Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all.
Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage") |
|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1234> |
| Author | |||||||||||||
MaxerJ 
Forum Senior Member 
Joined: August 03 2009 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 127 |
 Posted: October 09 2009 at 03:17 |
||||||||||||
|
^... you got me
|
|||||||||||||
|
Godspeed, You Bolero Enthusiasts
 'Prog is all about leaving home...' - Moshkito |
|||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||
|
Pangaea
Forum Groupie 
Joined: July 17 2009 Location: New England Status: Offline Points: 46 |
Posted: October 09 2009 at 09:05 |
||||||||||||
|
I cannot believe that in their hearts they think Beethoven and the Spice Girls are equal. Whoever said anything about them being equal?
Better at what? Why even make the point then if you can’t prove it? I won’t argue about your assessment, but why do people always drag out the very extremes to try to prove a point? Comparing the Spice Girls to Beethoven in an effort to make a general statement about prog rock. . . ? Is there a point here? It’s like comparing Moby Dick to Mr Messy. It’s pointless. But I will say this . . . kids love Mr Messy. That doesn’t make them “just not too bright” and if having it read to them and then reading it themselves instills a love of reading then perhaps one day they’ll grow up to write the next great piece of literature the world has ever seen. The thing is, the Spice Girls were not aimed at a bunch of classical (or prog) music snobs. They were aimed squarely at adolescent girls, with a message about empowering young girls to have some stones and to go for it. Some of the girls in their audience are, right now, making music themselves, in fact it wouldn’t surprise me if some of them play prog. Making these kinds of extreme comparisons just makes it sound like people are not bothering to think, like stocking fish in a barrel, shooting them, and then telling people they went fishing. By the way, on the subject of Literature . . . have any of you actually read War and Peace, that great masterpiece of literature? It is absolutely painful to read. And crushingly boring for long, long stretches. And goes on seemingly forever. Sound familiar? Yes, it has all sorts of devices and attributes to commend it. But, my god what a nasty experience trying to get through it. And while I’m on a Friday rant here,
Some people are smarter than other people. Some people are more mature than other people. These people do things in life that are smarter and more mature than stupid, juvenile people because that is who they are. Creating art is something people do, and since it is a product of the person, it can be influenced by the degree to which they are stupid and juvenile. Therefore, a stupid, juvenile person can create stupid, juvenile art that can and should be recognized as stupid and juvenile, just as we recognize when a person is acting stupid and juvenile, so that they may correct their behavior in the future. QED You know, the world is stuffed to the brim with smart people who are the biggest bunch of social retards on the face of the planet, exhibiting the most juvenile ineptitude in their everyday life, and stupid in their relationships with other people, from the happily geeky to the downright creepy. Why on earth you would want to set ‘smart’ as some sort of art intelligence barometer is beyond me. These are some of the shallowest social creatures I’ve ever met. Yeah, if you need some fancy new software code, or want to know everything about the mating habits of the Chaunacidae, great! you know who to ask, perhaps they’ll dispense a little Star Trek trivia along the way to lighten the mood. But stay away from my stereo please.
art that can and should be recognized as stupid and juvenile, QED And why exactly should it be recognised as stupid and juvenile? So you can feel better about what you do or just because you get a thrill by kicking someone else’s art in the balls? Again, the world is full of art that was once considered abhorrent, lame, terrible, unworthy, stupid and juvenile. The thing is, a generation or three later it is recognized as Art of the Highest order. So, if you want to be judgmental and dismiss things as stupid and juvenile, knock yourself out, for all the good it’ll do.
just as we recognize when a person is acting stupid and juvenile, so that they may correct their behavior in the future. QED Oh yes. Immediately and with shallowness aforethought the lofty we gets trotted out as a paragon of the smart side. Everyone else of course is stupid and juvenile and must correct their behavior to the norms of the we. For what it’s worth, most of the really smart people I’ve worked with listen to some blindingly sh*tty music. But if you want them to be the DJ at your next get-together then you get what you deserve.
