Better late than never:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91CNb1yXg2E
L
Lucas Youngs
10 years ago
While I understand some of the reasons that were put forth for changing the duo rules there are still some issues that were not addressed. First, in the response by the board they completely ignored the fact that the rules were not voted on THIS YEAR, and only mentioned what they MIGHT do next year. Secondly, the board brushed off all the people that have been working on their speeches over the summer. The board stated that: already finished speeches could just be turned to OIs, yet that leaves two people with a lot of wasted time, the same script that they can't both use for other speeches, and if they still want to do a duo then they have to start all over again. In my opinion, while the rule changes may or may not have been needed, as they were not voted on this year they should be changed back regardless of whether or not it's past September 1st. Also, I'm not trying to sound rude, but I think STOA needs to change something about how it deals with and responds to its members.
I
Isaac DeJager
10 years ago
I common misconception within duo is creativity is the point. The majority of judges examine and judge duos upon their originality and fancy blocking. Disney duos are fun to watch, as their blocking is often creative and cool. I wont deny, it is fun to preform and watch this blocking, but this feature moves the entire point of interpretation.
What is more important? Cool blocking and writing your own script, or digging deep into actual, quality literature full of deep meaning, then bringing it to life with creative characters, blocking, and emotion?
One argument that is presented in the petition is that this new rule reduces education. In the previous system, all the education came not from the literature, but from the blocking and characters. It moved from reading and understanding to theater. Theater is an amazing skill to have, but it is not the point of interpretation.
Please do not consider this marvelous event something to simply have fun with. It is a serious learning experience with searching through quality literature, understanding the authors intent, and presenting that intent to an audience.
M
Marc DeJager
10 years ago
I think i'll just be lost in the comments, but I'm still going to present my own view.
It would take far too long to respond individually to each and every point here, so i'll just hit the big ones.
I can help enlighten you on reason 4, that is the justification for the change is too vague. The reason for the change is that duo has become increasingly infected with what my club likes to call "gimmicks", that is speeches the sole purpose of which is for two people to go up in front of an audience and be silly for 10 minutes. I witnessed a perfect example of this is in duo finals at NITOC 2015. The team had amazing synchronization, humor, and blocking, but a story was utterly lacking. This is entirely the wrong direction for duo to go, and the board has decided to return duo to its original purpose by removing the temptation of speakers to depart from the ORIGINAL INTENT of the piece and instead write their own stories.
This is key in understanding why the board made this decision without a vote. The purpose of duo, as presented on the stoa website, calls for an INTERPRETATION OF LITERATURE, not a ten-minute two-person skit meant to entertain.
"To select and analyze literature, then bring it to life through the creative use of voice, facial expression, and movement without interacting face-to-face."
I realize that this will decrease the population of the event. Frankly, that is a good thing. This rule change will weed out the duos that do not live up to the purpose of the event, and allow those that have followed the intent of duo interp, but have been repeatedly pushed out by gimmicks and silliness, to finally shine.
If this brings on a firestorm of hate, so be it. I believe this change is the best thing to happen to stoa sense the adding of storytelling as a wildcard. But don't even get me started on that.
Suffice to say, the board knows that a vote will never allow this change to happen, and as much as it goes against the public's wishes, it MUST happe
S
Sara Shipley
10 years ago
While I am aware that a lot of discussion and thought goes into decisions affecting the Stoa league, and that it is not a simple matter for the board and committee, I would respectfully request that they reconsider this "executive decision", and revert back to the original duo rules, allowing members to vote on it in the Spring. In so doing, Stoa would give competitors, parents, and soon-to-be competitors the choice of how their event should be (or should not be) changed. I ask this because I know how much work the board and committee puts into decisions, and I know how committed they are to quality and serving the league. This is one way that they can serve the league best, by allowing them the freedom to vote on this significant change. The board's self-stated purpose is to serve the league, therefore, please let the league decide this. Thank you.
H
Heather Laky
10 years ago
We are among the families who spent time over the summer working on a piece and were very surprised that no announcement was even made about the change.
R
Randy Dunlevie
10 years ago
I see no reason to make changes to
last year's rules. They were good then and they are good now.
T
Tristan Kilby
10 years ago
I do not approve of the fact that STOA made this decision without voting. As well as that the disadvantages are non-existent compared to the negative effects that this rule change has on the Interp community.
C
Chandler Kilby
10 years ago
I strongly Dissagree.
J
Janet Neuenschwander
10 years ago
Please return the Duo expectations to the original. This petition is well stated and I so agree with it. The 150 limit of words added stifles the amazing creative and meaningful presentations. Having coached many duos, I have found the creative additions add great richness and depth to the pieces and allows for continued development throughout the season.
G
Giorgia Catalano
10 years ago
I competed three times in duo. The first two times my partner and I used pieces from books. My last year in speech, my partner and I did a completely original piece. My last year was so much more fun and we ended up doing much better and breaking several times. I feel allowing students to have the option to write their own piece should be encouraged.
D
Delaney Ward
10 years ago
My partner and I benefitted greatly during the 2012-2013 season because we were allowed freedom in writing, altering, and editing the Duo piece we chose. There is great skill involved with interpreting a selection of literature, using mind and motion.
S
Stephen Marshall
10 years ago
don't change the rules for Duos keep as they are.
J
Jackson De Vight
10 years ago
4 year alum
E
Emily Waldrum
10 years ago
I believe that both a restricted duo and open duo format both have some merits, so this vote is not in favor of open duo as much as it is to encourage more participation in changing the rules of events. I am all for putting the rule change up for a vote at the next league vote.
N
Neal
10 years ago
Noooooooo!!
A
Anonymous
10 years ago
Original duos leave so much more room for creativity!
