life (85) warhammer (50) politics (40) art (38) artists (27) mental health (26) future (25) music (22) culture (18) rabbit hole (12) wolfram (11) morality (8) poetry (8) brutal (7) camp awesome (7) personal history (7) poem (7) psoriasis (7) purity control (7) nWo (6) shame (6) cats (5) fear (5) books (4) crime (4) health (4) map (4) modelling (4) otherworld (4) sexuality (4) canada (3) technology (3) christasthostoraoraret (2) game/play (2) guilt (2) love (2) story (2) sundance (2) words (2) writing (2) zen (2) arcology (1) boomers (1) dream (1) eagles (1) fish (1) fluff (1) food (1) goldstream (1) haiku (1) hands (1) heroism (1) hockey (1) hummingbirds (1) instruments (1) magic (1) money (1) nature (1) sick (1) song (1) teeth (1) whales (1) win (1) youth (1)

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

the legend of music and why it must be encouraged to evolve and change

back in the here whereyonder, people started with the musics. first of all i'd wager theyd sit around or till or march to a bit of song someone made, that went round and round and had a bit of a payoff.

then as these grew more sophisticated, only some ppl could do the really good ones, and soloists came into a new prominence. but the ppl liked to howl something fun, it was their campfire time too, so we got the chorus. this was a bit everyone could chip in on to keep things fair.

then all sorts of instruments and techniques were invented, and all sorts of music rose and fell.

the drive of what i am saying concerns the fate of music nowwith. so let's focus for a minute on what we have now. soloist does something. then there's a repeaty bit. then soloist does the thing again. then the repeaty bit again. then something called a bridge, just to break things up. then a couple more choruses, and some stuff, then a fade out or (increasingly rarely?) a snappy stomponit ending.

that's a pop song. and there's nothing wrong with that.

but here's what i'm saying. that's no pop song anybody ever sat down and wrote except sellouts.

because Verse and Chorus and Bridge are terms which describe music. they are words in a system we use to discuss music. they are not pluggable peripherals when you're making your product: or you are an artistic sellout.

artisans are people who make really great food and certain kinds of furniture and like beautiful tableware and ID and the more skillful advertisments. THEY ARE NOT FINE ARTISTS. fine art always addresses humanity and its needs and struggles. now while I am quite certain craftsmen can create art, I'm sorta tending that they don't make a nice chair for someone "to cushion their humanity and speak to the experience of their years." they probably made the chair because doing it felt right to them in their life and maybe made them a few bucks. right on. the chair may come to be appreciated as art because it tells tangibly of a byegone era of comparable humanity to our own, or because its sitter was an exceptional person it may be regarded somewhat as a conceptual art object. but yer average chair is designed to be sat on and ignored and moved around and be reupholstered and fix that broken rung and get worn out or be a museum piece in the year 4000. IT DOES NOT GO IN AN ART GALLERY (not angry caps, just emphasis).

amazing shocking and breath-defying works of art go in the gallery, and incredible music, goes in our ears. it never will get old and never quite wears out.

so why do people who have the (still admirable) trade quality of skill get away with making our fine art?

how do we have so many annoying American Idol clone songs assembled in ikea fashion (no disrespect to ikea) by spoiled songwriters? written from outside? seriously, written from outside of music?

"oo, then we can have a prechorus and after that we'll have a bridge section." instead of writing the song as it comes to them, they make it up like a 4-minute shish kebab. and we are forced to listen to it repeatedly. somewhere someone buys a couple of albums. really?

what happened to songs that change to another song halfway thru? not a lot of new ones of those being played on arr radio stations. what about chorusless songs? or admitted fluffy joys like "i've got my mind set on you, i've got my mind set on you, i've got my mind set on you, i've got my mind set on you..." or remember the 18-minute theatrical epic?

i'm not even saying making up a song like that would be a good suggestion. i just wish the big big money would recognize the benefit of more variety.

out of breath at the end of my pseudo-structured tirade, i will leave you with one final question: when's the last time your radio station played an instrumental? yu kno a with no vocals?????


  1. that which is different scares people, and that is why talent is scarce.

  2. also a lot, even a plurality of the truly talented people who get to the heart of it, are prone to be poorly adjusted or in some way challenged.

    i thinq if people were better musically-educated they would welcome variety.