What makes us so special???
- Thread starter nate_dennis
- Start date
StevenJacksonMu
New member
I like this and I think there's a lot of truth to it, but I do think that people who 'create' are trying somehow to express themselves...it's not always clear why !
Somojo, only the best independent and unsigned music.: home
legionserial
New member
We aren't special. We're just musicians. It's no more noble a pastime than being a mechanic. Less so probably.
diggy_dude
Now 169% diggier!
Only the ones that want to make a living at it. The "I hate crass commercialism" type gets starved out sooner or later.
legionserial
New member
I think the definiteion of art is subjective anyway. I can go to a gallery and see a blank canvas that some douche labelled modern art and sold for a fortune. The band Anal C*nt call themselves art, but in reality it's just a fucking random noise. It's at that point that this 'art' actually just becomes opportunism. The definition of art has got so distorted now that any hack can be called an artist in a medium in which he has no talent, just because he attached some pretentious spiel to his 'work'. So essentially, art is no longer about the work you present, but the bullshit you reel off while you're doing it.
My sister is a commissioned fine artist. Not for a career, for a hobby. Her works get exhibited quite a lot, and she hates going to exhibitions. She spends the day listening to pretentious art critic fags putting meaning that isn't there into her work and then telling her categorically what her work means, and she's like "no, it's just a fucking painting of some flowers. It doesn't have any meaning. Someone paid me to paint this picture they wanted, so I painted it. That's what being a commissioned artist is"
Bottom line: It's fucking gay.
My sister is a commissioned fine artist. Not for a career, for a hobby. Her works get exhibited quite a lot, and she hates going to exhibitions. She spends the day listening to pretentious art critic fags putting meaning that isn't there into her work and then telling her categorically what her work means, and she's like "no, it's just a fucking painting of some flowers. It doesn't have any meaning. Someone paid me to paint this picture they wanted, so I painted it. That's what being a commissioned artist is"
Bottom line: It's fucking gay.
diggy_dude
Now 169% diggier!
Exactly what legionserial said. I think it started with Jackson Pollock. He flung paint at a canvas and made up some bullshit about the collective unconscious guiding his work. As Jung's work in psychology was popular at the time, people ate it up.
nate_dennis
Well-known member
Sure. That's a good point. I guess I just get tired of the "CTRL+ALT+DEL" mentality that so many musicians have these days. It's all about editing, fixing, and quantizing. It's not about music anymore. I just don't understand why it's like that now. Why is it such a huge deal that so and so "artist" "wrote or co-wrote 8/10 songs on the cd." WOW!!! Really? Used to be bands wrote their shit, played it, and toured off of it.
So true. I know there are people like that. But I don't think that in MOST other mediums the majority of people are like that. I could be wrong though.
It always amuses me when people rag on "Jack the Dripper." I suspect it is because most folks have only seen his work reproduced in "coffee-table" books and thus reduced in size and scope. Truth is, there was a time when I didn't "get" Pollock's work, either. Then, I visited Washington DC and had time to visit some of the museums on the Mall. I was wandering around the Museum of Art, and when I rounded a curve and saw one of his pieces there- the size and sheer POWER of the thing almost literally KNOCKED ME OFF MY FEET. I really stumbled and took a couple of steps back, the damn thing made such a powerful visual statement. I never got that- not even a suggestion of it- when I had seen his stuff in books. Now, I can't say I "like" Pollock's work, like I "like" Winslow Homer's, and I don't really understand him, like I feel I do, somewhat, of Van Gogh, but I can't decry it anymore, either. He may well have been making it up if he said he was expressing the collective unconscious, or something like that, but if I was so overpowered by just SEEING one of his works, I can believe he was at a loss of words as to why he CREATED them.
Now, I am not saying diggy_dude or anyone else here has not seen Pollock's work in person- but if you have not, you really don't know what you are talking about. I have seen lots of visual art, before and since, but no one exposure has had as much an impact. Years after that initial impression, I am still in awe of the man.
