Why can't The Cadets ( and other Drumcorps ) just be considered Ar

[ACM]

I'm pretty sure that other people vote for any change in the rules. Plus, nobody is forced to do anything with their corps.

Find a competitive (top 12) Div I corps still playing G Bugles.......A group wanted a change to Bb, rule proposal passed, and within 2 years all of the top 12 were Bb.....they all had to change if they wanted to remain competitive.

[Fran Haring]

Wow.... I haven't ventured onto the DCI side of DCP in a while, but here goes:

The Cadets can do what they want with their show... that's their choice, purely and simply! I personally am looking forward to seeing/hearing what they do with the voice amplification, since I support the concept of A&E, if done in a professional manner. So bring on the vocals!

That being said..... as long as drum corps fans are required to pay to see corps perform, then corps are in the entertainment business to at least some degree, whether they care to admit that or not. They need to reach out to fans who are helping pay the bills and entertain them.

I've used this example before: "Blast!" on Broadway (and the "Blast!" touring show) was marching music performed at a very high level of quality and professionalism... quite frankly, a higher level than I've ever seen from a drum corps. However, in order to SELL TICKETS and fill that Broadway venue night after night, "Blast!" HAD to be accessible to the average theater-goer. I don't consider that "selling out" from an artistic standpoint at all. I consider it "good business sense."

I am absolutely convinced that if "Blast!" had been two hours of "out there, artsy-fartsy," it would have closed within a very short period of time on Broadway.

Drum corps who ignore the fact that people are PAYING to see them do so at their peril, IMO.

Fran

Edited March 3, 2006 by Fran Haring

[Lance]

Find a competitive (top 12) Div I corps still playing G Bugles.......A group wanted a change to Bb, rule proposal passed, and within 2 years all of the top 12 were Bb.....they all had to change if they wanted to remain competitive.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. No corps has to use Bb simply because they're now legal. You say corps in the top 12 choose to use Bb to stay competitive. The question to ask then is why do Bb horns fare better in competition? When the rule for Bb passed, did score sheets change?

[bawker]

When the rule for Bb passed, did score sheets change?

No, but sponsorship deals did. :P

After all, Bb proved to be a fairly good move. Kids can be brought in easier to to the horn line, resale value of used horns and so on. Nothing really changed but the pitch of the horn...and Top 12 corps don't want to waste rehearsal time teaching you how to play on G, anyway.

Monetarily and logistically, the Bb move makes sense.

Some other rules...not so much. :)

Edited March 3, 2006 by bawker

[monoemono]

I get a little bugged when people are so quick to bandy about the term "artist". The Cadets are "artists"? This is a stretch to me.

By "The Cadets are artists", do we mean the staff? The kids? The kids who march have no say. They just march the show put in front of them. They do what they're told to do.

So, then, the staff? Is this really their primary goal as a member of the drum corps community? To express their personal artistic aims?

It seems like the original poster is saying, "We shouldn't judge what they do. After all, they're ARTISTS." I've seen this argument before when people try to justify really crappy art. It doesn't matter if YOU think it's good. It's ART, man. You just must not GET IT!

I think they've done some pretty artistic things. They're usually my favorite corps. But they don't get a free pass on the "art" ticket.

Let's not get too ahead of ourselves here talking all this art stuff. A Beethoven Symphony, a show on a football field--ehhh.... :)

Edited March 3, 2006 by monoemono

[bawker]

So, then, the staff? Is this really their primary goal as a member of the drum corps community? To express their personal artistic aims?

...which, in some regards, goes back to the "celebrity" comments that Scott Stewart made...how one or a select few folks are of singular importance to the design concept, therefore not making it for the kids...but in a sense, for the designers.

Hmmm.

[Jeff Ream]

I do have to agree here.

A lot of the more recent age outs deride not only those here, but the more "lay person" fan as ones who just don't get it occasionally. I'm sure this isn't truly borne of any perceived lack of intelligence, but rather frustration at not understanding the concepts as they appear to those who were either part of it, or close to the process of creating it. No easy solutions here.

I'm not about to suggest that a music education or visual design degree is a requirement for enjoying and/or debating a shows relative merits, but it oft seems that way to hear it from some. There has to be a visceral drive to enjoying drum corps as well as an intellectual one.

This is what bothers me in some regards to where a lot of drum corps program themselves now. A bit of this tune, a bit of that...enough to show some technical merit, to maximize what the green shirts want....and nothing else. There's still variety out there, but it becomes harder and harder to pinpoint...

Fred J. Miller uniform? Check.

Show concept "inspired by" using several (sometimes upwards of 8-10) pieces of source music? Check

Pre-determined "big drill move after drum break"? Check.

Not to say that all corps do this, but look at the top 12. See the simlarities that exist, for the sake of maximizing those points...almost mechanically.

There's no easy solution to this either. People copy what works, whether its the Cavs GE, the Blue Devils percussion playing, or what have you.

