The Drum Corps Activity is Healthier Than Ever!

[JimF-LowBari]

I'll be happy to correct you.

Drum Corps IS healthy because MB, WGs and WDLs are healthy and all four contribute and benefit each other.

and it would NOT be the equivalent of saying to your family member, "you must be healthy because your family is.." it's the equivalent of saying, "you must be healthy because you consume a healthy diet."

Get it?

Stef

Nope still think it's bad logic but don't want to hijack the thread.

All four benefit each other but that does not guarentee the health of any of them. One can fold and the others can remain.

[ScribeToo]

Who said anything about a guarantee??

You can eat the most healthful diet in the world and still develop brain cancer..

OP said: DC is the healthiest it's ever been.. here's why.. let's celebrate.

you are now saying that the supporting evidence he gave for WHY it's healthy are invalid simply because there's no guarantee?

bull ####.

The activity is healthy for a lot of reasons. Even I have repeatedly said that the health and vitality of the other activities CONTRIBUTES TO (never did I say "guarantees") the overall health of drum corps.

But you are certainly welcome to keep reading what you would like to think I'm saying, rather than what I'm actually saying.

I'll just keep correcting you.

Stef

[JimF-LowBari]

But you are certainly welcome to keep reading what you would like to think I'm saying, rather than what I'm actually saying.

Stef, what I posted is what I thought you meant.

"Drum Corps IS healthy because MB, WGs and WDLs are healthy" sounded like a "set in stone" truth to me so I used guarantee......

If you want to get pissy because I misunderstood that's your problem.......

Done wasting my time....... <click>

[Matt_S]

Correct me if I've misunderstood the posts, but sounds like some are saying.

"Drum Corps must be heathly because Marching Band, Color Guards and Drum Lines are heathly and all four are in the Marching Activity group".

IMO - it would be telling a family member "You must be healthy because the rest of your family is heathy".

Hehe, ok, let me correct you.

These two main threads on the health of the activity were started because of someone pointing out that the number of corps has fallen over the years. Some took this to mean that the drum corps activity was in bad shape. Many of those suggested that the solution was to return back to the idea of the regional corps.

Others, like myself, don't see that as an answer. We see the diminishing numbers, but don't see it as necessarily a bad thing. What I see is that the number of corps competing in DCI championships has remained fairly consistant, falling to be sure, but not nearly as that of the total number of corps. This suggests that the corps that fold are by and large the regional corps, those that have only a limited tour and don't make it to championships.

What we also see is that over the last few decades, competitive marching band has become a world of its own, holding championships that match DCI's in attendance. Thousands of marching bands across the county march corps-style shows, many of which are written by people who design for drum corps as well. When I compare this to the idea of a regional drum corps, I don't see much of a difference. I see two groups that put in many hours to complete a field show, do a few parades, and go to a few local competitions. Essentially, I see two organizations that fill the same niche.

So when asked the question of why so many drum corps have folded, I have to think marching band has had something to do with it. When both activities offer essentially the same service, and when you consider the advantages that the marching band activity has - scholastic funding, more exposure, chance to march with longtime friends, or even just getting to the kid first - well then it's no surprise that eventually marching band became more preferred.

As I see it, the niche of "community marching ensemble" evolved into marching bands, and away from drum corps. As a result, the definition of drum corps evolved as well. Drum corps became nationally-touring, because that's where the niche was. Many corps have made that transition, but many corps were not capable of that change, and never moved past the regional model. Unfortunately these regional corps no longer had a role, and this would seem to be why so many folded. But what of the corps that are still with us? They seem to be as robust as ever. Clearly we still have corps that fold, but thankfully few, and we have new corps joining the Div I ranks each year.

So when people say that the activity is healthier than ever, I believe that they are referring to this new definition of drum corps. They bring up marching bands not because the activities are the same, but to show how another activity has taken on a role that drum corps used to fulfill. Because of that, drum corps has adapted to fulfill a different role, and in that role drum corps seems to be improving every year. Maybe if you view drum corps and marching band as competing activities, then you think drum corps should never relinquish any role. Me, I view marching band and drum corps as such similar activities, that it makes perfect sense for one to claim the role that the other struggled to fill.