But, if you want to "prove" you are as talented as he is, and have some fun doing so, go to one of my favorite websites-https://wbx-files.s3.amazonaws.com/jacksonpollock_by_miltos_manetas.swf
Last edited:
benherron.rrr
New member
"Video killed the radio star"
Music is infact bussiness. Think about the evolution of bussiness, take shops for example: I belive that people used to produce a product to be proud of it. To be known and credited for the meat they cut, the bread they bake the crops they grow. But somwhere greed took over pride. take the evolution of supermarkets. the aim is to make as much money as possible, quality means little its all about the money and the sales. Apply this to music, I belive that comercial music isnt about the quality of the product, but is infact all about makeing the biggest return from the smallest investment. Its how the world has grown to be. Sex sells, with the growning technology, and peoples need to be rich and famous. Take the classic case, get the best looking girl you can, she wants to be rich and famous and most likly has no concern how she does it. Since she doesnt care about the music side, she will sign any dotted line to achive her goal as easily as possible. Due to technology and the fact that there is a possiblity there is no need for a live preformace, it matters little if she has any talent because they can create the illusion that she does. Even those who claim to care about the music, the mojority of who are fresh out of the fame factory aka stage school. From a modern bussines perspective what choice would you make? A girl who looks great, due to the shallow nature of socity will sell from the looks. she only cares about fame so will be exteamly easy to take for everything she has and will be very cheap to produce. and as soon as she has reached her expiry date will be thrown out with nothing. Or the artist who is a little ugly, who cares deeply about their music thus wont let the big boys take them for a ride because what they are trying to take is the artists life. and will most likly take more resources to support. but at the end of it the product would be much more fulfilling.
The market for music is much bigger than that of the other arts, so much more is put in to make techniques and technology easier. although having easier acsess to higher quality technology that is easier to use is a blessing to us. it also means that the drive to create a deeply passionate perfect from the start product is slowly dissappearing. The thing that depresses me is knowing that there will never be another Queen or beatles, there will never be another artist who will storm the world influence so many people by doing just what they love and belive in. Is there hope in music as there once was? or are we being dumbed down as an audience to a point where it doesnt matter, it only matters what we are told to like? I always wished I could be the guy to show the world that music is as close to supernatural magic as were gunna get and maybe like most of you on here may realise, we should cherish it not abuse it
Music is infact bussiness. Think about the evolution of bussiness, take shops for example: I belive that people used to produce a product to be proud of it. To be known and credited for the meat they cut, the bread they bake the crops they grow. But somwhere greed took over pride. take the evolution of supermarkets. the aim is to make as much money as possible, quality means little its all about the money and the sales. Apply this to music, I belive that comercial music isnt about the quality of the product, but is infact all about makeing the biggest return from the smallest investment. Its how the world has grown to be. Sex sells, with the growning technology, and peoples need to be rich and famous. Take the classic case, get the best looking girl you can, she wants to be rich and famous and most likly has no concern how she does it. Since she doesnt care about the music side, she will sign any dotted line to achive her goal as easily as possible. Due to technology and the fact that there is a possiblity there is no need for a live preformace, it matters little if she has any talent because they can create the illusion that she does. Even those who claim to care about the music, the mojority of who are fresh out of the fame factory aka stage school. From a modern bussines perspective what choice would you make? A girl who looks great, due to the shallow nature of socity will sell from the looks. she only cares about fame so will be exteamly easy to take for everything she has and will be very cheap to produce. and as soon as she has reached her expiry date will be thrown out with nothing. Or the artist who is a little ugly, who cares deeply about their music thus wont let the big boys take them for a ride because what they are trying to take is the artists life. and will most likly take more resources to support. but at the end of it the product would be much more fulfilling.
The market for music is much bigger than that of the other arts, so much more is put in to make techniques and technology easier. although having easier acsess to higher quality technology that is easier to use is a blessing to us. it also means that the drive to create a deeply passionate perfect from the start product is slowly dissappearing. The thing that depresses me is knowing that there will never be another Queen or beatles, there will never be another artist who will storm the world influence so many people by doing just what they love and belive in. Is there hope in music as there once was? or are we being dumbed down as an audience to a point where it doesnt matter, it only matters what we are told to like? I always wished I could be the guy to show the world that music is as close to supernatural magic as were gunna get and maybe like most of you on here may realise, we should cherish it not abuse it
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
music's music.10' legs and small body on top, with a crotch you can drive a Mack truck through!
Who did they use for the model...?...I want to meet her.
Now THERE'S a band I want to be in!
Can you imagine what those guys feel like playing that stuff...???
Eh...I guess it's a gig...no different than playing "Freebird" for the millionth time to a bunch of drunks!
It's all the same once you've done it long enough.
Freebird isn't any worse than any other song.
They're all songs ...... they all require that you play to a certain standard ....... it's all the same.
You may have your preferences but if you play that preference 6 nights a week for a few years, then you don't like that any more than anything else.
It's music ...... it's all good and fun.
Yes, it really is.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
I see your point but ..... if you played 'Judy is a punk' every night for 15 years and heard every other band playing it at every club you went to ....... you'd pretty much feel the same way about it.
I submit it's not the song ......... it's the driving it into the ground until you wanna scream if you ever hear it again.