Tradition. Whether you love it or hate it, READ THIS!
CruBari
"Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all
classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead.
Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy
who merely happen to be walking around."
-- Gilbert K. Chesterton
This quote begins an extended tract that I hope explains a little more
clearly why I, and others who feel as I do, defend the tradition of
drum corps so ardently against those who appear willing to abandon
that tradition. I say "appear" because, rightly or wrongly, that's the
way it seems. If this is wrong, I wish to be corrected.
If you stand in opposition to my beliefs, that is your right. But
before you complain that I do not respect that opinion, please
understand that I DO respect it. But do not confuse disrespect and
criticism. While we all have a right to our opinions, we also have a
right to be wrong in them. And I am willing to entertain the idea that
I am wrong as well.
"It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but
it is bigotry to be unable to imagine how we might
possibly have gone wrong." - G.K. Chesterton
To defend my position is the easier task. To defend the opposite is
harder, I admit. But, as it should, the burden of proof rests on those
who wish to remake things.
And also understand that I have no desire for drum corps to become
static and absolutely unchanging. This is identical to being dead. But
the opposition must understand that change for change's sake is not
good either. Not all change is progress, improvement. Let me again
quote Mr. Chesterton:
"Progress is a comparative of which we have not
settled the superlative."
In other words, the future may or may not be better than what we have
now and had in the past.
We all know that there is something wrong with our beloved drum corps.
It is dying. It has been dying. (Well, it is certain in the junior
ranks; senior corps MAY be showing a resurgence.) Many corps we all
loved are no more. Fewer corps spring up to replace those that have
passed. Fewer shows populate the tour schedule. Fewer people attend
the shows that we do have. This, I hope, we can all agree on.
The causes for this are legion. We all believe that there is something
we in the activity are doing wrong, or something right that we aren't
doing, or something we do that we could do better, to rectify the
situation. But just what is the correct diagnosis? Well, this is where
we all disagree. We each have our own pet theories and our own
solutions to the problem. No doubt everyone fervently believes he is
right. If none of us were passionate about it, RAMD would not exist.
But, we all need to keep our eye on the ball here. Our solutions must
be the right ones for the actual problem(s). And as always,
identifying the problem correctly remains paramount. A question we
should all ask ourselves is, "Will this fix what's really wrong."
"That vision thing", as the elder George Bush once called it, becomes
the crucial sense, a vision of the future of drum corps and how to get
there. Who would you want to follow: someone who is winging it, or
someone who lets common sense and experience guide him? We can't
follow "leaders" who travel willy-nilly all over the countryside:
"Progress should mean that we are always changing the
world to fit the vision; instead, we are always changing
the vision." - G.K. Chesterton
The problem, as I see it, lies with those reformers proposing all
sorts of "fixes". (In the current climate, the big fix is allowance of
electronics and amplification.) The reformers have little idea of
exactly how those ideas may play out. This thought may be appropriate:
"Men invent new ideals because they dare not attempt
old ideals. They look forward with enthusiasm, because
they are afraid to look back." - Chesterton
Here is where those of us who are more tradition-minded get upset. WE
look back to the past, when DCI was more popular than it is now, when
more corps existed and more kids participated. What lessons do we take
from that? This next line, I think, sums up how some of us feel about
drum corps' (and specifically DCI's) past:
"It is true that I am of an older fashion; much that
I love has been destroyed or sent into exile." - Chesterton
There are many who think that going back is wrong, that we cannot
"recreate the past". As Mr. Chesterton says above, they invent new
things to do because they are too afraid to look back. They say,
"Well, we can't do what we used to, let's do something else." Why?
I think this is so because the idea that DCI = HIGH ART (as opposed to
mere "art" which most everyone agrees drum corps is) has taken hold in
many people, including those who run, design, and instruct DCI corps
and those who philosophically support them. And that "avant garde"
(no, NOT the drum corps) spirit (not THAT corps either) comes into
conflict with tradition. This conflict opens a whole new set of
problems. To them, new is good and old is bad. To be innovative is
good and to do the same old thing is bad. Who wants to see the same
thing over and over? We traditionalists understand this, as much as
Winston Churchill, an artist as well as a statesman, did:
"Without tradition, art is a flock of sheep without
a shepherd. Without innovation, it is a corpse."
So did John A. Locke, who proposed a middle ground solution:
"That which is static and repetitive is boring. That
which is dynamic and random is confusing. In between
lies art."
And hence a lot of previous changes, while fought by some
traditionalists of those days, did happen and have become a part of
drum corps over the years.
What the reformers misunderstand, however, is that we traditionalists
DO NOT oppose change. We oppose THOUGHTLESS change. We oppose that
which has no reason for being in drum corps. For what GOOD reason did
DCI change to Bb horns? For what GOOD reason did DCI do away with the
traditional retreat? Let's not change what is right about drum corps
without a GOOD reason.