Some of it I can explain for a selfish reason, saying that in my own stilted opinion there's no shows like Madison 1995 or 2002, or Blue Devils 1992 now...ones that just say: "Here it is. We're going to lay this out for you." alongside those groundbreaking shows of Star 1993 and so forth....where there's a happy medium of gut-check, destroy your face shows, and those that require a more deft touch.

I don't know. Everyone sees this differently, so maybe I'm way off. :)

i agree with you. and here's a question...what's wrong with fans being selfish? they are paying more and more moeny as ticket prices keep rising to go to shows. why shouldn't they be allowed to say if they are unhappy with the product?

if a sports team sucks, are fans going to keep going to see them? nope. and fans will complain...look at talk radio and online forums....they make DCP look tame.

so, if i fan isn't getting what they feel is their money's worth, they have every right to cpmplain. And, when talked down to or told they aren't all that important, they get mad and stop spending money.

then, tour fees go up higher and higher.

there has to be a happy medium. yes it is for the kids. but it's also for the fans. you have to have one to have the other, and if one is not happy, it carries over into all aspects.

[NIGHTFLY3000]

Sure they are artists, in the medium of drum corps.

Just like a painter is an artist, they still have to follow certain rules in order for their art to be considered a painting. If the painter suddenly picks up some clay and creates a sculpture, it maybe art by an artist, but it is not a painting.

And so it is with the Cadets drum corps. This ballad with a vocalist maybe wonderful music, and it maybe art by an artist, but it is not drum corps.

Edited March 3, 2006 by NIGHTFLY3000

[MarimbasaurusRex]

As an artist myself, I can say I would be ****ed before I ever let what someone WANTS to SEE OR WANTS to HEAR ultimately determine how I use my ability.

Ok....So.... lets speed up my point.... to make it simple.....my viewpoint as an artist is............If you don't like my art..........**** you!!!!

This is not the definition of art, it is the definition of a hobby. Art is a two way street along the same lines as "if a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it., does it make a sound?" A truly successful artist balances pleasing an audience with maintaining the integrity of the art. That's difficult, but it obviously has been done successfully zillions of times. An artist without an audience is a hobbyist in the basement. Would the Mona Lisa be art if no one wanted to look at it? Or would it just be another painting in the attic? If you can stay pure to your art AND find an audience, then you hit the jackpot.

The fact is that true artist don't make things according to other people's desires. Artist make things because they think they shoud be made.

That definition would count out Mozart and thousands of others in favor of Marc Sylvester. Call me crazy, but I don't buy it.

Once someone starts making things primarily according to others people's desires you know what he/she becomes?!?!?!?!?

AN ENTERTAINER........ who only exist for other people's amusement.

Tell that to Cirque du Soleil. It's all about balance.

ARE SOME OF THESE PEOPLE SERIOUS!?!?!?!?!? DO THEY REALLY THINK THEIR OPINIONS MATTER THAT MUCH?!?!?!

Look in the mirror.

IMO.....FANS and Alumni and vastly secondary!!!!!......

And they feel vastly secondary. This attitude has driven away thousands. You want your hobby in the basement? Fine, we won't bother to watch anymore. Maybe corps will enjoy playing to empty stadiums and silent ovations, because they have their precious art.

Marc Sylvester does consider himself an artist. Take that for what it's worth.

If drill writing is art, then so is needlepoint, dots on a grid. Try selling that idea in SoHo.

At the core of any discussion of art is the C factor, CREATIVITY. Consider what passes and doesn't pass the creativity test...

Music - 99.9% derivative.

Individual Performer Creativity - 0%

Dictation from staff - 100%

As art, drum corps is not doing very well. Is drum corps performed and designed artfully? Absolutely. Does that make it art? No.

[JimF-LowBari]

A lot of the more recent age outs deride not only those here, but the more "lay person" fan as ones who just don't get it occasionally. I'm sure this isn't truly borne of any perceived lack of intelligence, but rather frustration at not understanding the concepts as they appear to those who were either part of it, or close to the process of creating it. No easy solutions here.

I'm not about to suggest that a music education or visual design degree is a requirement for enjoying and/or debating a shows relative merits, but it oft seems that way to hear it from some. There has to be a visceral drive to enjoying drum corps as well as an intellectual one.

Owe Bawker a cold one as he helped me pinpoint something I couldn't quite put together when I first posted about the fans on this thread.

Over the years (OK decades *sigh*), I've seen the relationship between Jr corps and the fans go straight down the toilet. Not all Jr people or corps act this way but it seems to get worst each year.

In the late 70s (my starting point), if a fan didn't like or get a show that was either "too bad" or "sorry you feel that way". The corps staff tried to walk the tightrope between a pleasing show and what showcases the corps talents best.

In the 80s as corps went to my complex and less mainstream music, the blame finger started pointing towards the fans because "they might not be musically educated enough to get it". IOW - don't blame the corps if YOU don't get it.

Didn't follow corps in the 90s. When I discovered RAMD/DCP in 2002 or so DCI was now "all about the experience" and heavens forbid if the fans "interfere" with the members experience.

As 2006 starts I see more and more "If the fans don't like it, <bleep> 'em as they never ment squat anyway" AKA "Who cares about a show the fans like, it's all about US (members)"