Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Hi all. Very interesting discussion - and about as many opinions as there are posters. I don't have much to add. I do see a bit of everyone's point of view. Here's a slightly different variation. I started out as a visual artist and had much education/training and a very modest career track-record as such decades ago. Music was only a "hobby" at the time and not something I shared with the public (or hardly even friends). When I was having art shows, I never worried about what sort of muzak was being played at the gallery opening. It did not concern me what sort of wine was being served nor what the cheese and hors d'oeuvres plate looked like. Vivaldi's "Rite of Spring" had nothing at all to do with my work and might (even so) be wafting about on speakers somewhere but it didn't bother me. At the time I would never have presumed to tell the gallery people what to serve or what sort of "muzak" to employ. That was their business, I was just a painter. I doubt if anyone was there to hear the Vivaldi - though I am sure it made the evening more pleasant (less tedious) for some. There might have been a few there who's objective in attending was specifically the free food and drink (and might not have come otherwise). Most were probably there to see and be seen by the other attendees - or were dragged there by someone who was. And . . . a few . . . were there to see the art . . . or me . . . or some mixture of the two. It's that way with every musical audience too. Add a bit more alcohol, dancing, smoke, caffeine, chit-chat, ennui, and maybe lights and video and you have an typical local music venue. People come for different aspects of the experience - often without actually even realizing it. Some people are so conditioned by TV and movies to expect some form of "visual" with any musical experience that some sort of "show" had better be provided (if the band wants to come across), even if it's an ersatz or totally random one - like showing cartoons with the sound off behind the band while it plays. It's like the obligatory wine, cheese, and Vivaldi at the art gallery - obligatory and mostly harmless. Personally, I have often wished I was more of a "performer" - because that is what the public really wants (or seems to respond to). They want you to be the music AND the cartoon . . . so-to-speak. I have at times been obliged to augment my performances with modern dancers, vintage or abstract film, avant-garde theatre, video, fancy lights, etc. Sometimes it is fun. Sometimes it is even "successful" as an artistic statement and/or experience. However, I am just not a person who is much interested in coordinating and integrating all that into an organically complete presentation much of the time. Some of you are - and my hat is off to you - God bless you. But, if it ever comes to the point that artful music itself becomes generally less "valid" because the musician is not also a great dancer, video auteur, standup comedian, story-teller, magician, juggler, jack-of-all-trades, plus is also a physically beautiful specimen, bon vivant and a bit of a slut as well, then most of us are really and truly sunk and may as well go home. That's the sort of message the music industry has encouraged for an eternity and a day. That's not a bus I can . . . or want to . . . ride at this point (if ever I could). Best regards, tEd ® KiLLiAn http://www.myspace.com/tedkillian http://www.reverbnation.com/tedkillian http://www.pfmentum.com/PFMCD007.html http://www.CDbaby.com/cd/tedkillian http://www.guitar9.com/fluxaeterna.html http://www.indiejazz.com/ProductDetailsView.aspx?ProductID=193 http://guitarplayer.com/article/y2k6-international-live/Jun-07/27768 Ted Killian's "Flux Aeterna" is also available at Apple iTunes