2020 Rules Proposals

[Terri Schehr]

.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Terri Schehr

[Glenn426]

1 hour ago, MikeN said:

Actually, I agree with you a bit on the future being indoors, but I think we're talking decades, not years, and it will be a summer circuit - not WGI - so independent groups don't have to compete with scholastic units.

That said, Soundsport isn't quite what you think it is.  Have you actually watched any of them?  It's way more decentralized by design, and the groups that compete at DCI events *do* get televised, same as the DCI groups attending.  I can tell you the name of every one in Texas, if you cared to hear it, but that's not really the point.  Again, decentralization.  You don't have to go to Indy to still have a good experience, and you don't have to do it the "DCI Way" to provide a good season for members.  And the division has done a great job of expanding awareness internationally as well as domestically weeding out orgs that aren't yet ready (or just don't care) to apply for Open Class. 

Mike

I follow #drumcorps on IG and commonly on that feed, groups from Malaysia and Japan post videos of these great indoor groups performing in a space a little bit larger than a standard WGI floor. Normally somewhere between 75 -100 marching members with a front ensemble. One way to bring cost down,

Remove a bus. And arenas in the middle of the summer will be empty. They I would imagine gladly host a show for much less than your standard state of the art football stadium. And the groups are still top notch so you can still sell tickets for the same price. 

If you've ever been to WGI finals in Dayton you know the energy inside of an arena is just as great as a football stadium, just much more intimate. 

I think however brings this idea to market first will be the winner in the drum corps market. 

[Tim K]

2 hours ago, Slingerland said:

Why would a visual designer care one way or another?  Ok, let's stipulate to your example: in that case, Leon would be free to find another corps next time his LOA or contract is up (even though the other corps would ALSO be sans saxophones) and Boston would find someone to replace him. Everyone would be happy!

...except for those who were really looking forward to someone doing "A Kenny G Portrait" in 2021. They're probably not happy.😎

 

A Kenny G Portrait? I’ve been criticized for some of my show ideas, but that one deserves the guillotine! 

Though some of the musical staff may be mourning the woodwind vote results, my thought is visual designers may have breathed a sigh of relief. George Zingali supposedly love the idea of front ensembles because they were s a perfect way to be rid of the “ugly instruments” which for him were marching timpanies and xylophones, bells, etc. As a one time clarinetist, I would never classify woodwinds as ugly, but a friend who used to design shows for smaller local drum corps and high school bands used to claim all brass made design easier. He only does high schools today, but he claimed it was difficult getting the visual look he wanted with so many varying instruments though from what I could see he did a fine job. For me, there is a visual appeal to all brass which is part of the reason why I can do without trombones, concert French horns, and sousaphones in drum corps.

[greg_orangecounty]

3 hours ago, Glenn426 said:

The cutting edge for Designers and the Test Bed for innovation now will be in WGI Winds. 

Fantastic!  Keep'em over there.

[garfield]

3 hours ago, Glenn426 said:

But the idea that the Corps Instructor and Director would not be in line with each other is crazy to me. I understand that there are different aspects that they would have to evaluate but wouldn't the Director share their feelings or leaning with the instructor before the Vote.

I assume the Instructor vote was a secret Ballot, Where the Results where revealed but what each person voted was secret.

You would however think that the Instructors got a chance to tell their corps director how they voted?

If they did speak to each other, at least 4 times this happened on Saturday night;

 

Leon May: Yeah Chris I like what was proposed and I voted in favor of AI.

Chris Holland: Cool, cool, yeah that's what we discussed.

CH: [votes against AI]

LM: So Chris How did you vote?

CH: I voted against AI.

LM:........................................................ 

No, not really.  This is not how it works  -  the voting parties are not sequestered from each other.  There's lots of time when all of the parties are at the coffee tables and break rooms at the same time; there's no effort that I've ever seen to keep them apart. 

Sure, there's contact, and maybe even coordination, between instructors and their directors, and there may also be coordination between the directors and his/her BoD.  But I think it's incorrect to think that this process was/is that kind of process.  You describe it as combative between instructors and directors, designers vs. management.  It's not that way.  Sure, both constituents can agree to promote or oppose an issue, but this process seems more designed to be inclusive and make sure that all education partners are involved in the education and instructions issues.

