u/JesuSpectre

Judges will determine finals rankings by each show's depth of concept. That's right.

Design matters.

For example, it's the difference between Crown's 2025 show before prelims, and after. When Crown added the Fortuna character consuming an unsuspecting victim of Fate, the crowd screamed because there was meaning. (Finally.)The judges duly increased Crown's score. That's an obvious example.

Shows are ranked according to their concept design quality within slots. Concept design quality requires the following:

• Specific subject and theme (articulable, immediate, high stakes)
• Cohesion of elements
• Arc of action or imagery
• Universality of theme
• Authenticity
• Uniqueness
• Emotion/Pathos

1. Bluecoats - Gravity and Grace - The Bluecoats illustrate gravity-- using a planetary path from backfield to front, with see-saws and deflating windsock puppets. Brian Wilson's God Only Knows adds another layer of gravitational weight with its existential-adjacent lyrics. Wilson's tune is the backbone for this complex mix of elements around the ups and downs of human existence. Deep, playful, powerful, and resonant.
2. Blue Devils- BD presents an Icarus sequel where he survives his fall, and is recognized for risk-taking, rather than his failure. The show repositions our judgment of our own failed ventures. Broken wings are a path to discovery, (and a path to the urgent care.) However, the show design is scattered and episodic, with disconnected scenelettes. Designers are saving an ending until finals.
3. Carolina Crown - Alduos Huxley discovered hallucinogens as a door to enlightenment, putting the metaphysical universe within reach. But why Ave Maria? Perhaps it's an ode to the Christian madonna who appears in apparitions, and comforts those in "times of trouble", but the use of the classical piece is generally unexplained. Does it fit? Designers must tell us why.
4. Boston Crusaders - Blurred Lines gets high with A Little Help from My Friends. But that's it? There are plenty of visual depictions of blurred images, from costuming effects to drill maneuvers constantly reshaping lines, and other drill effects. Sure, the choreography occasionally pairs friends helping each another with "getting by". But the show can't be about one pot reference, can it? The ending lacks clarity and points up a missing arc of dramatic action or imagery. How do you end a show if there's no pattern of meaning to start with?
5. Santa Clara cobbled together a theme of "youths" 6 to 12 jump-roping with chains, and the breaking free of chains, repeatedly. You gotta be kidding. The entire premise is child abuse-adjacent, and lacks any specific real-world context. Designers started with prop chains and reverse-engineered the theme around kids jump roping-- the only visual you can do with them. (Crown even includes a jump rope or two this year.) Designers' then forced themselves into the awkward "youth and vulnerability" corner, which then sent costume designers scrambling to sketch "youth" in their underwear-- white boxer shorts and white underslips. (Gulp.) Paramount/Warner Brothers would laugh these bozos out of the room at any music video concept development meeting. "You want what?!" "What children could we cast in this?" [ Cue: crashbox sound, call legal]. An amateurish exquisite corpse. An unresearched, first-draft, last-minute hybrid concept. An embarrassment for DCI.

"They drop their arms you’ll see a little peek of skin." (Costumer)

6. In Phantom's fourth wall-breaking "Bloodline", designers rushed to order a truckload of huge props-- eight foot tall identical blood-draw lancets to prove some imagined membership criterion for a "blood legacy". (It was an alumni ploy on its anniversary.) Designers paid extra for the lancets to compress and lay flat for some reason-- a meaningless attribute. By the end, the lancets have done nothing but pair like bird wings, and then point inward, a metaphor for the show's theme turning on itself in seppuku, as it desperately searches for definition and real-world context. Under-developed, unresearched, uncontextualized, and lacking peer review.

- - - -

Design impacts more than 50 percent of the score. From music selections, interpretation, visual setting, to drill, choreo, and action. Design is baked in to every caption on the scoresheet. The show concept contextualizes the music. But that's not what drum corps teaches its participants.

Designers want to avoid critiques by marching members. Drum corps designers coyly teach participants not to worry about the design. Not to meddle. Not to question it. Not to learn the basics of show design. (Designers barely know them, themselves.) Keeping participants in the dark is convenient for designers. Designers know deep down they haven't done the work to create a show that is logical, engagiing and with higher purpose.

