Zen Peddler Posted June 16, 2012 Anyone else noticed that many more famous artists now days can only get air play and attention by being shocking rather than anything else? Their art focusing more on one element of art - the art of shock or awe, rather than any other developments of merit? Anyone else noticed that modern music - as played on radio stations like Triple J - constitute a boiled down, non-threatening regurgitation of various safe and oft-tried concepts from various eras of modern music from early 60s/70s rock'n'roll to techno concepts and ideas from the early 90s to early 2000s? Made safer by a ever greedier industry hell bent on sell only 'artists' with generic sounds rather than take any potential risks with new ideas or artistic merit incase it doesnt sell, causing a funnelling of ideas and sound into bland, predictable 'SAFE' sounds that will sell but offer nothing new or unique by design? Anyone else noticed that the screen plays in modern films are becoming more and more predictable as directors/film groups cater for the narrowing of attention-spans in the modern world - gratuituos storylines and shocks without any real substance or depth? 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
qualia Posted June 16, 2012 no. but then again i pay little attention to pop culture. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seldom Posted June 16, 2012 (edited) If the meaning of all eminent creation is to break the gregarious habits that always direct existing beings towards ends that are useful exclusively to the oppressive regime of mediocrity - then in the experimental domain to create is to do violence to what exists, and thus to the integrity of beings. Every creation of a new type must provoke a state of insecurity: creation ceases to be a game at the margins of reality; henceforth, the creator will not re-produce, but will itself produce the real. Edited June 16, 2012 by bulls on parade Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
qualia Posted June 16, 2012 i think if you go to any point in time you'll find someone complaining that what is art isn't art, at least according to how they see it. remember that beethoven was once pop music..... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Auxin Posted June 16, 2012 Perhaps the issue is not a reduction in innovative and poignant, socially challenging, art- but rather your seeing the effect of the predominating public psyche whos dollars dictate whats proliferated across the air waves. In retrospect we see a wealth of avantgard and revolutionary art throughout the history of man but thats just what we filter out, at any given time 99% of art is fluff intended to satisfy the luxuriant impulses of change-resistant status-quo minded masses. 5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
qualia Posted June 16, 2012 lots of people cite lady gaga as being a prime example of the degradation of modern music/art. i disagree, as a matter of fact, i see lady gaga as being the epitome of high art. you need to think about how she will be viewed in 50, or 100 years. now, i don't know her songs, only loosely, (and quite frankly the sound annoys me so.....). but she's so much more than just the music. the whole persona, the devil worshipping/illuminati/project monarch "graduate" all fits a mythos which she pervades as her art. she's no longer just a "pop songstress", but a whole entity. think about the mystery which surrounds her now, "is she or isn't she?". imagine the mystique surrounding her in 50, or 100 years time. if/when humans get out of this quagmire there will be a wealth of speculation about this mysterious being, "lady gaga". sure, to a certain extent you or i might see it as a pop act, but try to view the long game. she's no longer just a pop starlet, as the likes of taylor swift or jessica simpson (did i do that right?), but more an entity which pervades not just the surface of pop culture, but down to the deeper levels of sub-culture where people who may ordinarily abhor pop music take an interest due to the supposed illuminati links (which i personally think are bullshit, and all part of the act....attention seeker much? of course, how else do you sell records ..... ). she's got the game sorted, she's owning every part of it. kudos to you lady gaga, i think you're fucking brilliant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nothinghead Posted June 16, 2012 So you think Gaga pervades the deeper levels of sub-culture by incorporating symbols into her act that have no real connection to the levels of sub-culture they cite? pick one. not that i have anything against her, its just that cultivating a multifaceted image doesn't really bring her into the same category as, say, or even no matter how elaborate her costumes get. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seldom Posted June 16, 2012 (edited) art it a medium that occupies a priveledged space with regard to transgression, and i think the fact its transformative power is neglected is a massive shame, in relation to its appreciation and its production. The act of creating changes the nature of the person who creates, it's bidirectional, people make objects but objects also make people. i think art is one of the most important things in life edit: if you substitute popular music for advertising, this would be an apt description of many of its present forms Edited June 16, 2012 by bulls on parade 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zen Peddler Posted June 16, 2012 Interesting thoughts fellas thanks. Lady Gaga is just a boiled down reduction of of Diamond-dog-esque Bowie but without the cocaine and musical merit. But she isnt really what i was talking about. its in fact the sounds that are peddled as 'alternative' or specific labels that are the point. Music is caving in on itself with less and less variation until my niece's description of 'robot voices' will be accurate. Why have humanity at all involved? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
paradox Posted June 17, 2012 as far as film goes it seems all the best stuff these days is in adverts. cause just about all the best creative minds are snapped up & payed large amounts of $ by corporate interests in the advertising industry. either that or you don't know about them cause nobody has exploited or figured out how to exploit them yet. that said, i don't have a tv & can't stand ads even if they are creatively brilliant, my thoughts were sparked the other day when a friend that i somewhat respect creatively said that he watches tv just to see the creative work in the ads.. i can't relate to doing that much but i understand why.. seems like pretty bleak times in the world in general culturally speaking, paradoxically theres a whole lot of amazing things going on that we couldn't have imagined not so long ago.. it's a interesting thing.. simultaneous expressions of extreme polar dualism. i reckon though that art is one of those things that will always come through for us when it's really needed. we're pretty fucking jaded as a species right now. extreme over abundance & extreme poverty everywhere we care to look & no space left in our heads for the stillness of the wellspring, so to speak like... it's easy to kill a for meat when you've a empty belly. not so when you're bellys full & if theres no meat at all to be had then you just put one foot in front of the other & take what you can get. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whitewind Posted June 17, 2012 Genuine musical talent turns up quite rarely, and it frequently doesn't make it's mark so well when blended in a band. But lets take a quick look at someone like Shpongle - ask the vast majority of people whether they like Shpongle and they just look at you and laugh somewhat hesitantly. Yet the amalgamation of different styles of music is fantastic and blends beautifully; not only that it translates in to a live act which is nothing less than sublime. Radiohead also, far more mainstream and accessible to the masses but still occasionally amazing music that is even more emotional when played live. Lady Gaga may be good at manipulating crowds and self-hype, but her musical talent is quite mediocre - she sells shock and costume. Fascinating though she is for a short time, it doesn't last last. I think she will be forgotten in a decade, maybe 2. I have to say none of my favourite music has ever been discovered by listening to the radio, far less the TV. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zen Peddler Posted June 17, 2012 Someone told me that apparently there is such a dirth of good screen plays in Hollywood that they are commissiong fairly ordinary writers to write up producer and director ideas rather than reviewing new ones which they cant get quick enough. I think your right in that often the very talented or original musicians get passed by. But others just sell out of course. Its interesting that in the 60s and 70s many quite popular groups or performers were quite experimental and their listeners actually wanted that - to be challenged. David Bowie, Brian Eno and many more obvious bands are clear examples of this. Even in the 80s many bands would be heading in some pretty strange directions - Front 242 as an example were well fucking out there. And in the 90s bands like Suede and Radiohead made a few mainstream tracks to get interest but their albums were also full of complex arrangements or electronic ideas and concepts that were quite original. And ofcourse techno/acid took off in the early 90s and all of a sudden everyone knew what a 303 sounded like. (i still love them). It funny you mention Shpongle because to me Shpongle was almost inevitable - the culmination of the new psytrancey goa sound moving back towards some of the ideas from the Rising High groups like Bedouin Ascent, etc. Similarly Autechres glitchy sound was inevitable in a way and probably had more to offer purely because it was different and original than any musicality. A better example for me would have been Boards of Canada - a nostalgic sound based partly on trying to capture the wide-eyed emotion of a child watching an old film board of canada documentary with retro sounds and totally new ideas. People are literally starving for that. In