[ChicagoFan]

I'll be happy to correct you.

Drum Corps IS healthy because MB, WGs and WDLs are healthy and all four contribute and benefit each other.

Your first statement is certainly a truism. You're only too happy to sanctimoniously correct anyone that doesn't agree with your opinion.

As for the second, I'll reserve judgement. I need more than the Proclamation of Stefanie and the use of capital letters to convince me that the perceived health of related activities necessarily contributes to the health of our own. In the meantime, I think I'll call up the CEO of Amtrak. I'm sure he'd be thrilled to know that because Carnival Cruises experienced a banner year, all travel-related industries are in great shape.

[JimF-LowBari]

Hehe, ok, let me correct you.

<ker-snip>

Would be a great conversation around a few cold ones but the bottles might start flying....

Just a few responses:

Don't think pure numbers of corps is the 100% gauge of health due to changes in society, etc, etc. Ability to have new corps be created and be able to last is my current best way to judge Drum Corps health.

Because I never became a big fan of MB <ducking chairs and bottles :P > it's easy for me to keep the MB and DC world/activity seperate. Also because (some/most) MB gets $$$$ from school budget and has a "captive " membership base gets into the old apples and oranges thing when the comparasion go too deep.

From what I've read on DC history and from what I've seen in other places I feel $$$$ was the cause for most of the small community based corps to fold. Many of the AL and VFW posts have either closed or no longer can afford to fund outside activies for youth. Same goes for many churchs and just about any group based in the inner cities. (Got to learn a lot about the decline of th ecities since the 1950s/1960s while on council with a city church.) Same decline corps has gone thru was repeated with Little League, Scouting and othe youth oriented groups.

Edit: Forgot to mention the explosion in the cost of running a corps over the years. Balll and bat costs may have risen higher than the inflation rate, but the cost of horns.

What's your "new definition of Drum Corps"???

Edited October 12, 2006 by JimF-xWSMBari

[audiodb]

I remeber us in 77 doing our 'tour' to Butler PA and then on to the WO prelims in Mass. We didn't go because they were DCI-sanctioned...we went because they were the American and World Open shows. That they were DCI-sanctioned was incidental and irrelevant to us.

The fact that your corps cared enough to travel to these events and compete - and that DCI set the date and the rules - made DCI relevant to that corps. You can downplay it all you want, but you can't hide the relevance DCI had to corps in that situation.

Under DCI's sanctioning, pre-existing shows have been moved from one month to another, focus shows have been relocated 500 miles away from the previous year's site, and events have been merged, split or outright removed from the schedule. These changes, good or bad, were neither "irrelevant" nor "incedental".

Sorry...these minimal appearances are not "DCI involvement" IMO. We were a GSC corps that chose to do some Big Show prelims that may or may not have been DCI-sanctioned...that part was not relevant to us.

This is hilarious. You call them "minimal appearances" in one sentence, and "Big Shows" in the next sentence. Like I said, you can't hide the impact DCI had on these corps.

BTW...you are using the quote "had nothing to do with DCI" in a way entirely different from it's meaning in context.

There is no context that would make your statement accurate. Evidently, you must have meant something different from what the words "nothing to do with DCI" mean.

[audiodb]

So when people say that the activity is healthier than ever, I believe that they are referring to this new definition of drum corps. They bring up marching bands not because the activities are the same, but to show how another activity has taken on a role that drum corps used to fulfill. Because of that, drum corps has adapted to fulfill a different role, and in that role drum corps seems to be improving every year. Maybe if you view drum corps and marching band as competing activities, then you think drum corps should never relinquish any role. Me, I view marching band and drum corps as such similar activities, that it makes perfect sense for one to claim the role that the other struggled to fill.

Well, I don't know about you, but if you were to ask me, "was drum corps healthier when it fulfilled two major roles, or just one?" - that makes it even harder for me to imagine today's scenario as the healthier drum corps segment.

By the way, nice historical synopsis - remarkably free of spin. ^OO^

[Tom Brace]

I think there is a good summation of this thread somewhere...but now it seems we are arriving at whether a smaller number of corps is a good or bad thing and if the health, vitality and longevity of newer corps are a more accurate indication of the health of the "drum corps activity."

So...here I go...

I like a smaller number of corps...in fact..if I got to be DCI (in the world that exists only in my head) I'd put each and every corps through a systematic annual evaluation...not just the struggling corps, but every corps.

I would evaluate strengths and weaknesses of every program and offer advice on how an organization might strengthen themselves for the present and future. I would be working tirelessly to make sure corps continue to make progress. I may even use corps who have their act together mentor other corps...there'd be white papers, etc. I know that some of this does in fact go on at annual meetings.

But, wait...you say you like a smaller number of corps...YES! I've seen corps...I've fed corps (other than the one I was supposed to be feeding) whose kitchen truck broke down a week ago and whose buses were not DOT inspected. I was also privy to some information following a certain Minnesota contest which occured a few years back where DOT officials were informed and were at the contest to meet the corps as they pulled into the parking lot. Many tickets and fines were issued and buses were impounded. So I say, before the season...in my head again...if I'm DCI, if your buses and equipment are not passed inspection by June 1, you don't compete this year.

Financially, if your house is not in order, I may limit your touring operations for a season. If your staff and volunteers have not submitted to background checks and if that information is not complete and on file, you don't get to enter any of my DCI competitions for this year.

You see folks...we are talking about the kids here...I'm sure what I just discussed may even sound foriegn and extreme in an oversight role for an organization like DCI. But, you must realize that all of the scholastic programs that everyone has discussed. and many other youth organizations, ALREADY have this oversight in place.

I believe in the past too many "fly by the seat of your pants" drum corps were allowed to compete, when in fact, they had no business going down the road with a bunch of kids. I, for one, am glad some of these corps no longer exist.

The fact is, the organizations who are DCI (member corps) must take a more ownership role of drum corps. What has happened (especially in II/III, but in select Div. I corps as well) is that there is little oversight unless there is an overt measure of trouble. I can remember corps where instructional staff (who taught all day) also drove the buses to get the corps down the road because they lacked bus drivers.

Then DCI finally reacts, like it did this past season with at least one corps. Why can't DCI be more proactive? Why do I still see some of these organizations being allowed to continue to operate by the seat of theur pants?

I guess when I was asked to agree whether drum corps is healthy, I'd have to answer that having a smaller number of healthy, well run corps is better than diluting the pool with more "fly by the seat of your pants" corps. I would also say that organizations are new and are developing...like Academy, OC, etc. It is those corps do their jobs and DCIs oversight and experience helps it can lead to those corps long term success. But, as was said before, there are no guarantees.

[MikeD]

The fact that your corps cared enough to travel to these events and compete - and that DCI set the date and the rules - made DCI relevant to that corps. You can downplay it all you want, but you can't hide the relevance DCI had to corps in that situation.

Excuse me...were you with us that year? I was on staff, for goodness sakes. We went to those shows as they were decent sized 'name' events (not our regular GSC haunts, in other words) to make up the best tour we could for our members, given our finances. DCI-sponsored or not DCI was irrelevant. It gave the kids a chance to go on the road for a week or so to get a flavor of touring.

The WO was a national show before DCI came along. See www.drumcorpsvideos.com and look in the junior section for the 1971 WO finals.

This is hilarious. You call them "minimal appearances" in one sentence, and "Big Shows" in the next sentence. Like I said, you can't hide the impact DCI had on these corps.

As far as I know...you were not there...or were you? I was. I know why we and others went to the shows we did...and that DCI as an organization had no impact on where we competed as a local GSC corps.

There is no context that would make your statement accurate. Evidently, you must have meant something different from what the words "nothing to do with DCI" mean.

THIS is the paragraph you grabbed a quote from and decided to use it out of context...

I watched as corps after corps folded throughout the 70's in the circuit I taught in and judged, the Garden State Circuit. Had nothing at all to do with DCI.