Here are the likely GE and visual judges' notes with three weeks left:

1. Bluecoats - Change opening to be more clear in its visual game. What should the audience get from the opening segment? Don't spend so much time so far away from the audience, in the "stratosphere" at the beginning. Use distance from the audience as a potent spice. Also, what is your planned final visual that wraps up the show? Right now, the ending is flat.
2. Blue Devils- Why doesn't the Icarus character who appears at the end appear earlier? Why don't we recognize him? How is the end different from the beginning? What's your final set piece? An unexpected new flight with either new or reattached wings? A pair of wings on a drone that flies away?
3. Boston Crusaders - What transformation should the audience grasp by the end? What visual pattern should the audience become aware of during the show? There's a lack of a visual pattern in this show, and the audience is lost. The audience gets the "Get High With a Little Help from My Friends" reference, but the show must be more than a simple drug reference of blurred vision. The choreography and costuming generally refer to blurriness, or altered vision. But why? How are blurred lines represented elsewhere in the show, visually, and to what point?
4. Carolina Crown - How does the Ave Maria tie into Alduos Huxley? We've all heard of visitations of the Blessed Mother, but how exactly does this tie in to Huxley's vision of the afterlife, and how is she represented visually? What changes visually after the playing of Ave Maria (Ellens Gesang III)?
5. Cavaliers- Can you heighten the use of the secret "doors" on the ramp props at the end? Could everyone come bursting out of them at the end? What action transforms the "There was a boy..." character? Could his brother Sam help him down from a ledge? How is Michael different at the end? Could Michael orchestrate the single-file charge by the whole ensemble through the secret doors on the side of the ramps?
6. Santa Clara - Why are children 6-12 being represented jump roping in their boxer short underwear and in underslips, and restrained by chains? No explanation will ever be enough. Where is the specific context for this awkward, underdeveloped, unresearched scenario? PS: You're fired, and you deserve it. This design concept took you one night, and don't pretend it didn't. Change the age and costumes.
7. Phantom Regiment - How can you develop the use and logic of your large, unexplained stage sets? What happens in this show? What is the pattern? Can you develop some relatable action this late in the season? How are bloodlines challenged or rescinded? This show design illustrates a complete lack of visual communication skill. Subject. Theme. Pattern of action. Might as well do whatever you want, but this show cannot be recognized for its structure, symbology, immediacy, or clarity. The cat is out of the bag on this one-- there's no meaning. And we learned last year, without contextual meaning, there's no way to judge the music. Add a fabric element that comes out of the tips of the lancets with some meaning tied to them. Dates. Images. Anything.
8. Blue Stars - Can you clarify the arc of action with the frames. How can the audience predict what happens next? Wha pattern are you creating with the use of the frames? What happens on the ending to tie up the progression of action? What's your point of view about the frames?
9. Troopers - No changes. A sophisticated, deep commentary on wars and wars for profit, with strong, clear references to Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now. This masterful show upends Troopers' jingoistic "When Johnny Comes Marching Home" repertoire of the 1970's. This concept is ballsy, immediate and high-stakes. It is a sign that the Troopers design team is next level.

This post is not a joke. I have nowhere else to post my commentary, after having been banned on all platforms.

- - - -

Bluecoats' red "found object sculptures" backfield are car wash windsock puppets, only viewable at a certain angle, much like the show theme. (Have you seen art sculptures that do this-- at a certain angle, the sculpture of random objects appears to be a bird or a flower.)

As you've seen at car washes, the wind puppets collapse to the ground with gravity every 20 seconds or so, and then rise back up. Their movement from gravitational pull ties into the Bluecoats' theme. The winning element in the puppets is their hair-- the top of their heads is a spinning device that also ties into the warbling, vibrato/tremulo device the percussion uses throughout the show. The puppets' arms are cyllinders, like the see-saw platforms use. One of the arms has planetary path lines on it. The base of the windsock is a see-saw base. Masterful integration of visual and musical elements. Dazzling, whimsical, profound. Brilliant show design for the win.

https://preview.redd.it/a4hwjd0bcnch1.png?width=521&format=png&auto=webp&s=08fad9152b1404874f1f0baa22d64ec89f1a4dc1

The Blue Devils use the Fiona poem Rewriting Icarus as the basis for the subject and theme of their show. (Fiona *weareallboats* is an online poet. She shouldn’t to be confused with the famous and award winning UK poets Fiona Benson or Fiona Sampson.) Fiona wrote the poem which re-contextulizes Icarus as a triumph of risk and reward, rather than a failure of hubris. She says that taking a risk and failing is better than hiding in the weeds. The show topic appears to be an introspective moment for Scott Chandler who placed outside the top three for the first time in his eight natural lives, and perhaps he is having a moment of reflection.