I seriously doubt that “ooga shaka’s” of the world have told you to turn off the Miles. Who are these mysteriously undefined people and why are you listening to them?
Oh my god, are you serious? Crass and venal exists everywhere, in prog and in pop, in art and in literature. And who gets to denote for everyone else what crass and venal actually is? You? Angst ridden liberals. Please. Drop the dopey rhetoric and stick with the real argument you brought to the party:
Now that is worth talking about! That is poetry. (of course you may feel free to disagree or we can discuss it in a Prog = Poetry thread) :O)
No matter the amount of beret-wearing music lovers telling me that 'it's all about feeeeling' ^I want to agree, but i'm afraid of all previously mentioned beret-wearers Why do you undermine your otherwise worthwhile thinking and interesting discussion with this ridiculous tripe?
The best post in this whole thread. Thanks Nuke. Edited by Pangaea - October 09 2009 at 09:07 |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
MaxerJ
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 03 2009 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Posted: October 09 2009 at 20:15 |
||||||||||||
|
^ Pangea, you are the beret-wearer...
 I've seen your responses on several threads, attacking the concept of our music versus their music. In this thread I've really been trying to overcome that idea... but I still stand by what i told Luke. J - Paradoxically, you can't say 'Each to their own', although this is true, when you realise that our concepts of music are constructed by our cultural parameters... I don't want to stop anyone listening to mainstream music, I just want them to acknowledge or make the slightest effort to look past it into the wide expanse of 'other music'. Heh.. my friend once compared music to a theme park - All these wonderful rollercoasters, ferris wheels, sideshow alleys and jumping castles... and most people never get off the carousel by the entrance. So, Pangea, what exactly is your take on this then? In all your responses, you don't really give your own view, just problems with everyone else's views. What would you talk about in a comparison between, say, Crimson's ITCOTCK and Human Nature's Walk the Tightrope? P.S. Toddler, I know how you feel... I too have been told before to turn off the MILES! |
|||||||||||||
|
Godspeed, You Bolero Enthusiasts
'Prog is all about leaving home...' - Moshkito |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
ExittheLemming
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Penal Colony Status: Offline Points: 11415 |
Posted: October 10 2009 at 10:56 |
||||||||||||
Bravo, within one milk curdling post you have managed to impart your inane realisation that aesthetic opinion cannot be verified by fact. (I suspect you would light a chocolate fireplace with a blowtorch) It was MaxerJ in an earlier post who stated that he felt we are brought up to consider all music as equal (not thinking is clearly lazy but not reading is worse) The knee-jerk (pun intended) swipe at prog fans as incorrigibly nerdy is just unwitting cliché from someone who would be non-plussed if for example, they met a diffident German (or a sincere troll). Yep, War and Peace is a drag but at least the socially retarded Trekkies will mitigate such shrill rancour with the possibility that your brain is using some sort of cloaking device. BTW With regards to state of the art ball kicking, like the quaint New England Revolution you appear to be a lower case combatant on this sphere. Dopey rhetoric - 'Heigh Ho Heigh Ho it's off to work we go' - now that's poetry mister  Ridiculous tripe, a dish best served cold. (Me ? I prefer judgemental bollocks garnished in sour white whine, can you send me the recipe ?) Let's hope your next post is a damn sight more coherent. Make it So (Number 19) Edited by ExittheLemming - October 10 2009 at 15:33 |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007 Location: Grok City Status: Online Points: 16432 |
Posted: October 10 2009 at 17:11 |
||||||||||||
This is the issue ... and it is as much a generation issue as it is education ... in general, the teachers of today always reject anything of today in favor of the definitions and information from "yesterday" ... that is the history of art, literature and music .... And I have been a proponent for a very long time that there needs to be room for the artists and works of today ... and this respect is usually only seen in a couple of big cities, where these folks can have enough of an appreciation to actually live off it and not be blown off by the art of advertising .... which is what the arts is all about the rest of the country and world ... an orchestra in Portland, Or ... where an idiot reviewer would rather say that Brhams was slow (... and help kill the orchestra even more ...) instead of admitting that he did not go to the show to "listen" to an orchestra ... he came to listen to himself ... and his ideas ... NOT the music in front of him ... and heck ... you see this all the time in Shakespeare productions and people always looking at new artists and prefering a picture of an onion in their living room ... and so on ...
