[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: means to an end (was "the diatonic-chromatic-noise paradigm")

IMHO, I think we're expecting too much here.  I would LOVE for people to 
what goes into my music, or into my writing or into my engineering, or 
into my
artwork, buuuuut....

Our work is the sum output of what we put into it.  The music carries the
history in all it's veiled glory.  Music  (for that matter most art) in 
cultures,stands on its own to a greater extent and that's how we should 
others to interpret it. Sometimes the process and final form are 
intriguing in
that the listener or viewer says, "I didn't know you could get x by doing 
Yet, when music is heard at a function, on a radio, etc. we don't (and 
can't) pass out little flyers explaining every little bit of info going 
the art unless the process is the focus-pure and simple. While loopers are
process oriented folks taking pride in the techniques, the guts and the 
to the rest it's music, or art, or....

For me personally, I think music should take their thoughts off my 
stuff, off my
toys, off my techniques and focus on the deeper aspects of Mystery.  While
people may be intrigued by how I do my music and wowed by the fact that "it
sounded like 5 guitars playing at once," in the end, if they were moved and
pondered *THEIR* existences, *THEIR* lives and perceived beauty and wonder 
all their senses in spite of the fact that only one sense was stimulated, 
done what I've set out to do.




Quoting goddard.duncan@mtvne.com:

>>> It has to do with the "process" involved with creating music vs. 
>>> the just the output by and in itself. It must be how peoples' 
>>> brains work when they try to understand music, but I have met some 
>>> people who are only interested in the nature of the final sonic 
>>> output of a composition, and not "how" or the process by which it 
>>> was created. [snip]
> I was raving about the process by which I created some tune of mine, 
> and the other person basically didn't care...it was all about the 
> final output...<<
> if your listener is only concerned with the end-product, & not the 
> torture (or otherwise) involved in bringing it to life, then they are 
> missing a whole emotional dimension of the work in question.
> I bet they don't read sleevenotes either.
> they aren't appreciating the effort, the frustrations, the hours of 
> blistering practice sessions, the years of study..... the thousands 
> of dollars you've spent on toys to be able to do what you do.
> in short, your emotional investment is meaningless to them.
> & this is true of the "won't"s, aswell as the "can't"s.
> is it valid to appreciate the music entirely disregarding how it got 
> there? even if one were to accept that a musician is just a "channel" 
> for some higher entity, & that the music comes through rather than is 
> made by him, his listener in choosing to remain ignorant of this 
> process is being a bit disrespectful, no?
> I often wonder about this when considering the experiences of live 
> show vs recording, whether this latter is studio-crafted or 
> off-the-board-at-a-live-show.
> I might look into the audience while we're playing, & most of them 
> are either looking somewhere else or have their eyes shut.
> fair enough, I think, well at least they know we're here & that it 
> took us some effort to get here with our stuff & set it all up, & 
> hopefully they can also tell we're improvising.
> well.... can they? how does an innocent bystander, musician or no, 
> tell when you are improvising? is it easier to tell if it's a solo 
> artist or a group playing? & how much does it matter if they simply 
> don't care?
> we have some fans who turn up to every gig no matter what it costs 
> them to get there, & some other fans who wouldn't come see us live if 
> we played in their back garden. including a label boss, in fact, 
> who's never seen us play live. I think I need to do some research on 
> this.
> duncan.
> The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user
> of the e-mail address to which it was addressed, and may also
> be privileged.  If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may
> not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it
> in any form whatsoever.If you have received this e-mail in error,
> please e-mail the sender by replying to this message.
> It is your responsibility to carry out appropriate virus and other
> checks to ensure that this message and any attachments do not
> affect your systems / data. Any views or opinions expressed in this
> e-mail are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
> represent those of MTV Networks Europe unless specifically stated,
> nor does this message form any part of any contract unless so stated.
> MTV reserves the right to monitor e-mail communications from
> external/internal sources for the purposes of ensuring correct
> and appropriate use of MTV communication equipment.
> MTV Networks Europe