Chandler's exquisite and thoughtful Variations on a Gathering was a necessary political call to action, begging all parties to come to the proverbial table, after recent gatherings of hundreds of millions in the street protesting our buffoon president. BD's show begged us to look at ourselves as birds in flight, naturally following in one another's paths, in unified formation for the common good. Gathering placed fourth, a surprise for the stalwart designer Chandler. BD's 2026 show perhaps comments on his own "fall" (to fourth place).

BD's Zei starts with the strangest, most frivolous and low-stakes feathers floating aimlessly from the sky, without any emotion or investment. The two dancers who are holding the wings appear to be on thorazine, and are no more concerned about falling to earth at terminal velocity than getting a cup of joe at Starbucks. This is a missed opportunity for what we all want to see-- the grizzly death and fall to earth. Missed action set piece number one.

The stage sets appear to be either clouds or bird wing skeleton structures, and have no interactive use, other than to "define the space" which is any prop's weakest excuse. At the end, they assemble as a single set of new huge wings, possibly a symbol of rebirth or trying again, but the message is unclear. The audience expects the rolling devices to have some physical transformational value.

This show's biggest design concerns are the lack of emotion, the lack of any narrative clarity, and a lack of a defined single character, Zei. At least pick someone to play him. The effort at multiple castings benefits the theme in that Icarus's flight applies to all of us, sure. But the lack of focus fails to coalesce into a specific narrative. Where is he? What is he feeling? What is his mission? How does he fail, regroup, and succeed? We don't know because we can't find him anywhere on this massive stage. There is no injury. There is no pain. There is no arc of emotion. There is no central focus. There seems to be an intentional lack of defined narrative action set pieces in this show. Instead we see grouping clusters of horn players around a single random dancer, which then dissipates with no resulting effect, a tired trope in this activity. The choreography and drill movement do little to define or clarify any action.

BD demonstrates a strange narrative weakness in the show. At one point in the middle of the show, the ensemble is tightly clustered, and Zei appears to clear his way from the back to the front of the crowd, and then, once in front, outstretches his arms, flapping, as if in flight. Perhaps it's going to be a crowd surfing action set piece, in development, still. There is no detail, no depth, no story context, no effort to define how this fits into an overall narrative arc, and no new information. Worse, we haven't really seen this performer earlier in the production-- who is he? This tells the judges that designers paid little attention to any kind of storyboard sequence, or any abstract sequence of imagery for that matter. Is he ready to try to fly again? Or is he flying again now? Where are we in the sequence? We have no idea. Perhaps in the body surfing moment, the crowd will offer him new wings, once he surfs to the front. But this moment is critical to the spine of the piece, and should already be choreographed and in place. It's not that hard. The fact that it is not completed is a sign to the judges of unpreparedness, and that designers are searching in the dark for meaningful action set pieces-- a sign of struggle for narrative clarity. I mean, come on. With a four week run, you should have your main action set pieces in place.

The show is diligently packed with symbolism, in usual BD style. Last year's uniform featured white "arm casts" indicating broken arms of cultural scapegoats, and that still applies to this year's theme with a fall to earth. Sky imagery on the chest, perhaps fiery red on the legs, speckled stars (a symbol of yearning), a belt or cummerbund that has perhaps come dangerously loose, and a transformational color palate that shows a range of intensities-- from calm to fiery during the accident. The neck collar perhaps harkens back to ancient Greek garb, and loose cape like elements on the legs show motion and perhaps heat and fire, which brought Icarus down. All these costume elements shine with BD's typical careful symbolism and detail. So why is the narrative progression so lacking in comparison?