Heck ... it's almost the same thing here ... we love some giants ... and we rarely spend quality time discussing new works and bands ... and someone will inevitably trash it senseless ... you might not like Dream Theater ... but you can at least appreciate the musicianship involved ... it's excellent ... and those are our classical artists of our time ...
I may not enjoy rap that much, but I give them credit as an art form and literature ... all aspects are important ... heck, you should read some James Baldwin so you can appreciate an American group fighting for attention and acceptance ... and guess what we are doing here ...
The same thing! ... because at times we think that "prog" means Genesis and ELP ... and not a Terje or an Oldfield ... and a lot of the music and the feeling that helps people want to develop MORE music ... gets left behind ... ... it's an eternal struggle ... you have to leave home to make your own name to be accepted ... many parents don't even accept their kids and what they want to do!
I really think that this board, is far more PROGRESSIVE ... than a lot of them ... and I think that the admins here are doing their best to help improve these music discussions ... and help validate the work and material a little more ... we have a long way to go ... but folks like you seeing it ... helps ... a lot! ... what doesn't help is the bunch of stuff that puts it down ... that part hurts! ... not only us, but all the artists! Edited by moshkito - October 10 2009 at 17:20 |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
tamijo
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 06 2009 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 4287 |
Posted: October 11 2009 at 03:38 |
||||||||||||
|
Only 0,1 % or less of any given population care about music, beyond just listin' to whatever comes their way.
Excatly the same with literature, Painting, Film.
They just want to consume some of it, enjoy or dislike instinctly, and move on with their life.
So its not Our Music/Their Music, its more like Music is made for those interested in Music, versus
Music made for those not that interested in Music.
That music is made with easy consumption in mind. either first listen hit protentiale, or a steady beat you can dance to, often combined with strong branding. They dont want/need music that you would want to still listen too 50 years later, they need it to last about 10 weeks or something.
What we want is music that last us a lifetime.
It not nessesary better, its just compleetly diffrent.
And due to the fact that its diffrent ballgame, you need diffrent skill's to be sucessful in each game.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator 
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: October 11 2009 at 03:56 |
||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
What?
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
tamijo
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 06 2009 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 4287 |
Posted: October 11 2009 at 04:52 |
||||||||||||
Yes i was even thinking about that agument when i was writing the post.
Elvis, Dolly Parton, Carpenters, ABBA ect ect ect.
But i still think my agument make sence, the fact that some hits, will become classic. Mainly because thay have a universial timeless appeal combined with high quality, dosent change the fact that you got music
based on the desire to make instant hit, adressing a casual pool of listners, and music less mainstream,
focusing on listners wanting to dig deeper. That was the conclution in my post.
Elvis, Dolly Parton, Carpenters, ABBA was adressing the casual listner, making instant hits.
They are/was just extremly good at what they did, making there version of mainstream, last a lot longer than 99,9% of radio hits does.
