval, transformation, metamorphosis, breakthrough;More

   • a new method, idea, product, etc.

     plural noun: innovations

     "technological innovations designed to save energy"

      

     I hope this helps! 

[Mello Dude]

My sig covers this.

[year1buick]

8 minutes ago, Box5Opinion said:

in·no·va·tion

ˌinəˈvāSH(ə)n/

noun

 

1. the action or process of innovating.

   synonyms:

   change, alteration, revolution, upheaval, transformation, metamorphosis, breakthrough;More

   • a new method, idea, product, etc.

     plural noun: innovations

     "technological innovations designed to save energy"

      

     I hope this helps! 

Not really. The question wasn’t “How do you define innovation?” He was asking how, specifically, SCV’s show fits that definition more so than others. (It also wasn’t, “What about SCV’s show is really good?” Which is what some others seem to be trying to answer.) I was curious as well. And, to be clear, I think their show is amazing and deserves to be placing where it is as well. But I thought the innovation question was a good one. 

[quietcity]

Steve Jobs said: Creativity is just connecting things. 

Picasso did not invent red. Stravinsky did not invent dissonance. Giacometti did not invent sculpture. Like any artist, they all took existing concepts and materials and put them together in innovative ways that play on our senses. The gestalt of this re-assembling process, and not the viewing of individual pieces, is what we experience as art. This is the "it" that other folks here have referred to. 

Drum corps is a highly constrained art form, given the physical limitations, the high levels of skill required by the (young) participants, the logistics, the difficulty and cost of building a design team, and the need to entertain while also competing. While there are a lot of great drum corps shows, few truly transcend these limitations to create genuine art. Fellini-esque did. Downside Up did. And now Babylon does. Session 44 comes pretty close too.  On the other hand, BD this year seems more like a collection of great parts that do not cohere into something larger. 

Edited August 8, 2018 by quietcity

[DCIDADDIO]

13 minutes ago, quietcity said:

Steve Jobs said: Creativity is just connecting things. 

Picasso did not invent red. Stravinsky did not invent dissonance. Giacometti did not invent sculpture. Like any artist, they all took existing concepts and materials and put them together in innovative ways that play on our senses. The gestalt of this re-assembling process is what we experience as art, and not the viewing of individual pieces. And the gestalt is a mental processes. This is the "it" that other folks here have referred to. 

Drum corps is a highly constrained art form, given the physical limitations, the high levels of skill required by the (young) participants, the logistics, the difficulty and cost of building a design team, and the need to entertain while also competing. There are a lot of great drum corps shows, but few truly transcend these limitations to create genuine art. Fellini-esque did. Downside Up did. And now Babylon does. Session 44 comes pretty close too.  On the other hand, BD this year seems more like a collection of great parts that do not cohere into something larger. 

I think this is a pretty comprehensive response to Cappy’s interrogative. 

[Box5Opinion]

56 minutes ago, year1buick said:

Not really. The question wasn’t “How do you define innovation?” He was asking how, specifically, SCV’s show fits that definition more so than others. (It also wasn’t, “What about SCV’s show is really good?” Which is what some others seem to be trying to answer.) I was curious as well. And, to be clear, I think their show is amazing and deserves to be placing where it is as well. But I thought the innovation question was a good one. 

Shouldn't one know what they are looking for first?

[Box5Opinion]

Santa Clara Vanguard show is different, they changed from last year, they are altering the physical landscape of the field (staging - close proximity drill and being effective at it and use of platforms (moving for drill and staging)), it abstract in concept yet there is structure, costumes and use of color, the music is cohesive with drill and what they are trying to portray and overall they are making a breakthrough (with judges and audiences alike) and  they have developed a new method to show design that is engaging and entertaining. 

[skevinp]

1 hour ago, year1buick said:

Not really. The question wasn’t “How do you define innovation?” He was asking how, specifically, SCV’s show fits that definition more so than others. (It also wasn’t, “What about SCV’s show is really good?” Which is what some others seem to be trying to answer.) I was curious as well. And, to be clear, I think their show is amazing and deserves to be placing where it is as well. But I thought the innovation question was a good one. 

Well you can't really answer a question about innovation without knowing what innovation is, and it a term that is sometimes used in ambiguous ways, so I don't see the harm in his sharing a definition.