K
Kyle Neuenschwander
10 years ago
Featured
My partner Sarah Salvatico and I competed in the 2012-2013 STOA season with a piece composed mostly of our own material. Without our creative efforts, we could not have touched the hearts of our audiences to anywhere near the same degree. Added material is crucial to creative interpretation. Please bring original duos back to STOA.
M
Milton Vincent
10 years ago
I agree. We appreciate your leadership, and ask that you consider these arguments.
agree
Better late than never: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91CNb1yXg2E
While I understand some of the reasons that were put forth for changing the duo rules there are still some issues that were not addressed. First, in the response by the board they completely ignored the fact that the rules were not voted on THIS YEAR, and only mentioned what they MIGHT do next year. Secondly, the board brushed off all the people that have been working on their speeches over the summer. The board stated that: already finished speeches could just be turned to OIs, yet that leaves two people with a lot of wasted time, the same script that they can't both use for other speeches, and if they still want to do a duo then they have to start all over again. In my opinion, while the rule changes may or may not have been needed, as they were not voted on this year they should be changed back regardless of whether or not it's past September 1st. Also, I'm not trying to sound rude, but I think STOA needs to change something about how it deals with and responds to its members.
I common misconception within duo is creativity is the point. The majority of judges examine and judge duos upon their originality and fancy blocking. Disney duos are fun to watch, as their blocking is often creative and cool. I wont deny, it is fun to preform and watch this blocking, but this feature moves the entire point of interpretation. What is more important? Cool blocking and writing your own script, or digging deep into actual, quality literature full of deep meaning, then bringing it to life with creative characters, blocking, and emotion? One argument that is presented in the petition is that this new rule reduces education. In the previous system, all the education came not from the literature, but from the blocking and characters. It moved from reading and understanding to theater. Theater is an amazing skill to have, but it is not the point of interpretation. Please do not consider this marvelous event something to simply have fun with. It is a serious learning experience with searching through quality literature, understanding the authors intent, and presenting that intent to an audience.
I think i'll just be lost in the comments, but I'm still going to present my own view. It would take far too long to respond individually to each and every point here, so i'll just hit the big ones. I can help enlighten you on reason 4, that is the justification for the change is too vague. The reason for the change is that duo has become increasingly infected with what my club likes to call "gimmicks", that is speeches the sole purpose of which is for two people to go up in front of an audience and be silly for 10 minutes. I witnessed a perfect example of this is in duo finals at NITOC 2015. The team had amazing synchronization, humor, and blocking, but a story was utterly lacking. This is entirely the wrong direction for duo to go, and the board has decided to return duo to its original purpose by removing the temptation of speakers to depart from the ORIGINAL INTENT of the piece and instead write their own stories. This is key in understanding why the board made this decision without a vote. The purpose of duo, as presented on the stoa website, calls for an INTERPRETATION OF LITERATURE, not a ten-minute two-person skit meant to entertain. "To select and analyze literature, then bring it to life through the creative use of voice, facial expression, and movement without interacting face-to-face." I realize that this will decrease the population of the event. Frankly, that is a good thing. This rule change will weed out the duos that do not live up to the purpose of the event, and allow those that have followed the intent of duo interp, but have been repeatedly pushed out by gimmicks and silliness, to finally shine. If this brings on a firestorm of hate, so be it. I believe this change is the best thing to happen to stoa sense the adding of storytelling as a wildcard. But don't even get me started on that. Suffice to say, the board knows that a vote will never allow this change to happen, and as much as it goes against the public's wishes, it MUST happe
While I am aware that a lot of discussion and thought goes into decisions affecting the Stoa league, and that it is not a simple matter for the board and committee, I would respectfully request that they reconsider this "executive decision", and revert back to the original duo rules, allowing members to vote on it in the Spring. In so doing, Stoa would give competitors, parents, and soon-to-be competitors the choice of how their event should be (or should not be) changed. I ask this because I know how much work the board and committee puts into decisions, and I know how committed they are to quality and serving the league. This is one way that they can serve the league best, by allowing them the freedom to vote on this significant change. The board's self-stated purpose is to serve the league, therefore, please let the league decide this. Thank you.
We are among the families who spent time over the summer working on a piece and were very surprised that no announcement was even made about the change.
I see no reason to make changes to last year's rules. They were good then and they are good now.
I do not approve of the fact that STOA made this decision without voting. As well as that the disadvantages are non-existent compared to the negative effects that this rule change has on the Interp community.
I strongly Dissagree.
Please return the Duo expectations to the original. This petition is well stated and I so agree with it. The 150 limit of words added stifles the amazing creative and meaningful presentations. Having coached many duos, I have found the creative additions add great richness and depth to the pieces and allows for continued development throughout the season.
I competed three times in duo. The first two times my partner and I used pieces from books. My last year in speech, my partner and I did a completely original piece. My last year was so much more fun and we ended up doing much better and breaking several times. I feel allowing students to have the option to write their own piece should be encouraged.
My partner and I benefitted greatly during the 2012-2013 season because we were allowed freedom in writing, altering, and editing the Duo piece we chose. There is great skill involved with interpreting a selection of literature, using mind and motion.
don't change the rules for Duos keep as they are.
4 year alum
I believe that both a restricted duo and open duo format both have some merits, so this vote is not in favor of open duo as much as it is to encourage more participation in changing the rules of events. I am all for putting the rule change up for a vote at the next league vote.
Noooooooo!!
Original duos leave so much more room for creativity!
My partner Sarah Salvatico and I competed in the 2012-2013 STOA season with a piece composed mostly of our own material. Without our creative efforts, we could not have touched the hearts of our audiences to anywhere near the same degree. Added material is crucial to creative interpretation. Please bring original duos back to STOA.
I agree. We appreciate your leadership, and ask that you consider these arguments.