|
|||||||||||||
|
Prog is whatevey you want it to be. So dont diss other peoples prog, and they wont diss yours
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 271 |
Posted: October 11 2009 at 11:39 |
||||||||||||
|
Well, this is a good discussion and I'm happy to see that at least a few people are also taking my side now. Kudos to Pangaea, it must take serious effort to make such a mammoth post. However, please no one else quote the entire post, it makes it hard to look through the page. What I'm seeing in these arguments is a disturbing degree of snobiness. Like I said earlier, we can't even agree on what quality is, so how can we claim to make such assessments of quality? Why do you have to elevate your music on this mystical scale that trumps all others? Why can't you just talk about what you know, like originality, emotional resonance, complexity, technical difficulty, aesthetics, or depth? All those things seem very related to quality, but at least you can talk about them in a somewhat more objective fashion. I think there is often a degree of laziness to those writing off music as inferior to other music. Threads of this sort always seem to degenerate into mindless pop music bashing. The posh music-litarati types will exclaim "Oh, but that is just music for the masses, whereas I listen to the obviously superior music made for thinking folk like me!" First off, if you are listening to prog rock, that's not the "thinking man's" music. That music is classical music. You talk about how pop music doesn't last 40 years, but forget that prog music doesn't last 400 years. I shouldn't be giving advice on how to be a proper elitist, but there it is, go listen to Beethoven's 3rd, not Yes's Close to the Edge. If you don't want to be a proper elitist, then perhaps you should look a bit more carefully at pop music, because pop music is actually one of the most meticulously constructed music forms. Many of the best and brightest in the music industry are working on this type of music. It's easy to make fun of Britney Spears, but there is a reason she constantly tops the charts, it's because of the really talented songwriters supporting her underneath. |
|||||||||||||
  |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Textbook
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 08 2009 Status: Offline Points: 3281 |
Posted: October 11 2009 at 16:57 |
||||||||||||
|
Would we have more success with this theory if we made it more specific and said prog = poetry?
There's a few prog albums that bear resemblence to novels but virtually all of them have the feel of aural poetry, where an impression is created through either free or stylised selection of material without regard for prose conventions.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
MaxerJ
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 03 2009 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Posted: October 12 2009 at 08:43 |
||||||||||||
|
Nuke - Let me start by saying it was never my intention to completely
write off 'inferior' music. We all like a bit of raw, quick,
dispensable music. I couldn't live without my extensive Tom Morello
collection.
Now, i'll highlight things that are important so you can skip my digressions.... You've got a couple of problems. First off, the whole 'quality' thing. Did we say anything about quality? Let me see... ctrl+f.... okay, everyone who has mentioned quality has stated that it is impossible to define... What I am trying to say is that 'we' - the collective being ProgArchives users - shouldn't bother arguing over 'x is better than x' in terms of 'proggyness' or 'quality'... instead, let's take a page out of the Lit criticism book and work on defining music - not just prog though - as 'literary'. Sure, you could say 'art' - it's the same thing, different schools of thought. Art students like to think of it as art, Lit students like to think of it as literature. What's important is what it signifies. You yourself said that people understand literary books to be better because 'the smart people told them so'. To millions of educated - and i use the term to talk about people with more than five years in school - western teaching has emphasised certain books and authors over others... We haven't denigrated the books that were 'not literary', we have just said, 'Well, that's a good read!/That's a bad read!' But when people read the books seen as canonical 'literature', they talk about how it changed their lives... admit it, as much as mainstream music is fun, bopping, and consistent, it won't have the same effect (on me at least) as VDGG's 'Lighthouse Keepers'. I'm going to shrug that music off the same as i shrug off David Eddings books -they're entertaining books, but i don't feel any different after reading them... This is another bad example and i have digressed quite a bit. Let's just remember that no one has said anything about 'quality' apart from your infatuation with it... I think it's time for the Formalist speech. Right. Once, there were these cats called the Formalists. They came from Russia. They thought that books could be 'rated' (for lack of a better term) by their own merits, discarding the author, or