From: gordons@CS.ColoState.EDU (vahl scott gordon)
Subject: Scouts 93
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:33:52 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University

From: <MHUGHES@MIAMIU.BITNET>

>Yes, there is something to be said for history and the repetition and slight
>variation on it.....the trouble is that it's damn near the ONLY thing that
>Madison is capable of these days.  Just look at the past few years:
> 
>      1986 - Gershwin music from the 1970s regurgutated
>      1987 - (I forgot this one...sorry)
>      1988 - Maleguena regurgitated for the umpteenth time
>      1989 - Slaughter on 10th Avenue regurgitated for the umpteenth+1 time
>      1990 - an original show that I actually liked (but noone else did)
>      1991 - City of Angels...an excellent production
>      1992 - City of Angels...an excellent production (yawn)
>      1993 - excerpts from the 1981, 1983 and 1990 shows
> 
>C'mon!!!!!!!!!!  How can you defend this lack of musical creativity?
>Would you defend the corps if they did the same drill moves year after year?
>Used the same guard uniforms and equipment?  Etc, etc, etc....
> 
>Mike Hughes

I think you're confusing musical creativity with playing different songs.
Would you contend that classical musicians all necessarily have no
musical creativity because they play pieces that have been played before?
Does Wynton Marsalis have no musical creativity when he plays an Ellington
or Parker song?

It's unfair to say that they are "regurgitating" these pieces.  Did ANY of
the musicians simply regurgitate the music?  I suspect that NONE of them
were around when they were done the first time.  What about the arrangement?
Were they "regurgitated"?  They sound completely different to me on the
recordings than the originals.  Were the visuals regurgitated?  No comment
necessary there.  What about the two City of Angels productions... a few
of the musical passages were the same, and they borrowed the drill move
used in the 1991 closer to finish the 1992 opener.  Otherwise the show
looked completely re-worked to me.

How do I defend the use of previously used material?  How about the
screaming applause that Madison manages to get nearly every year? (well, there
was 1990 but you liked that show).  How about the high that the members
get by getting more audience response than most other corps?  What about
the challenge of playing intricate and difficult music?  What about the
joy of being a part of a long, proud heritage?  What about the joy of
getting the opportunity to play music that you've always wanted to play?
Looking back is part of Madison's style.  It's part of what draws people
to play in their corps, and it's part of what fans look forward to when
they take the field.

There should be room for this in the activity.  What is WRONG with this???
If in the process of putting together such a show a corps is the BEST,
then why shouldn't they win?

But let me get back to my discussion of what innovation is.  Do we penalize
corps for using flags?  After all, flags have been used before.  No, we say
it's how they USE the flags.  But apparently DCI doesn't think this applies
to music.  Why does innovation have to mean songs that have never before
been used on the field?  Remember Garfield 84, one of the most innovative shows
in history?  West Side Story was one of the most often played pieces in corps.
But it was WHAT they did with it!  Remember the groans when Sky Ryders 
announced that they were going to do it too in 87?  But what THEY did with
it was regarded as thoroughly innovative!  The feeling lately seems to be
that you won't get good marks from DCI unless you play songs that no
drum corps ever played before.  (especially not your own, even if it was
20 years ago before any of the staff or members were even born)

Don't get me wrong, I think it's GREAT when a corps plays new music.
I also think it's GREAT to be blown away by a piece that is known to be
a good vehicle for drum corps innovation.  There should be room for both.

Scott

Newsgroups: alt.drumcorps