|
Absolutlely, my paragraph you sited below had some
extremely emotively charged languange in it, based on my own subjective feelings
of the music, mixed with some not-so creative observations about a performances
creative character. I rather enjoyed writing it and would write it
again if the context fit. It was also partly humorious, which doesn't come
across in email...sometimes a simple :) doesn't cut it.
I like your criteria. It's is generic l enough to
fit to a large percentage of us loopers and musicians. If you stood a pyramid on
its head, which broadly applied critera on the top and narrow below, I think
your would rank one of the top.
Kris
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 1:19
AM
Subject: Re: Keller Williams / jam bands/
rc50
That's true, you never said they had no talent.
However, the description you did offer comes doesn't come across as
someone with a differing sense of aesthetics offering an even-handed
assessment of something that doesn't rank highly based on those criteria, but
a slagfest on what you perceive as...practically worthless.
Reading your assessment of Keller Williams leads me to believe that
the only things he has going for him is that 1) he enjoys what he's doing and
2) his large fan base enjoys what he's doing. When you throw in the fact
that he earns a living doing this, I'd have to say that's what I consider a
very successful musician, on all levels. Here's the criteria I
use:
Doing something you love, having lots of people appreciate it (in
my personal criteria having "more" people liking what I love to do is
preferable to "few" or "none") and getting paid for it (again, "more money for
what I love to do" being preferable to "less" or "none")--that's as good as it
gets.
The particulars of "what you love to do" are irrelevant in
this case, but who wouldn't want all three of the the above?
TH
On 11/29/06, Krispen
Hartung <khartung@cableone.net>
wrote:
Very observant, Travis, but I never said that
anyone had "no talent". nice try. Even an amateur guitar player
has talent. Whether they are inspiring and creative is a different matter,
in my opinion.
Kris
----- Original
Message -----
On 11/29/06, Krispen
Hartung <khartung@cableone.net> wrote:-----
Original Message -----
From: "Miko Biffle" < biffoz@arczip.com>
> I'm just questioning some
of the so-called obvious assertions you're
> writing
> reams
about. I don't buy the no-talent, anyone-can-do-it theory.
I never claimed that anyone had no talent. You must be referring
to someone
else or misrepresenting my points to conveniently, albeit
fallaciously refute
them.
-------------------------
Krispen Hartung, not
twenty-four hours earlier: "[referring to nameless jam bands,
other than, at times, Phish]...a mind numbing, THC induced,
drone-on-the-same-string/scale-for-a-fucking-hour fest. You could
take a nap, wake up and hear the same shit playing. Most jam bands
I've seen are virtually devoid of any creativity. It's a social thing,
albeit, like sex, drugs, and alcohol with Rock n' Roll...no one expects
artistic genius. Even Keller's set is not that inspiring from a
creativity standpoint. The final music output is entirely unoriginal...the
chops are standard (except the vocals and therimin playing, which have
much to be desired), and the looping technique is fundamental. That's his
bag I guess,but I'd wager that any of the competant multi-instrumentalists
out there (thousands) could pull a similar set off with little effort,
after learning the basic functions of the looping device. What is left
after stripping every other possible unique factor away from his set is
that he appears to be one of the only successful guys doing it for large
crowds...this says
nothing of the music, by the way, just
marketing, time, and energy to create
a niche. I'm sure it works for
him...I'd comittt suicide if my musical
career came down to that.
I hope this gets someone bent out of shape...I
like bending
people out of shape! :)"
|