what the reader thought. They measured off originality, style, flair, poetic-ness, and loads of other things... They were shut down by Structualists, but that's irrelevant. If you want to do this, lets do it. Let's be music Formalists. I would like that. But don't pay out others because they are more extreme Formalists than you. We're all in the same boat, otherwise you wouldn't be on this forum. As for classical music... i don't know about you but I listen to equal shares classical and progressive. The point is that we are still searching for something else - 'leaving home' as moshkito put it... We just get there in different ways... but it's still better than not leaving at all. There's always speculation as to what Beethoven would do if he were alive today, but you must realize that cultural and economic settings are completely different. Have you ever read anything from Elizabethan/Victorian era? Austen, maybe? Books from that era show how their entire days consisted of walking around, watching the servants do all the work. Beethoven probably had so much time on his hands that Anderson and Howe in similar circumstances would write CttE five times over.... Seriously, people in 1700/1800's didn't do anything all day... And finally,
Yes there is a meticulously constructed form... it was made twenty years ago and has been rinsed and repeated ever since. Fantastic. Many of the best and brightest are working there either because their fantastic Kraut rock band couldn't sell albums or because they actually enjoy their work. (Examples of these people you talk about please.)The reason Britney tops the charts is because the charts are made for Britney. That's like asking why Mugabe is still the president of Zimbabwe. You must realise ALL IS INTERTEXTUAL. Then we can work out how to unplug the stereo. |
|||||||||||||
|
Godspeed, You Bolero Enthusiasts
'Prog is all about leaving home...' - Moshkito |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
terryl
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 03 2007 Location: Thailand Status: Offline Points: 183 |
Posted: October 12 2009 at 11:12 |
||||||||||||
|
This thread is getting serious.
Seriously i don't have much time to read through everything (sorry), but this statement of yours struck me quite a bit. I'm in a country where we are bombarded with plain mainstream music in radio and cd shops. Only 0.0001% of the music here has some elements of prog. Any music that is not in the mainstream never sees light of day. No radio station will ever play anything longer than 4-5mins. That is a sort of music education the public ever receives. I'm not meaning the music education where you learn the theory or how to play an instrument, but the sort of education where audience can be exposed to different kind of music, with at least knowledgeable DJs giving decent information of some music. We don't have that. So the reason the Britney Spears of the world top the charts here is because there are no other choice. Musically we are dictated by the Mugabes of music industy. |
|||||||||||||
|
And who are we to justify the right in all we do
Until we seek, until we find Ammonia Avenue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrmJ39j58W0 |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
TheCaptain
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2009 Location: Ohio, USA Status: Offline Points: 1335 |
Posted: October 12 2009 at 11:44 |
||||||||||||
|
My original intention was to go through this and individually respond to each post I disagree with. I then realized there were far too many disagreeable posts and far too many tangential-at-best posts so I'll just say my piece.
There are a lot more great pieces of music out there than almost anyone thinks. Realizing what the music is great at is where the hang-ups occur. Great tech metal is great because it's great at being technical. Great pop music is great because it's great at being catchy and/or reaching a large audience and/or being relatable and/or bringing in money and/or a few other things I can't think of. This type of thinking can be done to pretty much anything. As long as it's considered great within the sphere of it's audience it is great. The inverse and reverse of this statement aren't necessarily true. |
|||||||||||||
|
Curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: October 12 2009 at 12:51 |
||||||||||||
 just a few points -
The Elizabethan era and Victorian era were 200 years apart:
Jane Austen (1775-1817) - was writing about the landed-gentry - a small portion of the English upper class whose income was derived from the Estates they owned. Austen was born into the lower echelons of the landed gentry, however her father worked as a rector and teacher. Most of the male characters in Austen's novels have day-jobs - military officers, bankers, lawyers, clergymen, etc.
Beethoven (1770-1827) - like Bach and Mozart - was born into a family of professional musicians and had to work to support his family - this involved teaching, composing and playing (he was a piano virtuoso). Even before the death of his father Beethoven had to work to support his brother's and sisters.
|
|||||||||||||
|
What?