"The reformer is always right about what is wrong.
He is generally wrong about what is right." - Chesterton
Tradition does have a place, a reason for existence. It serves as a
guide and anchor that can be useful when upheavals occur in life. The
past informs the present and guides the future. Traditionalists had
their reasons for opposing the first piston valve added to bugles, the
slides, the rotors, the second piston valve, and third piston valve,
pits, "dancing" guards, etc. Were they right? History says no. But
that is the benefit of hindsight. The reformers could very well have
turned out wrong. And just because they were right before probably
means they were more lucky than infallible.
"I believe what really happens in history is this:
the old man is always wrong; and the young people are
always wrong about what is wrong with him. The practical
form it takes is this: that, while the old man may stand
by some stupid custom, the young man always attacks it with
some theory that turns out to be equally stupid." - Chesterton
This concept of drum corps as high art is fairly old, but not everyone
buys into it. Those who do, tend to be reformers; those who don't,
tend to be traditionalists.
What's the REAL difference? Again, the reformers hate imitation. And
what could be wrong with that? Well, try these thoughts on for size:
"Those who do not want to imitate anything, produce
nothing." -Salvador Dali
"In our time there are many artists who do something
because it is new; they see their value and their
justification in this newness. They are deceiving themselves;
novelty is seldom the essential. This has to do with one
thing only; making a subject better from its intrinsic nature."
-Henri de Toulouse Lautrec
"Another unsettling element in modern art is that common
symptom of immaturity, the dread of doing what has been
done before." - Edith Warton
"Don't be afraid to borrow. The great men, the most original,
borrowed from everybody. Witness Shakespeare and Rembrandt.
They borrowed from the technique of tradition and created
new images by the power of their imagination and human
understanding. Little men just borrow from one person.
Assimilate all you can from tradition and then say things in
your own way." - John Sloan
"Who is there, among the great men, who has not imitated?
Nothing is made with nothing, and the way good inventions
are made is to familiarize yourself with those of others."
- Ingres
The traditionalists have reacted to this DCI = HIGH ART concept by
claiming it is boring, devoid of emotion, uninteresting,
unimaginative, strange, and worst of all, unpopular.
"Art is contemplation. It is the pleasure of the mind
which searches into nature and which there divines the
spirit of which nature herself is animated." -Auguste Rodin
"A painting demands a certain mystery, a vagueness,
imagination. When one dots all the i's, he ends by being
boring. Even when painting from nature, one must compose.
There are people who fancy that this is forbidden." - Degas
"[High] Art is making something out of nothing and selling
it." - Frank Zappa
"How strongly do new paintings usually appeal to us at first
for the beauty and variety of their colors and yet it is the
old and rough picture that holds our attention."
- Marcus Tullius Cicero
"As music is the poetry of sound, so is painting the poetry
of sight, and the subject-matter has nothing to do with
harmony of sound or of color." -James McNeill Whistler
"I do not literally paint that table, but the emotion it
produces upon me." -Henri Matisse
We do not argue against DCI shows that are programmed with
contemporary music. We argue against shows that are POORLY programmed,
or "composed" to use Degas' word for it. A show made up of DCI's
greatest old hits could be poorly programmed and boring as well.
Cannot a "high art" show be made exciting? The real problem is that
the "high art" idea trickles down to people and corps that have no
business doing such shows.
The reformers' counter-reaction has been the "ivory tower" argument:
"Well, you just don't understand our new high art." In fact, some even
point to its very unpopularity as proof of it being "art". This
attitude is dealt with by some thinkers.
"Savages and modern artists are alike strangely driven
to create something uglier than themselves. But the artists
find it harder." - Chesterton
"I do not want ART for a few any more than education for
a few, or freedom for a few." -William Morris
"Art for art's sake makes no more sense than gin for gin's
sake." - W. Somerset Maugham
"By a curious confusion, many modern critics have passed
from the proposition that a masterpiece may be unpopular
to the other proposition that, unless it is unpopular, it
cannot be a masterpiece." - Chesterton
"Any young person who has studied Heidegger; or seen
Ionesco's 'plays'; or listened to the 'music' of John Cage;
or looked at Andy Warhol's 'paintings'- has experienced that
feeling of incredulous puzzlement: But this is nonsense! Can
I really be expected to take this seriously? In fact, of
course, it is necessary for it to be nonsense; if it made
sense, it could be evaluated. The essence of modern
intellectual snobbery is the 'emperor's new clothes' approach.