At another point earlier in the show, one ensemble member collapses. Is he our man? Should we give him our focus? No. He gets up and joins the ensemble as if nothing had happened. No meaning. No stakes. No bruises. No processing. Then another "Icarus" takes focus for 16 counts. It's repetitive, episodic, and any hidden transformation is hard to follow.

Rebranding Icarus’s fall as a "success" doesn’t mean that he wasn’t in pain. Just because he laughed falling at 120 MPH doesn't mean he didn't scream with a broken pelvis when he landed. Without some range of emotion, we don't see his 360 degree character rotation. With an intense sense of Evel Knieval adventure, and a range of emotion, the show's stakes can raise through the roof.

The sequence is further confused by an opening that starts with everyone already having fallen to the ground in clumps. No major film studio or music video director starts after the fun part. We want to see the desperate fall in action, and then we can climb aboard the regrouping effort-- that's where the audience's emotional investment lies.

This is a serious take. I've been banned on all other platforms. My objective is to discuss design and design principles. It's not about "feeling" and "my interpretation." There are design principles underneath professional design. Learn them. 1) Subject 2) Theme 3) Cohesion 4) Universality 5) Uniqueness 6) Authenticity 7) Emotional scripting 8) The rule of three 9) Powerful endings 10) Avoiding unilateral decisions by using group think, etc.

- --

Bloo's 2026 show design for Gravity and Grace soars above many competitors' designs. The complex theme includes elements illustrating the pull of gravity and planetary path lines, the sun's force, the ups and downs of human existence (teeter-totters, extreme volume changes), and even the emotional weight of depression, in Brian Wilson's God Only Knows.

This masterful collection of visual elements is perfectly aligned and fits together beautifully. The theme is both scientific and human-- something last year's show couldn't muster. It's clear that designers spent more than two weeks throwing it together, unlike Phantom and SCV. (SCV has cut nearly all its jump rope sequences already-- a catastrophic design blunder.) Bluecoats' cohesion around the subject of planetary gravity and gravity-adjacent life events is perfectly balanced, philosophical, and fun.

The design is almost so expert, it's almost reckless and defiant. The inclusion of the car wash windsock puppet sculptures is whimsical at first. In the background, these sculptures are symbolic of the absurd ups and downs of gravity, but there's more to it. The sculptures use the technique of anamorphic found object sculptures to create car wash windsock puppets visible only at a certain angle, complete with whirly-bird head-tops. The puppets can only be discovered by a certain angle of human perception, same as the show theme.

The early musical sequences are choppy and experimental, but set up a clean slate for the lush and flowing arrangement of God Only Knows. A final visual effect with the teeter totters is needed to clinch the win.

The design is sophisticated, smart and soul-searching on life's biggest topics.

Virtuosic design for the win.

Here's how SCV's troubled 2026 show design evolved around the design table. The progression is blatantly obvious.

1. Selected theme: breaking free of constraints.
2. Let's use chains. yeah... long chains!
3. Twirl the chains, make them elongated... wait, we can jump rope!
4. Make them girls jumping rope! School girls in parochial school uniforms jumping rope. And then the schoolgirls get restrained by chains!

HOLY SHIT. Now you have a show about vulnerable 6-18 year old girls tied down with chains. That's an entry-level design snafu stumbled upon by inexperienced writers and producers. It's a thematic incongruity. Plus, who gets in front of a video camera and says "Our show is about youth and vulnerability", and then shows school girls in high school uniforms and in chains. Did they think for even one minute about the optics?

In WGI, there are plenty of women-centered themes about women's empowerment, and young female empowerment. They're careful about the symbolism and prop use, making sure it's ge appropriate for the performers. SCV's color guard is primarily women, and the designers are exclusively men.

PROBLEM: Jump ropers in the US are girls 6-12 in age. Chains? Really? You're doing a show about 6 to 12 year old girls in chains? Underage girls being asked to break all the rules, be reckless, with abandon, and "be vulnerable"? Umm.....

PROBLEM: The designers are men, telling schoolgirls they need to be more "reckless" and act with "abandon" and "risk-taking" and "breaking from the rules"? That sounds like the movie Lolita. You can see how uncomfortable the SCV designers are describing this in their intro video.