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
DJPuffyLemon
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 18 2008 Location: L Status: Offline Points: 520 |
Posted: October 12 2009 at 16:49 |
||||||||||||
The only way that ANYTHING can every be intrinsically more worthy than anything else (notice I didn't say BETTER, because it still doesn't make it BETTER!) would be because of its cultural impact. That is to say: You can not claim that In the Court of the Crimson King is in any way better than random pop album A. You can say you prefer it though. You can also say that it has more inherent worth because it made an impact on music by helping shape a genre. It is not however, a better album if you're talking about taste. It can be better put together artistically, but still it doesn't make it a better piece of music, only a more important piece. Speaking literately, the only reason why Lord of the Rings is (and should be) more celebrated as a work of literature than Harry Potter is because of its impact on fantasy literature. Is it better written than HP? Well, that's to the reader to decide. HP isn't poorly written, it's actually more entertaining than LOTR in my opinion of course, but either way, one can't be better than the other intrinsically. LOTR is currently more important since it started a lot of fantasy literature, but at the same time HP helped a lot of children read, which is also important. Comparisons serve to destroy or enlighten. Enlighten in the case of helping readers or listeners find new and "better" (relatively speaking that is) literature or music; or destroy in the case of being a critic and saying band A is better than band B or classic era writer A is better than modern day writer B. More specifically talking about you guys now: Lots of people say that a certain band is better music because it is either more complex or more groundbreaking than another piece of music. There's nothing wrong with that until you get into destructive terms, such as genre bashing. This is one of the simplest yet most destructive things. First of all, there is NO way that progressive rock is better than thrash metal or grunge or indie or post rock. The reason why everyone is on this forum is because you all PREFER progressive rock to those other genres. you prefer it because it is either more complex, supposedly more groundbreaking, or because you grew up in the 60s and discovered that Barclay James Harvest was something you identified with more than with Led Zeppelin. And that's all fine, it depends on what you prefer in your music. Any groundbreaking activity 90% of the time in progressive rock only served to further the ambitions of progressive rock, the same as in any other genre. Of course, there's the 10% that was later picked up by metal (which birthed prog metal) or by indie (which produced a weird sort of 21st century art rock), but that happens in any genre. Does this make sense? The reason why genre A is considered better than genre B is because a fan of genre A is going to compare Genre B by genre A's standards. Less philosophically: You like progressive rock and you judge rap by the standards of PR (complex instrumentals, vocal harmonies, and song structure)....well DUH obviously rap doesn't have those things! And rap fans won't like PR for the most part because it doesn't have meaningful or insigntful lyrics powerfully delivered or a strong beat or even a catchy melody. And those are ALL legit concerns because everyone prefers a slightly different musical style to suit their tastes. God damn, this post covers everything I think I deserve "clappies" and stars. Either this post gets stickied or I'm copy pasting this whenever there's a dumb discussion on why Muse is disappointing because on their newest album they went more alt rock than proggy. I'm out. PS: Let's not get started on radio though.  |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
sealchan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 12 2009 Status: Offline Points: 179 |
Posted: October 12 2009 at 18:15 |
||||||||||||
|
I've said elsewhere (but I am generally lazy these days about finding my own citations) that I think that what prog is really about is about what art is "really" about. This is difficult to define but it has been attempted and I like the following definition. This comes from an audio tape I have of the great comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell giving a lecture on the main works of James Joyce (Wings of Art). You can definitely see James Joyce's work as "progressive" literature in that his writing was highly complex, highly experimental and relatively inaccessible to most people's reading tastes. There are two kinds of art (my friends)... 