Teachers, critics, our self-appointed intellectual elite,
make it quite clear to us that if we cannot see the
superlative nature of this 'art'- why, it merely shows our
ignorance, our lack of sophistication and insight. Of course,
they go beyond the storybook emperor's tailors, who dressed
their victim in nothing and called it fine garments. The
modern tailors dress the emperor in garbage. - Ron Merrill
To me, many artists can afford not to live in the real world. Drum
corps is a different beast. It must sustain a minimum of popularity to
exist. I also believe that many people simply like being contrary.
Hence, they portray themselves as reformers because that is the
contrarian position. Their opinion is as inconstant as the wind.
Chesterton deals with these sorts as well:
"My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to
boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer
Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday."
Traditionalists must learn to turn the other cheek when confronted by
those who flit from fad to ephemeral fad. The trick is simply not to
allow the latest fad to become the rule.
And this is what the reformers must learn: tradition means not letting
our activity be governed by the "latest" thing, unless there is a
compelling need to adopt it. If this concept cannot be heeded, then
the activity becomes rudderless, drifting to and fro at the whims of
fashion. Just because something has become fashionable to do or be,
doesn't mean that it is right.
"Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become
fashions." - Chesterton
Just because marching bands do something doesn't necessarily mean that
it's good for drum corps to do.
Next, we have the "open minded" reformers. These are the ones who wish
drum corps to be anything and everything anyone desires. It often
appears that these clamorers doth protest too much. They call for
accepting the new extremes while professing that they can appreciate
the old. But their "appreciation" often has qualifications attached,
usually invisibly. They say traditionalists are defective because we
cannot be as open-minded as they. I say beware of them. To paraphrase
Chesterton, I believe the people most vehemently preaching
"open-mindedness" are those who hate traditional drum corps and call
their hatred an all-embracing love for drum corps in all its forms. It
is their barely disguised disdain for the traditional that
distinguishes them. This can lead to open warfare between the two
sides, as we have seen here on RAMD.
For the sake of drum corps, the best path, not merely to survival but
outright prosperity, should be to combine the best of tradition with
the best of innovation. As Churchill said, both are necessary for art
to live well. Reformers, do not blindly follow the whims of fashion.
And Traditionalists, we should not blindly cling to the immovable rock
of ages past. But lastly, and most importantly, in the battle to be
right, we should not forget that drum corps is what we're really all
about.
Dale Fine, Baritone
Steel City Ambassadors 1987
Butler Soundwave 1995
Rochester Crusaders 1996 - present
Keith Hall
public school).
Keith Hall
Rochester Crusaders 1990, 2001 - forever
Patriots 1984 -89
Schlossgarde (Germany) 1986-88
Royal Coachmen (NY) 1969 - 1977
Dave Adams
I know its bad form to write "me too" posts, but that is one fine essay.
-Dave Adams-
Jerome Kimbrough
> classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead.
> Tradition refuses to submit to that arrogant oligarchy
> who merely happen to be walking around."
> -- Gilbert K. Chesterton
>
> It is dying. It has been dying. (Well, it is certain in the junior
> ranks; senior corps MAY be showing a resurgence.) Many corps we all
> loved are no more. Fewer corps spring up to replace those that have
> passed. Fewer shows populate the tour schedule. Fewer people attend
> the shows that we do have. This, I hope, we can all agree on.
>
> The causes for this are legion. We all believe that there is something
> we in the activity are doing wrong, or something right that we aren't
> doing, or something we do that we could do better, to rectify the
> situation. But just what is the correct diagnosis? Well, this is where
> we all disagree. We each have our own pet theories and our own
> solutions to the problem. No doubt everyone fervently believes he is
> right. If none of us were passionate about it, RAMD would not exist.
>
> problems. To them, new is good and old is bad. To be innovative is
> good and to do the same old thing is bad. Who wants to see the same
> thing over and over? We traditionalists understand this, as much as
> Winston Churchill, an artist as well as a statesman, did:
>
> "Without tradition, art is a flock of sheep without
> a shepherd. Without innovation, it is a corpse."
>
> So did John A. Locke, who proposed a middle ground solution:
>
> "That which is static and repetitive is boring. That
> which is dynamic and random is confusing. In between
> lies art."
>
Good ,excellent post.I rarely comment on the stuff that goes on
here,other than an occasional joke,but,this post hits home
hard.Especially like the Zappa quote.
J
James Christian
James
Mar-Jean Fine
I agree, Keith, but Dale does this stuff for fun! (I thought it was
something for a MENSA meeting). I think I need to spend more time with
my husband!
I really enjoyed his post, and thought every quote was completely
relevant. I did, however, mention to Dale that I thought he should
have put a Groucho Marx quote in there....
