Jack of all Trades or ONE TRICK PONY???

mosc · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:13 pm Post subject:

Well, we can all think whatever we want. We can like and dislike whatever we want. But, being committed to being respectful means we try our best to express ourselves in ways that support and encourage other people.

Anyway, that's a core value of this community. Support, encouragement, and compassion.

One trick pony - that's a bit of a pejorative expression. Was Mozart a one trick pony because all he did was write classical music? How about the Beatles, all they did was pop music (with a few exceptions). Writing all beats at the same tempo might be interesting to some people. I don't write beats at all, but I respect those that do, even if I haven't been able to "get into" that style.

Getting upset because of someone else's music could be a sign that one is upset with oneself. We all are upset with ourselves. When we try to be respectful of others, then it works out that we become more comfortable with ourselves. When we are more respectful of ourselves, then our music becomes better.

If you don't believe me, ask anyone who has come to the electro-music events in Philly.

dewdrop_world · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:21 pm Post subject:

blue hell · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:27 pm Post subject:

zynthetix · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:16 pm Post subject:

blue hell · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 1:31 pm Post subject:

v-un-v · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:14 pm Post subject:

v-un-v · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:15 pm Post subject:

Perhaps 'shit' is to harsh a word? Confused

dewdrop_world · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject:

Kassen · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:38 pm Post subject:

Kassen · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 5:08 pm Post subject:

Doni · Joined: Jul 11, 2007 Posts: 64 Location: Canada

dewdrop_world · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:23 pm Post subject:

I think the disagreements recently posted in this thread are based on some degree of misunderstanding.

The following might sound a bit pushy but intended with humor. Laughing

Come on, ladies and gents, mosc is no fool. By "being comfortable with yourself," do you really think he means to avoid any kind of negative feeling? Quite the contrary. If you live your life in fear of negative feelings, then you are never really comfortable with yourself! Becoming comfortable with yourself means facing all the things that make you uncomfortable. They never really go away. You just learn, over time, that it's okay if they come and visit for awhile. Given enough space, they go on their way in their own time (Zen master Dogen: "The best way to control a cow is to give it plenty of room to graze").

But to reach that level of comfort depends on going through periods of intense discomfort. I speak from experience. There is nothing Pollyanna-ish in mosc's remark. Like the best wisdom, it sounds like nothing but says everything.

Kassen: "I believe that comfort with oneself is over-rated; I certainly don't hope to ever be comfortable with myself, except maybe in a few seconds before dying." -- Nice thought, but being comfortable with yourself is not something that happens magically at the end. It takes practice, and the right conditions of some pain (to keep you from being lazy) balanced with enough of a peaceful environment to allow concentration and insight.

If you are due to play Bartók's Third Piano Concerto with the Vienna Philharmonic, would you wait until the day of the performance to start practicing the piece? Why should death be treated more casually than a concert? (But we all do, including me.)

By the same token, how is it that "respect" has come to mean "never saying anything even slightly critical"? Because, if you're arguing that criticism is incompatible with respect, then you must be accepting this definition of respect (even though it seems to me that this definition is awfully weak).

I tend to reserve my criticism for artists whom I think could do better. Recognizing potential for improvement is a sign of respect. On the other hand, if the music is so bad that criticism would be wasted, maybe the best reaction is no reaction at all.

Did mosc say that being respectful precludes criticism? Who introduced that idea into the conversation? Razz

James

Kassen · Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 8:01 pm Post subject:

I'm still not a 100% certain what Mosc means by the word "respect" in this context but it seems to me that he introduced the word in this discussion in responce to some critissm of certain behaviours of some musicians.

Supposedly this critisism lacked "respect" towards those musicians as people,despite no names being used. I'm not sure exactly what is meant there. The original post was quite crude but it did bring up a interesting phenomenon and Doni's displeasure with that. I honestly don't see any real issue of lacking respect there.

