Non-traditional intros trending?

[Drewcipher]

I prefer intros that have substance to them and introduce the theme in a fun way, but that may just be me.

[superfluous]

As a judge and coach, I have an intense dislike for these sort of intros... mostly because they're a waste of my time. I'm a little more tolerant of them in HI, although I still feel they're pointless because your piece should be funny to begin with and one more joke isn't going to make a difference, but when these sort of intros pop up in prose and duo I'm even more irritated by them. Considering the fact that forensics is supposed to be an academic activity, what students are supposed to be learning from interp events is how to interpret literature. Not in the way we throw usually throw interpret around (voices, ect), but how to find the theme and key elements in a piece of literature, and the introduction is the most direct way to show a judge that you are learning, not simply performing. Also I prefer a solid traditional intro because in addition to informing me why I should care about this story, you're also informing me why you care about this story, and a competitor showing me that they really do care and are passionate about this is the best way to get me on your side.

[Crimson]

when these sort of intros pop up in prose and duo I'm even more irritated by them.

Really? Prose? Personally, if you start out with one and than continue to explain or if it does the explaining for you and it's in humor, I'm ok with it. But like prose and drama it's not OK because you need to show us your perception of the piece and I enjoy seeing where people have taken things and for me I use my intro to kind of represent my character for the rest of the piece.