] [Thread Prev
Re: Fwd: The Artist's Right To Be Boring (was: Re: the best.... theworst....)
Speaking of dead horses:
This guy walks into a psychiatrist's office with a concerned look
on his face. "Doc," he says, "I'm worried.
It's that dream. I'm
having it again." "What dream?" asked the shrink, not
attention. "You know," says the man, "the one where I'm
sadism, necrophilia, and bestiality. Should I be worried or am I just
beating a dead horse?"
At 10:43 PM 6/20/2007, you wrote:
Not wanting to keep beating a
dead, or at least dying horse, I just had to share this.
I sent someone(?)'s previous wonderful rant on LD about this subject to a
friend of mine
in Seattle who is a long time recording engineer there (and damn GOOD at
and has a Masters Degree in musicology (amongst other things) and is one
of the more brilliant people I know.
(unlike my own barely educated self :-) )
Hopefully, his words / rant will resonate w/ some of you, or at least be
some fun reading. Enjoy.
Subject: Re: Fwd: The Artist's Right
To Be Boring (was: Re: the best.... the worst....)
Good discussion, by somebody with enough
experience to recognize
the need for DISCIPLINE (defined as Structure, not Obedience) in
music, as in everything you actually give a husky fuck about.
Virginia (and Stefan), there is FAILURE. I'm a seasoned expert
this topic, so you can trust me here. Yep, the artist must be
"allowed" to fail, because, whether there is allowance or not,
GONNA HAPPEN. Because we're *human*, not gods or muses, even
we're engaged in allegedly "inspired" activities. It's a
that you can't learn from a mistake *until you make it*; it's
tragic when some "free spirit" doesn't learn from a mistake
he or she can't admit it was a mistake, or even that mistakes are
possible. Sure, anything that makes a sound can be *considered*
musical instrument; every sound can be *heard* as music. But
doesn't elevate it to the same level of achievement as the best
music made by people who have real musical ability honed by
experience in FAILURE. It's NOT "all good". Just
can be argued to be "legitimate" doesn't make it valuable or
The great fallacy (and colossal waste of time) of the 20th century
was the obsession with "validity": "Is it art?"
"Is it music?"
Who gives a shit? Is it worth a damn? Is it worth the
Sure, it's "valid" as this or that art form on a conceptual
but is it any good at all? These are questions that *can* be
answered; it just takes a few generations for the clues to
Meanwhile, "non-judgemental thinking" just leads around in
winds up being just another form of mental masturbation. THERE
GOOD. THERE IS BAD. *We* won't be the ones to render a
assessment, but we're sure as hell part of the discussion.
we attempt to abdicate on some namby-pamby all-inclusive pseudo-
"liberalism", in which case WHY BOTHER?