Inspiration -- Music

Hi,

Upon listening to one of Guy Guden's old shows, I came across something that was really interesting and very strong at the same time.

In a special about Vangelis, around the "Heaven and Hell" time, there were some comments made that I, personally, find important and valuable. And they touched on the most important part of it all for me, the inspiration that creates music.

It is a 2 part comment and I will do my best to explain.

It starts with a comment on folks thinking that something is good or bad. And he uses the example of a 4 year old just touching an instrument, and doing whatever, and how an adult can kill the child's interest with one word so fast ... saying it is good or bad or indifferent is "criminal", because none of that has anything to do with the child's moment with that instrument and what he/she created. While this seems silly, for many of us classical music knowledgeable folks and all that, in the end, we define "music" by what we "know", NEVER, by what we don't know, or understand, and we do not have any idea, or concept of what it took for that child to hammer these three notes or whatever.

I, in my reviews, and discussions of music, may not like something, or think much of it, but I have never said they did not have a right to express themselves, and I would be the first one to line up to fight for its right.

This also reminds me of the recent Robert Wyatt album, that is very strange indeed, if we can use that word, but in a comment on the album I said that the whole thing felt like a child first touching the keys on an instrument for the first time. I can not say that it was intentional or not, but the childish-like quality of the album, that is very "un-musical" (I have no word for it, btw!!!!!) and various musicians with him, try to make it musical by adding melody lines here and there only to have him break it up!

Is this a discovery process?

The other concept was the one that bothers me the most about a lot of reviews in PA, that have a tendency to compare things to an imaginary concept of "progressive music", and consequently, kill  the possible appreciation that anyone might have for that band's originality and ability to descrobe its music. I tend to not compare things, but I might mention in passing, that it felt like this and that to me, but comparing Ange to Genesis, is down right stupid, and a frivoloty that most people here will not only not do, they will trash Decamps, in favor of Gabriel, when Decamps is the ultimate actor, and Gabriel, never again took up the acting mode ... ohhh wait ... this is rock'n'roll, not acting! BOOMMMM ... you are killing the ability for someone to create something distinctly different and valuable in its own right.

So, listening to Vangelis talk about it 40 years later, is very interesting ... it felt "fresh" and strong, and right. And it is very visible today ... when he talks about "cosmic music" and "commercial music". And to realize that the composition was all in his head and he created it all and played all instruments, except the choir that was added a bit later, instead of a keyboard.The synthesizers in those days were not doing vocal styles as IKT Philharmonic came to doing 15 years later.

I can see how a "comment" would hurt the inspiration. That happens to me, when writing a poem, a story or anything I do, including reviews, which is the main reason why I DO NOT solicit comments, and fight for what I say ... it's NOT necessarily a belief, but it is WHAT I SAW at that moment in time, and it could be different tomorrow ... and this is where the discussion can get weird, when "time" elements get confused with "is", "was" and a reality.

I like to say that I do not believe in anything, because these inward things change so much and so fast, that by the time I finish the sentence, the time has expired and it is already a new "dawn", day, noght or moment.

Music for me is not like words in a language. I try to "translate" with words what I want to tell you, but music ... is different for me ... it is not like "speaking" to you. It is more like an attempt to define something inside that is still invisible, thus you know my predilection for long cuts and pieces of music that allows the "writer" to see into themselves in those situations. Without that, the whole thing is just a bunch of notes, and you can mishmash them and come up with thousands of compositions ... all empty! No heart or blood inside of it!

Is that what you want out of music?

I'm a "student", of the art of creativity.

For example, for me it is no secret that Picasso's Guernica is a "snapshot" of what the young man saw outside the window in spain during their Civil War. Garcia Lorca and many others also allude to it.

Another, which is not as "hidden" as many folks seem to make it, is the majority of the music in the late 60's. KC's first album is so "political" that it comes off as some kind of totally obscure poetry that no one thinks as important ... and the over abundance of everyone's say in the media, makes the knowledge and understanding of something come off so obscure and unimportant ... because the fan has to be the boss, not the artist or creator.

I'm scared that we're closing down the avenues for creativity and intimidating the ability of children to learn ... it really feels like "City of Lost Children" already ... in a different sort of way ... we turn the children into nobodies! This is such a socialist and populist ideal, that it is way too scary for me ... and seeing the top ten, here there and everywhere, makes it even more so.

I'm not trying to be paranoid, but I would like to see better freedoms of expression without folks spending their time putting it down as this or that ... as Vangelis suggests,  would tend to irritate and probably intimidate anyone working something from their intuition. As such, it leaves us with only one option ... the variations upon a theme on the same notes.

Sounds familiar with rock'n'roll, doesn't it?