PROBLEM: Girls dressed in school uniforms are from primarily private schools. Is this about underage girls in private schools? Or the scant 19 percent of public schools who wear uniforms? Why private schools? How do private schools tie into this theme?

PROBLEM: Where are the female subject matter experts? mmm. Where are the women designers? Who's guiding this concept about underage girls?

PROBLEM: Why are grade school and high girls' clothes ripped? What "sports" are they doing to rip their clothes? What are they doing to get their clothes ripped? If it's a metaphor about psychological battle, what battles, specifically? Why are none of these activities or battles represented?

PROBLEM: Why are school girls playing with chains and being tied down? After they jump rope? Who is tying them down? Who is the antagonist?

This show concept is completely under-developed. vague, with mismatched-layered themes, inspired by the prop "chains". It is rushed, first-draft, uninspired, full of socially awkward pitfalls, and unclear in its focus. This show alleges to be a cultural commentary about "everyone," but visually features only young school girls in uniform and jumping rope. Even with the upcoming choreographed "jump the river" and "snake" sequences which will rile up the audience, the jump rope sequences must be removed to delete the awkward "youth" references.

CHANGES YOU WILL SEE:

1. Delete the school girl skirts, raise the age. (Experienced show designers avoid child-themes because it's such a mine field. (Not SCV. Like moths to a flame, they're so inexperienced, it's almost comedic.)
2. Reduce the jump-rope activity to the beginning in the preshow only with a few high school skirts, representing early years, then, when the show starts, adulthood, get rid of the schoolgirl uniform.
3. Retain all the other chain activities including soon-to-be-revealed "jump the river" and "snake" sequences.
4. You must define the age of adulthood for these characters. Start the show with a brief graduation VO "Congratulations high school class of 2026!"Or have the dancers remove their caps and gowns.
5. You must define what "freedom" young girls are being denied, and who is denying them. Specificity is key. A subtle clue is all you need.
6. Would it kill you to reference a poem or a literary work to represent young women "breaking free" and in what way? This would go a long way to help narrow the subject matter.
7. Get a female subject matter expert on board immediately to explain what "boundaries" eight year old girls should be breaking, for example, and what rules they break with "reckless abandon". Hopefully the SME is a female.

Fucking oy vey.

Here's how SCV's troubled 2026 show design developed around the design table. The progression is blatantly obvious.

1. Selected theme: breaking free of constraints.
2. Let's use chains. yeah... long chains!
3. Twirl the chains, make them elongated... wait, we can jump rope!
4. Make them girls jumping rope! School girls jumping rope. And then the schoolgirls get restrained by chains!

HOLY SHIT. Now you have a show about eight year old girls tied down with chains. That's a freshman-level design problem for student writers and producers.

PROBLEM: Jump ropers in the US are girls 6-12 in age. Chains? Really? You're doing a show about 8 to 12 year old girls in chains? Underage girls being asked to break all the rules? Umm.....

PROBLEM: This show is about jump-roping private school girls 8 to 12, and the designers are men, telling them they need to be more "reckless" and act with "abandon" and "risk-taking" and "breaking from the rules"? That sounds like the movie Lolita. You can see how uncomfortable the SCV designers are describing this. OMG it's so embarrassing.

PROBLEM: Girls dressed in school uniform skirts are overwhelmingly 6 to 18, and in private schools. Is this about underage girls in private schools? Or the scant 19 percent of public schools who wear uniforms? Why private schools? How do private schools tie into this theme?

PROBLEM: Where are the female subject matter experts? mmm. Where are the women designers? Who's guiding this concept about underage girls?

PROBLEM: Why are grade school and high girls' clothes ripped? What "sports" are they doing to rip their clothes? What are they doing to get their clothes ripped? Why are none of these activities represented?

PROBLEM: Why are school girls playing with chains? Why are they representing being tied down? After they jump rope? Who is tying them down? Who is the antagonist?

This show concept is complete, embarrassing, amateurish garbage, created around cheap prop "chains". It is rushed, uninspired, full of pitfalls, and unclear in its focus. This show is a disaster, even with the upcoming choreographed "jump the river" and "Snake" sequences.