DCI has worked hard - and it's obvious to me - to end the "Cesar and his Senate"- type of rules proposals and decision-making for the activity.  I see them being very proactive to clarify and operate as the "assembly of associated interests" that DCI's founders envisioned.  To my eye, the entire "instructor's caucus" and both its inclusion and separation from the other interests in the decision room is evidence that unilateral decision-making is gone.

That Kathy Black vetted approval to introduce a rule change "for the entire activity" is a clear demonstration of DCI's attempt to reduce the conflict of interest, perceived or actual, that can come along with rules proposals made by individual directors.  Those of us around for a while can remember clear examples of where the personality (and his potential conflicts) sucked all of the oxygen out of the decision room.  When I think of a board meeting led by GH and some (cowering) supporters I see verbal brow-beating, shutting off of discussion, pressured votes, bad bargaining, and bad faith.  Last week, I envisioned Kathy Black out in the hallway taking the heat and the directors all together in a room calmly debating the subject without any overhang of bludgeoning pressure or threats of mistreatment for dissenters, let along dare anyone disagree.  My hunch is that one of the reasons the issue was clearly treated can be attributed to there being no presenting "strong personalities" with a conflicted vested interest in the room.

I'm thankful that there's been a willingness to have changes introduced by and for the activity as a whole instead of, perceptively, for an introducing-few.

 

[MikeD]

4 hours ago, Slingerland said:

I would disagree. "Creativity", by definition, means to 'create' - to come up with something new. Inherent in the act of invention is the idea that it hasn't been done before, or at least, your approach is markedly different or fresh from what's come before. It's unlikely to think that drum corps designers willl come up with some use of woodwinds (or any other instrument) that hasn't been already done in the marching band world.  

What IS unique in drum corps is the intensity of brass/percussion mix where the players are moving at the same time. Those limits and requirements necessarily force the designers who want to do something new to be creative in order to succeed.

I'd argue there's no such thing as 'no limits' - every artistic act or mechanical invention is dealing with limits, whether they are natural or man made. Gravity is a limit. "11 minutes max" is a limit. What you seem to find troubling are man-made limits, but when they're made in the interest of competition, they're no more than the rules of the game. Designers who want to design with no rules can do so freely in the fields of professional music, theatre, and dance, but then again, the activity isn't supposed to be about the designers.   

Designers using woodwinds is dismissed as not being creative because they have been used in scholastic marching band, while designers using just brass are creative because they can't use WW?    

That make no sense to me. Sorry. A show design can be just as creative using WW and brass as it is using just brass. 

[N.E. Brigand]

3 hours ago, garfield said:

DCI has worked hard - and it's obvious to me - to end the "Cesar and his Senate"- type of rules proposals and decision-making for the activity.

[N.E. Brigand]

21 minutes ago, MikeD said:

Designers using woodwinds is dismissed as not being creative because they have been used in scholastic marching band, while designers using just brass are creative because they can't use WW?    

That make no sense to me. Sorry. A show design can be just as creative using WW and brass as it is using just brass. 

"Writing free verse is like playing tennis with the net down." -- Robert Frost. 

[Jeff Ream]

16 hours ago, cixelsyd said:

Not concerned about the public reaction?

They assigned the proposal to an unaffiliated BoD person.  They submitted it, in defiance of DCI rules, without a sponsoring signature.  They delayed public release of the rule change proposals until the last minute.  They withheld the vote tally, only for that one proposal, in an unprecedented act of secrecy. 

DCI has done everything it could to conceal the identities of corps directors who are proponents.  Obviously, that was done because they were concerned about public reaction.  No one wants to be the one who loses donors to other corps over this.

can't argue that logic

[Jeff Ream]

14 hours ago, Slingerland said:

There were, reportedly, only a handful of directors who stood up and expressed support for the proposal - the majority of those who spoke about it were not in favor, and for a variety of reasons,  from the financial and practical to the aesthetic. Even in secret ballot, it would seem likely the voting wasn't close.

but no guts in being public about it