1. Dynamic art that seeks a certain goal: consciously or unconsciously motivates you towards a particular action or belief 2. Static art that seeks to arrest the mind before the profound mystery of the world. Art that is simultaneously relevant to meaning and yet does not prescribe action or opinion but rather inspires a new awareness of the world that is not expressed better than in the form in which it is experienced (as there is no higher perspective from which to make this judgement as the form is as necessarily rooted in the particulars of the composition as it is transcendent of them) So for music this means that a song or album collectively does not make a political point or recall a simple emotional perspective primarily. What it does do is evoke a mood that is composed of feelings/beliefs/sounds etc... that shows those things collectively in a transcendent manner; transcendent of their simple worldly referents. A concept album is probably the best structure in which to accomplish something like this. In Genesis' "The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" there is a self-conscious awareness of this quality (read the lyrics to the last song "It"). Other albums which evoke a complex mood as a whole may contain songs that work a theme usually the theme is merely a vehicle for the communication of that higher mood in which (as a Freudian might say) the manifest content is simultaneously symbolic of a more abstract content, the struggle of the instincts versus the social needs, etc. In presenting problems, true "static" art does not provide answers, it shows the deepest character of the issue and anyone who comes away inspired by the work to a particular belief or action has either identified a limitation of the work or has underestimated it. Perhaps the simplest way to accomplish transcendence in art is to place two things that are opposite together in a way to evoke an unconscious response. In my review of some of the Beatles songs I have found that their use of contrasting moods within a song adds a sense of a higher quality to the song as if the song was speaking of something above and beyond the simple one way emotional attitude a single-minded melody can portray. |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 271 |
Posted: October 13 2009 at 20:49 |
||||||||||||
Good post, I wasn't able to reply right away because I was busy and I knew this post didn't merit a reply that took 5 minutes to write. To start with though, this quality thing had me worried a bit that I'd set up a straw man, but it's not true. You guys either explicitly stated it (using terms like "good" and "bad" which means the same thing as "quality" in this context) or implied it with talk of distinctions between literary work and entertainment. Now I see you want to use the term "literary" instead of "quality," which is a point I admittedly missed the importance of the first time through (the discussion didn't end up focusing on this distinction.) But what does that boil down to? It's dressing the distinction between good and bad in different terms. The distinction between literary and entertainment, in my eyes, is just as bogus as the distinction between quality and non-quality. The difference is that it is much more vague and thus more difficult to challenge. Just because VDGG's "lighthouse keepers" had a stronger effect on you than Lady Gaga's "the fame" doesn't mean it won't go the other way with other people (and it does). Besides, a yardstick of how much effect something has on you is unfair to the many examples of brilliant music that is meant for fun. Mozart often wrote fun songs that wouldn't change anyone's life, but to claim it is less "literary" than the many more serious works out there seems silly to me. If you were to claim that and the majority were to agree, then I would argue that the term "literary" means nothing. My point as it relates to the formalists would be actually against the formalist position. I'm not terribly familiar with Lit Crit but I think my arguments would be more understood in the post structuralist sense, where the work must be interpreted in the cultural and societal context of both the author and the reader. In other words, overarching judgements like "this is literary, this is not" reek of formalism, wheras the post structuralist view would be that "whether or not something is literary is subjective and depends on socio-cultural context." If I'm completely misunderstanding Lit Crit, feel free to correct me. Personally, I don't listen to too much classical music these days. I really appreciate the music, as a member of my college wind ensemble and choir I play it all the time, however modern music is more my comfort zone since I can relate to it so strongly. Not to say I don't challenge myself, because I do, but I also like to enjoy myself so more often I listen to prog rock, heavy metal, pop music, basically stuff written in my musical language. I find myself challenging myself more often by listening to the experimental wings of those genres than by listening to classical music, although I certainly have to spin at least 1 classical album a month. That's completely irrelevant though, so sorry, and I'll get back to the point. I agree that "leaving home" is an important experience and that most music appreciators should try this. I just don't think this implies anything about literaryness. As for an example of these people that work underneath pop stars, consider Max Martin. He's the one who wrote "Hit me baby one more time." Here is his production and songwriting discography. I don't know how old you are, but if you grew up at the same time I did, you'd realize that he's probably responsible for more top hits than the Beatles and Elvis combined. Now that takes serious talent! |
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
MaxerJ
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 03 2009 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 127 |
Posted: October 14 2009 at 07:08 |
||||||||||||
|
The Captain - I can't argue with you - you have a Brackenwood avatar.