About death and being comfortable; this cuts two ways. One might -for whatever reason- realise a certain comfort upon dieing or, after all tentions have been removed one might decide there is nothing left to do and simply end one's existance. This echos compositional practice; in my experience the gross majority of (western?)musical pieces end on one comfortable note or chord after all tentions have been resolved. In a different perspective; once you are comfortable with the piece you were writing it might be a good moment to call it "done", but maybe not before that stage.

So; I too am interested in resolving discomfort, but not in being comfortable as a state. When the emphasis on the process itself I think the means of accomplishing this comfort become very important and this concept of avoiding crtisism by calling for (aparently blind) respect isn't a part of that for me.

Likely we are mixing up words, maybe I didn't get what Howard was aiming at. Maybe the issue was entirely with the phrasing of the first post as it looks to me like Howard, right after calling for respect, rephrases the original post.

Anyway, clearly some people strongly disagree with the idea that "respect needs to be earned". This is fine, but I wonder where that leaves selfrespect for those people.

Doni · Joined: Jul 11, 2007 Posts: 64 Location: Canada

All I can say is: Crude is what I do baby!! lol

Seriously though, I never meant for it to go this deep. I wanted the topic to be a bit provocative to get people talking, but man, the insight! I couldn't have imagined...

I'm really not deep of a thinker.... the original point I was trying to get to was

"Are people happy with an artist who simply makes one style of music with no variation, or is variation something that we value as music lovers?",

I laced that with some language in my initial delivery, but I really just wanted to get people chatting

anyways, this is my attempt to steer the conversation away from the insightful analytical direction it's currently going in, also the direction away from my comfort zo.. I mean the... place i wanted... the conversation... to go... in the first place.... Embarassed

Stanley Pain · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:01 am Post subject:

Doni · Joined: Jul 11, 2007 Posts: 64 Location: Canada

I would have self destructed!! Shocked

Antimon · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 12:41 am Post subject:

A one-trick pony is ok if the trick is good! Also, DJs can help us out there.

A no-trick pony might be a bit sad, but hey, he's not hurting anyone, so just ignore him (unless he is playing 24 hrs on all radio channels).

/Stefan

Kassen · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:17 am Post subject:

dewdrop_world · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 8:39 am Post subject:

mosc · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 10:55 am Post subject:

James, thanks for the clarification.

Well, Doni, you rewrote you original statement to change the tone and perhaps the meaning. Thanks, I think you understand what I was getting at.

This respect thing. Think of flowers. Maybe this is a good analogy, maybe not. I respect all flowers. "Hold in high esteem" is a good enough definition. Some flowers are, to me, much more beautiful than others - I might photograph them or even buy a painting of them. Planting them and nurturing them is another thing to do. Others have burrs or thorns that get into my dogs hair. I might pull those and put them on my compost heap. In any case, I'm not upset by any flowers.

When I listen to music, I get the same feelings Doni and others are talking about. Sometimes I find myself being really upset - bored or even agitated. Sometimes I'm jealous, envious, angry or demoralized. But, why is a piece of music any different from a flower?

I hear a lot of people say, "electronic music sucks; it is boring and has no emotional content. It is self indulgent and infuriates me." To me, it is fine to think that. To speak it in those terms is something else, especially when, but not limited to, addressing the musician. When you respect a musician, you may still think this but you will realize how important it is to express your feelings in a respectful manner.

Kassen · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:25 pm Post subject:

Kassen · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:06 pm Post subject:

Doni · Joined: Jul 11, 2007 Posts: 64 Location: Canada

Everything you guys have said here I suppose touches on more 'big picture' issues, respect for all artists and all of that.

At this point I could try and steer the conversation another direction... but at this point I think it may be futile Wink

I like the flower analogy, but I really don't know if it works here. Flowers are, arguably, all beautiful (except for those venus fly traps...). But would we have the same appreciation if all the flowers were the same? What if there was only one kind of flower that was successful... would that be a good thing? Certainly not. So this is why I am saying what I'm saying about "one trick ponies", or rather was the point I was hoping to build to (I guess I am sort of steering the conversation... anyways..)