terms of guitar bands I would think really only Interpol and the Mars Volta do anything revolutionary any time recently. Mars Volta concerts I assume are the closest Ill ever get to what it felt to watch the Floyd at UFO or Led Zep in their prime. And to restore your faith in modern music: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whitewind Posted June 17, 2012 I think art is about speaking to people's emotions. Emotions only really occur when boundaries are pushed; through grief, or enjoyment, or curiosity maybe pain. The wider your boundaries are, the more difficult it is to push or cross them, so for intelligent people art is usually something unique or different. A lot of popular music isn't actually about art; it's behaves more like an addictive drug, a drug that can massage emotions gently without pushing boundaries, and allows a form of mental, pleasant brainwashing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zen Peddler Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) I think art is about speaking to people's emotions. Emotions only really occur when boundaries are pushed; through grief, or enjoyment, or curiosity maybe pain. The wider your boundaries are, the more difficult it is to push or cross them, so for intelligent people art is usually something unique or different. A lot of popular music isn't actually about art; it's behaves more like an addictive drug, a drug that can massage emotions gently without pushing boundaries, and allows a form of mental, pleasant brainwashing. Exactly my point! Its designed to sound so similar that it sounds familiar to the listener because its actually the same. its brainwashing kids into thinking the same is good when in reality its the same because the record company doesnt want to take any risks at all. its never really been about art - most musicians have encountered company resistance in the past when trying into unconventional territory, but now because there are so many potential musicians and because fame is now so fleeting, the companies have less reason to allow musicians any scope. So why not just do away with the fascade and allow computers to generate the music? Like completly with no human input whatsoever. Edited June 17, 2012 by Zen Peddler BlueGreenie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whitewind Posted June 17, 2012 Because people are buying in to the emotion and computers don't elicit any emotion? I don't think computers can make music without any human input, anyway, unless things have progressed way beyond my understanding. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whitewind Posted June 17, 2012 Tool are amazing too, but only if you have burning anger. Nowadays I find them too aggressive, negative. But that doesn't stop them being extremely talented musicians. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zen Peddler Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) But there is no emotion - and when there is its obviously false, contrived and not even trying to hide that fact. Often the emotional bits dont even last long enough for them to have an effect. I got in my wife's car the other day and she listens to Triple J unfortunately. They introduced this group as the most 'profound and interesting electronic act in the last decade' and 'doing some of the most original and interesting work in drum and bass' and then proceeded to play this utter shite song that had one repeatative break over and over with cheesy trumpet samples and some jazz sounds. Concord Dawn and Diesel Boy would be rolling over in their graves... Skrillex is another example - steal some ideas from Aphex Twin when the software makes it light years easier to do and then do music 'stunts' rather than actual songs and watch the kids tell us how original it is. Edited June 17, 2012 by Zen Peddler BlueGreenie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chilli Posted June 17, 2012 Pop is the voice of the gods, who also have been known to beam their messages through radiowaves and TV advertisements. People listen to music for all kinds of reasons, and appreciation of any kind of art is purely ubjective: there is no right or wrong music: beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Pop is fun, disposable, trashy: it's supposed to be. If you don't like it just tune in to a different frequency. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zen Peddler Posted June 17, 2012 I think I meant more the lack of variation but i take your point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