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mar-Jean Fine (a.k.a. Cru3r...@cs.com)
1996-Present: Rochester Crusaders-Baritone
1989-1991: Steel City Ambassadors-Snare & Baritone
***American Coaster Enthusiasts Member***
VKGARRY73
VKG
sarnia sam
Dale:
This is one of those things I look at and think - I wish I had said that.
Your post pretty much nails it all. It amply describes this Old Phart's
point of view (and I would think many of the rest of us). I like change -
when it improves a situation. I lived through the implementation of change
in the 70's and early 80's, most of which was good for drum corps, some of
which hasn't been good.
I work in a profession that has had enormous technical change (television
news), which has done much to make doing the job easier, or could have.
Unfortunately the pencil pushers saw different advantages, and the
quality/content of the news put out has actually declined (but it looks
better). If not for the dedication of journalists trained years ago, it
would have slipped even further. Newcomers to the job are a constant source
of irritation, especially non-editorial management, because they lack
critical abilities to understand the consequence of their decisions. My job
is harder to do now than it was 5 years ago, and it ain't the technology
that makes it so, it's policy that does. I see parallels to drum corps.
Drum Corps has not responded to the conditions of our times (i.e. the
economy <as money got tight and expenses went up, it abandoned the regional
aspect>, external demands for time <nintendo, MTV, and other competing
interests for the attention of younger folk>, changes in family dynamics and
the need for both parents to work, worse - one parent families, etc.).
Instead a few in powerful positions looked in the wrong directions to
explain decline, and latched onto the wrong solutions with incomplete
reasoning, or reasoning that has been shot full of holes by those who take a
critical approach (which does not imply negative, look up the word critical
before anyone decides to flame away), but have no vote. Drum Corps had an
opportunity to fill a gap, several, in society and shallow thinkers wasted
that opportunity.
And as many of your quotes and thoughts are appropriate in describing my
take on the situation, I see many that apply to Hopkins and company in
describing their motivation, or lack of, for wanting to try anything they
think might work without clearly envisioning the outcome, or worse having a
vision they won't clearly state to the rest of us. I say the latter with
qualification, some on this group do know the hidden agenda by piecing
together statements made over several years.
Your post should be required reading for all concerned.
Regards,
John Swartz
Oakland Crusaders 77-80
Keith Hall
>something for a MENSA meeting). I think I need to spend more time with
>my husband!
Yes you do! LOL
Neil L. Quinn
> Whither Tradition?
>
>
>
> For the sake of drum corps, the best path, not merely to survival but
> outright prosperity, should be to combine the best of tradition with
> the best of innovation. As Churchill said, both are necessary for art
> to live well. Reformers, do not blindly follow the whims of fashion.
> And Traditionalists, we should not blindly cling to the immovable rock
> of ages past. But lastly, and most importantly, in the battle to be
> right, we should not forget that drum corps is what we're really all
> about.
>
> Dale Fine, Baritone
> Steel City Ambassadors 1987
> Butler Soundwave 1995
> Rochester Crusaders 1996 - present
Dale, this is a "Fine" post(sorry, gang, I just couldn't resist). Is
the gRAMDie committee reading??? Truly luminous thoughts with great
quotes as supportive material. Hope it makes some people think ...
More Later ... Neil
Catherine
DO be certain to submit this to the Symposium. (I've been saving it to read
through at a calm moment...) Your essay contains some truly excellent
criticism of our "flourishing drum corps activity" which I hope will be
taken to heart by sincere individuals.
BTW... For more about G.K. Chesterton, one good URL is
http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dcs6mpw/gkc/ Once again, there's an Oscar tie - Mr.
Chesteron was born in 1876, 22 years after Oscar's birth, and a Chesterton
was a friend of George Bernard Shaw (who was a friend of both Oscar and Lord
Alfred Douglas, amongst others in Oscar's circle).
Yet another of Chesterton's works is called "Heresy", the Introduction to
which can be found at http://www.biblebell.org/visitors/heretics1.html and a
few of Mr. Fine's quotations are from that book. Therein is the following:
"In the fifteenth century men cross-examined and tormented a man because he
preached some immoral attitude; in the nineteenth century we feted and
flattered Oscar Wilde because he preached such an attitude, and then broke
his heart in penal servitude because he carried it out. It may be a question
which of the two methods was the more cruel; there can be no kind of
question which was the more ludicrous.
"The age of the Inquisition has not at least the disgrace of having produced
a society which made an idol of the very same man for preaching the very
same things which it made him a convict for practicing."
After all... Such hypocracy!!
I have no doubt Mr. Chesterton read and discussed Oscar often - if only for
the "There is nothing that fails like success" which could well be a play on
Oscar's "Nothing succeeds like excess". Wonderful stuff there... And
"Heresy" is definitely a book I'll have ta read!
-- Catherine
************************************************