Take a look at the most successful new artists coming out today. Are any of them progressive? Maybe some, but certainly the vast majority are producing music that people will buy, thus making them successful. We as a society (not the forum, the global society) reward people who are good at what they do.

By reward, I mean give them money. We give a good plumber money for doing a good job at plumbing, we give a good florist money for making a good arrangement and we give a good House DJ money for churning out another House track... right? This is how our economy is able to thrive (or not thrive, depending on where you live and what embargo's have been slapped on you)

But shouldn't music be separate from that? Shouldn't music be a protected 'art'? This was the direction of our society until the economy became more global, and it became less about progression and more about trying to screw everybody else out of money. As a society, it's more about what will bring in the cash and art is a dwindling memory (not yet, but at this rate... it could be in our lifetime). More or less, greed will kill music, or at least the progression of. But there is hope. That's because the integrity of a progressive artist far outweighs the integrity of a one trick pony

I'd be a liar if I said I didnt want to make money from my music, but the whole point is to keep the dream alive here. Hey, I'm not a bad looking guy, could I use that to sell records? to sell myself? I probably could, but what service would I be doing to the world? I want to use music as a vehicle for positive change.. they used to do that if anybody can remember.. I'm 24 and I appreciate this idea in extreme ways

Of course, before anybody will listen, one must attain a certain amount of credibility... something I am personally working on... but once I have that, and I have a voice that people will listen to, I will use it for positive change

this is a bit of a rant... I apologize... not sure how well my thoughts are weaving together here...

I just want to clarify again for people that I am not razzing people who can't produce good tracks yet or do not have the knowledge or ability to produce anything beyond one style. I'm speaking about people who clearly know better, people who are in it for the buck. By producing one and only one kind of music it makes marketing and ultimately making money easier, shame on THOSE PEOPLE (nobody here, please do not misinterpret this)

Music is communication. It's a way of communicating with others about yourself. So by not being progressive, it's proof of underlying selfishness and greed.. isn't it? Myself, I am trying to balance progressiveness, the message, and commercial viability. This is more difficult than focusing on one of those aspects exclusively, but ultimately I believe it will bring more success... success that CAN be had, of this I am sure.

im not even sure where to end this... hopefully I made some valid points... stick it to me if I didn't!!

dewdrop_world · Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 7:25 pm Post subject:

It may be a little too simple to say "back in the day, people made art first and foremost in service of beauty, or aesthetic progress" ("This was the direction of our society until the economy became more global, and it became less about progression..."). I would say that throughout Western musical history, precious few artists have been primarily about progress. Traveling musicians had to sing well enough to get fed, composers in the 17th and 18th centuries had to kiss ass to get a court appointment, and ticketed concerts in the 19th century cost money to put on, so it helped for the composer and performers to have the kind of name recognition that would ratchet up sales.

To me, it's remarkable that the "art for art's sake" ethic was able to flourish at all. Then again, the romantic era idea of the artist as prophet could also serve as a selling point. What great artistic truths would be lost to you forever if you don't go to the next Brahms concert?

Commodification of music began long before the global economy.

I see what you're saying, Doni, about doing only the minimum necessary to sell records. I find that an unappealing position myself, and a lot of classical performers are guilty of the same thing.

I also think it isn't a bad thing to specialize. Today the expected pace of change is so fast that you never have a chance to master the nuances of a style. Bach took decades to reach the point where he could achieve the incredible concision of the Well-Tempered Clavier or Art of Fugue. Now it's "been there, done that." Nothing wrong with sticking around for awhile and developing some depth.

I may get laughed at for saying this, but BT is a rare e-musician who balances commercial success with a desire to push further. If he were in it for the money, he wouldn't have written the opening track of This Binary Universe all in csound! There are faster and cheaper ways to get there. I don't like everything about his music (especially the lapses into genre set-pieces... here's the Hollywood soundtrack section... here's the indie shoegazer section... etc.) but I respect that he is not just churning out more of the same.

James