whitewind Posted June 17, 2012 Electronic music can be awesome; that's all done by computer, sampling natural and man-made sounds and blending them in to something orchestral; but often cannot be created on stage (the use of bird song is one example). The music industry still uses people to get the emotional catch; usually something young and hot, or older but cool - someone with a soulful voice and eyes (the gents) or outrageous and sexy (the ladies). It's no conspiracy; it's just what people like to see on stage (or their screen). The music industry doesn't actually care about music; it just wants to make money. If creativity sells (as in Lady Gaga's onstage antics) then it will sell and they will use it. If good looks sell; they will use it. The music industry is in to money, and unfortunately people generally like this stuff - otherwise it wouldn't sell. They also tend to sell to a younger audience (teenage through to late twenties) as these people have less outgoings and are more easily entertained and want to be entertained, most of them are incredibly bored. I watched your video, zen, and the guy is quite talented but it's not actually anything I haven't heard before, lots. When I was younger I may have heard this for the first time, thought "wow" and gone out and tried to get everything he created. Not so today. When I was younger, I was in to heavy metal and psychedelic rock - Black Sabbath when I was drinking, Pink Floyd otherwise, with a smattering of all the other cool bands from the sixties and seventies. I largely missed out on the eighties -I don't know why, when I go back and listen to some of the mainstream music it was really experimental and quite cool. But then came along Acid House and the rave scene, and there was enough energy to finally drag me away from the earlier darker stuff and get really enthusiastic about music again. The music around at the moment rarely grabs me; when it does, my attention easily wanders. Partly it's because I'm so busy; partly because it's a generational thing, and partly it really is quite boring. I enjoyed watching Lady Gaga on youtube for a while but her musical talent is quite poor and her entertainment limited. I would much rather spend my money on a festival where I can spend the day walking, chilling, talking and spend the night listening to a huge number of different bands or artists, many of which are quite talented and haven't hit the mainstream. That brings me to Peats Ridge; a great festival at the start, where they had heaps of environmental stuff and a huge number of small artists; it went away for a year and came back as a full-blown commercial music festival, and it was shite. The music industry had gotten involved and there was very little apart from way too much noise and no intimacy. I truly dislike what commercialisation does to anything - all it does it transform things in to money making rubbish that unfortunately, the masses are easily brainwashed in to buying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chnt Posted June 17, 2012 art is anything and everything, but at the same time you have to separate self from ego, and collective self from collective ego. art exists today, you have to look for it and it's there, tv, radio, media, ego... contrived art is still art, but what was the intent, to make contrived art or to make art that is contrived? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seldom Posted June 17, 2012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautology_%28rhetoric%29 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nothinghead Posted June 17, 2012 (edited) In terms of guitar bands I would think really only Interpol and the Mars Volta do anything revolutionary any time recently. Mars Volta concerts I assume are the closest Ill ever get to what it felt to watch the Floyd at UFO or Led Zep in their prime. Rubbish, there's plenty of good stuff going on - lots of it on your doorstep. Peter from Sydney's Nunchukka Superfly is an amazing guitarist, and you'd be hard put to find other bands that sound like them. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKUhawazTU4 Something from a little further away who've been around for ages and always innovating are nomeansno. All amazing musicians too. Could go on, blah blah. Personally I find the Mars Volta to be irritating dilettantes of many genres and masters of none. It's like with every song they're thinking "let's do a jazz sax... let's do a stoner bassline... let's try out atmospheric rock" and dip their fingers into every pot without really doing anything interesting for any of the styles they collect from. It's like their style of experimental rock is derivative and formulaic *runs for shelter* edit: for layout Edited June 17, 2012 by racketemensch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DELETED ACCOUNT Posted June 17, 2012 ...and to restore your faith in modern music... Just had to chime in to say that video/music by Yosi Horikawa was fantastic, thanks for linking it. On a more topical note, I don't think I agree that TripleJ doesn't have much to offer -- I agree that some of the stuff they have in high rotation throughout the day is a bit overdone/under-inspired, but it does appeal to the majority, and I like how they mix in unearthed stuff. That's not to say that it's all bad -- programs like the Sound Lab often play an amazing array of stuff from new and interesting artists, if you're into electronic. It's just a pity it's not on while I'm usually awake, but then again it doesn't appeal to everyone which probably explains the late time-slot... fortunately, you can stream/save the stuff as MP3s for later with a bit of nous Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