But honestly, I completely agree with that. Surely no one on this site just listens to prog - there are even many great... pop songs....  Dean - What can I say. Complete screw-over on my part. I was going to back and edit the Elizabethan/Victorian part, but the rest escaped the notice of my weak grasp on history. That being said, Beethoven did start music tuition at the age of four, continuing this tuition at an intense rate for the rest of his childhood. I'm not going to assume he didn't have other tuition - maths, english, other unimportant things - but somehow I don't think they had the same priority these subjects have for us. (some of us anyway) Genes sure help in making a musical genius, but so does twelve years of intense training.Nuke - Looking back on my Plague of Lighthouse Keepers and David Eddings example actually makes me feel sick... that really came out wrong. I hadn't thought of this distinction as solely of 'literary' and 'entertainment' - it's an unbroken flow between these two. Most importantly, i'm not advocating only listening to 'literary' music- that would be the greatest crime of all. But an equal crime is being made when music stagnates - when producers care more about finalising that album that took a whole three months to put together (and compressing it, who can forget that  ) than they care about... I don't know, making music. They literally turn the artist, audience and music into commodities to bargain, trade and sell. Who needs put effort in when the marketing campaign can get everyone to love the album before it even comes out? Ehh... I'm like the Hulk, trying to hold back the verbal barrage against capitalism. Nuke, your grasp of Lit Studies is very good. Your argument is Post-Structualist - New-Historicist to be precise. I was referring to the list - 'originality, emotional resonance, complexity, technical difficulty, aesthetics, or depth' but you are right, your overall argument is not Formalist. Max Martin - vocalist for the glam metal band It's Alive, whose album Earthquake Visions sold a paltry 30, 000 copies. Soon after Martin left the band to pursue a career as a songwriter. I should know. I BOUGHT THE ALBUM. No... no, not really i didn't. |
|||||||||||||
|
Godspeed, You Bolero Enthusiasts
'Prog is all about leaving home...' - Moshkito |
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
sealchan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 12 2009 Status: Offline Points: 179 |
Posted: October 16 2009 at 14:28 |
||||||||||||
|
If music producers and those talented song writers they have on their payrolls are the ones behind those disposable pop songs (whose lasting musical quality is usually only in their lyrics and sometimes in the quality of the vocals) then I call on all progressive rock bands to fight against that.
How so? Take those pop music forms, emulate them into your own musical skills and interests and represent them in the more artful context of a song which reflect more of life than the juvenile libidic interests that much pop music caters too.
Or in other words, there are two basic ways to interpret the Shakespeare play Romeo and Juliet (my friends)...
1. Pop music: ideal, innocent love tragicly cut short indirectly but nonetheless fatally by the inability of adults to "get along" in the world
2. Prog music: 1. AND two sex crazed teenagers who are naive and spoiled plan to run off (to where they don't know) and probably would have ended up back home within the week but unfortunately got thrown off by an unfortunate misunderstanding of hastily read signs and ended up killing themselves.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Nuke
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 25 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 271 |
Posted: October 16 2009 at 17:05 |
||||||||||||
|
Lol, I believe prog emulating pop has been done before several times, and with failure rates of around 90%. ;) If anyone wants to be convinced that it's actually hard to write good pop music, they should just listen to what happens when the supposedly better prog bands try their hand at pop! To be fair, there is deeper and more insightful pop music, often by prog bands (king crimson wrote some great pop in the 80's.) It hardly makes a dent on the charts though, people don't want insightful music to dance to. Maxer J - I think we're mostly in agreement then. I'm still not sold on literary and entertainment even being different ends of a continuum, as I see them as independent of each other, there existing literary entertainment, non-literary entertainment, literary non-entertainment, and just plain bad ;). I'm not sure there's as much stagnation as you think either. At least not in the mainstream, where formulaic hits seem to get surpassed by non-formulaic hits quite often. I think a lot more of the stagnation comes from niche genres actually, like "jazz vocalists," techno, or whatever you call that genre with all the bands that sound like nickelback. |
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1234> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Prog = Literature
Topic Options
Henry Plainview wrote: