The Hopkins Paradox

[Mouthpiece1234]

Paradox? It's a drum corps show, what you see on the field is what you see on the field.

This is being "overthunk"

[Meaghatron]

Then the Cavaliers 2006 show should have been

"Machines"

[madscout96]

I haven't heard the clips of Cadets 07 yet, but what I'm gathering from all the talk is that their show is gonna be like a drum corps version of "A Chorus Line". Right?

Anyway, maybe the paradox that the OP presented exists, but I don't think it necessarily does. And I don't buy the "performers : drum corps :: paint : painter" analogy he presented. I've painted a few paintings before (in High School, and probably with my fingers in kindergarten), and I've taught a few drum corps too. And when I painted my paintings, I didn't explain to the paints what the picture was that they were going to be in for the rest of their lives, because they didn't need to know. I didn't try to learn all their names and where they're from, or give them funny nicknames. I didn't hug my paints and say goodbye when the painting was finished, ready to be displayed. But all of those things I DID do with the members of the corps I taught. Performers DO need to understand what it is they're doing and why they're doing it, and they need to know their instructors care about them. Otherwise, they are just paint on canvas, mindlessly moving around a field and pushing buttons down on a horn. And that can easily be replaced by an electronic keyboard.

[DebateGuy]

Perhaps the concept behind the show is to get us to appreciate this contradiction or paradox. Many contradictions exist in life, and especially in art, and many artists produce their work to get people to question the fundamental assumptions that we as individuals make about our existence.

For example, an artist has an idea for a wonderful work of art, a beautiful painting, if you will. But rather than execute the painting on one canvas, they choose instead to paint each stroke on a separate piece of canvas. Yes, the analogy is strained, but bear with it.

So we go to a gallery, and there are a hundred different pieces of canvas, each with one stroke masterfully executed upon it. How does that make us reflect on art, and on our approach to it?

Personally, I begin to think about how perhaps I should cherish each individual stroke of a paintbrush, and the mark that it left upon each individual canvas. And even more, I appreciate that the gallery itself is ART. Together, the gallery is a beautiful picture, but through the artist's concept and execution, I have come to recognize that each journey that the paint took from the brush to its canvas was unique, and valuable in its own way. How thought provoking.

However, what happens when each canvas is sold, and go their separate ways? Are they still art? Is each performer after they go home still a drum corps? I remember one day near the end of tour when a staff member said: "You need to appreciate that in a few days all of you will go your separate ways, and some will come back, and some will not, but the important thing is that THIS corps will never exist again."

Perhaps the point of the contradiction was to get us to consider such a thing, and perhaps not. That's one of the joys of art. That after the work is produced, the interpretation is in the hands of the audience, not the artist.

[contra love]

Perhaps I was unclear.

What I mean when I use the word 'individualism':

Anything having to do with the performing member as a human being. i.e. Thier lives, what they go through in drum corps practice, all the things addressed throught the narrative parts in the Cadets 2007 program.

Individualism is an essential part of drum corps and should be celebrated, but only off the field.

Individualism should not be a part of the drum corps performance.

Individualism is not relevant to the drum corps performance.

I do not use the terms 'soloist' and 'individual' interchangeably and that distinction is crutial if one is to understand my argument.

First of all, I really have to disagree with you about how individualism is something that should not be part of the performance. I believe I understand what you are saying, but personally, I use my individual experiences and ideals to help me perform, whether it is simply to become more emotionally attached to the show/music or for the extra strength and energy needed when you feel exhausted.

Aside from all of that, one of the main reasons I've pretty much always believed drum corps never gets much attention from anyone outside the activity, is the lack of individualism shown in a performance. With all of the more popular sports and activities, fans are fans of people, not teams and not organizations. The closest you ever get, is during the Olympics when you cheer for a country, but even then, most people are cheering for a specific star athlete. In drum corps, you get The Cadets, or The Cavaliers or whatever. If you know the history and traditions of the corps, it is easy to be a fan. But with an individual, a simple view of their face or short story of their journey is all you need to make a connection with the person. In short, people are more personal.

Now that I've read what you have to say, I think I have an even better attitude about the design of this show. Maybe the show wont work, and wont place well/be loved for years and years. But I'm finding less and less things I disagree with about The Cadets choices this year. I have no delusions that this one show will change the activity or anything like that, but I think the very exploration of the possibilities of where drum corps could go is worth the effort. Maybe it wont work at all. Maybe everyone will hate it. But what if it's amazing? I really didn't want to compare it to Star, because it's a completely different situation, but what if it's just as effective? Is it not worth the risk? I mean really, what is there to lose? The Cadets aren't going to fold because of on unsuccessful season, people who hate the show don't have to watch it, and members didn't have to join this specific corps if they didn't like the decisions being made.

[glory]

I agree.

During the performance one should not see individuals.

One should see what the design asks them to see.

In the case of cadets 2007, the design asks us to see individuals.

therefore

in cadets '07 one should see individuals and not see individuals

contradiction

All due respect, but I think your interpretation is too narrow. Not having seen anything on the field yet, I'm not sure any of us can make a definitive interpretation. Nonetheless, from what I saw and heard on the stage Sunday, this is not the story of specific individuals as you suggest. Rather, it's the story of a drum corps collectively as told by representative members. I think that's the key. What you call "individuals" might better be termed "representatives."

You mentioned painting. I'd put this to some extent in the self-portrait category. Van Gogh was no less the artist when he painted his many self portraits. I'd say the same for the Cadets who are painting a self-portrait of a different sort. Still art though, right? Still valid?

HH

[madscout96]

Perhaps the concept behind the show is to get us to appreciate this contradiction or paradox. Many contradictions exist in life, and especially in art, and many artists produce their work to get people to question the fundamental assumptions that we as individuals make about our existence.

For example, an artist has an idea for a wonderful work of art, a beautiful painting, if you will. But rather than execute the painting on one canvas, they choose instead to paint each stroke on a separate piece of canvas. Yes, the analogy is strained, but bear with it.

So we go to a gallery, and there are a hundred different pieces of canvas, each with one stroke masterfully executed upon it. How does that make us reflect on art, and on our approach to it?

Personally, I begin to think about how perhaps I should cherish each individual stroke of a paintbrush, and the mark that it left upon each individual canvas. And even more, I appreciate that the gallery itself is ART. Together, the gallery is a beautiful picture, but through the artist's concept and execution, I have come to recognize that each journey that the paint took from the brush to its canvas was unique, and valuable in its own way. How thought provoking.

However, what happens when each canvas is sold, and go their separate ways? Are they still art? Is each performer after they go home still a drum corps? I remember one day near the end of tour when a staff member said: "You need to appreciate that in a few days all of you will go your separate ways, and some will come back, and some will not, but the important thing is that THIS corps will never exist again."

Perhaps the point of the contradiction was to get us to consider such a thing, and perhaps not. That's one of the joys of art. That after the work is produced, the interpretation is in the hands of the audience, not the artist.

If I went to a gallery or an art show with the display you described, I would interpret it very differently than you. I would interpret it as a statement that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Each brush stroke is meaningless without the others around it.

[DebateGuy]

If I went to a gallery or an art show with the display you described, I would interpret it very differently than you. I would interpret it as a statement that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. Each brush stroke is meaningless without the others around it.

That is the beauty of art, yes? Each individual will take with them what they will. The art isn't so much in the execution piece, but each person's visceral reaction to that piece that makes it wonderful.

Your post got me thinking, perhaps the next step is to analyze what it is that gives a work of art meaning, and how we as viewers contribute to the statement that is being made. Again, we come to a contradiction, is the art meaningful, or is it not, when all the parts are separated?

Perhaps it's a rhetorical question posed by the artist. But then the pieces separated are all evocative of the question that is being posed, and thus are all uniquely valuable, though the original meaning is lost.

The question itself is a beautiful one, regardless of the answers we find in it. Thank you for allowing me to get to that particular insight.

Edited June 1, 2007 by DebateGuy

[WGM Updates]

WGM runs on individual personalities. And I'll throw our art up on the slab against anybody's...

Sure it's validating to be in a street gang when you're young, but with age comes the realization that the most profitable crimes are committed not with violence but with a sweet blend of stealth and charisma, by the bold, against those who enjoy being a cog in a greater machine.

We're still going to beat you up and take your lunch money though.

[DAvery]

Techniques can differ. When you assimilate into one unit, you must use their techniques. Leave that group and join another, you must assimilate a new set of techniques.

Right, the goal is to "lose" your individualism, your unique characteristics.

Here's a thought. When I listen to the same maestro conduct the same work with two different orchestras, why do they sound different? Is it due to the direction of the conductor? Or, does the player project their own characteristics into the work. Each individual in an ensemble does add a little bit of themselves. I would impossible to remove all the "individualism" from the ensemble. And I think it is undesirable to do so. The personality of each ensemble is made up of the collective personalities of all the people involved. IN most cases, the goal is not to eliminate the individual personalities, but to blend them together to form one. The analogy of a painting does have it's limiations. A painting is a static piece of art. It does not change from day to day. It also is not an ensemble project. The artist is also the interpreter. Not usually so in music or dance. The composer writes the art. The conductor, and to a lesser degree the performers, interpret the art. Without seeing the Cadets, it would be hard to comment on this specific situation. Maybe each performer is presenting their unique story. Maybe this drum corps show has 135 stories, instead of one.