CHANGES:

1. Delete the school girl skirts, raise the age. (Experienced show designers avoid child-themes because it's such a mine field. Not SCV. Like moths to a flame, they're so inexperienced, it's almost comedic.
2. Reduce the jump-rope activity to the beginning to the preshow only with a few high school skirts, representing early years, then, when the show starts, adulthood.
3. You must define what "freedom" young girls are being denied, and who is denying them. Specificity is key. A subtle clue is all you need.
4. Would it kill you to reference a poem or a literary work to represent young women "breaking free" and in what way? This would go a long way to help narrow the subject matter.
5. Get a female subject matter expert on board immediately to explain what "boundaries" eight year old girls are breaking. Hopefully the SME is a female.

Fucking oy vey.

The following post is earnest, and not meant as satire. I've been banned from every platform except this one. My intent is to raise awareness in marching members of what they are not being taught-- principles of show design found in all professional performing arts. Know your show. Know why you're paying your designers $80,000, and whether they're following common sense principles of production design, from music videos to opera.

- - - - -

Phantom's 2026 show Bloodline is touted as an illustration of fighting for supremacy to maintain one's identity and legacy in history. That's either an amateurish attempt at a corps anniversary theme, or a defense of racial dominance.

Gulp.

Considering our country's current state of racism, a headline-driven expulsion of Hispanics, and an administration with ties to Naziism, a show theme that alludes to dominant hereditary genes could not be more tone deaf. The fumbling Phantom design team has blundered again. Any respectable advertising agency, any corporation, any human rights organization celebrating an anniversary, any media outlet, any educational entity, any arts festival with an anniversary, any museum, any government entity would steer clear of any mention of genetic dominance. It's so amateurish and blundering, it's cringe-worthy.

If a designer wanted to do an anniversary show, you'd probably be better off by sticking with "The Calling" (sci-fi adventure recruitment theme) or "On the Shoulders of Giants" (whole corps on stilts), or get the rights to the title "The Ring Cycle", a play on Phantom's seeking and winning championship rings.

But to place lancets on the field, as if it is a literal blood test, a genetic test, shifts the focus from the muse-influenced calling of drum corps participants, and instead focuses on the ugly subject of genetic testing and racial dominance. Worse, the show makes no use of the lancets. No blood is drawn. The lancets simply roam, shift location, and end up creating a strange formal facade, as if from a castle at Mar-a-lago, or the grandiloquent border decoration on the new Trump currency. The gloomy premise of genetic dominance smacks of white nationalism.

Clumsy theme aside, nothing happens in the show. There is no illustrated challenge to the "bloodline." There is no dramatic action. There is no risk-taking, or defense of the bloodline, or other actions mentioned in their press release. There is no pattern of action or progression of imagery. There is no real-world use of the large lancet props. They serve no thematic or practical purpose. They don't transform in any way. There's only a generalized "aggression", which will soon deflate and flounder without some additional thematic layer or dramatic action by August. This is a sixth-place, push-and-pose design with studio musician-level talent that needs additional elements in order to save it:

• --Perhaps an ending reveal of six large scale props or flags, each representing an iconic show in the corp's history. The arrow flag from New World Symphony, the cube from Mynd, Juliet in her red dress, and the yellow Beethoven flag-- all massive and stately. Each of these revealedin succession in the finale, with the last one-- one of the lancet props turns, tilts down and hurtles toward the Spartacus Roman Senator Crassus who is stabbed by the lancet and is impaled, just like Phantom's Spartacus finale. All of these represent the defense of the storied, imagined "bloodline" of the corps.
• Or another option, blood pours out of the tips of the lancets (wide bolts of red fabric) with various salient dates imprinted on them-- dates of Phantom's wins, or Shostakovich's birthday, and the like. These dates remind us of the important milestone's in Phantom's "legacy". The dated banners help create the story of the imagined "bloodline" of the corps.

In the future, PR's scholarship-level talent will soon learn to take over the production development process in order to secure a win by developing a clear, visually engaging pattern of action, required for top placement.

The $7.99 special is an absolute farce. People are walking out of the store like they’ve been punched in the stomach.