A complete "art snob"
To everyone I have offended to date...I'm sorry but not really. Over the past week I have finally pinned down my biggest fault - I'm an art snob (my second being that I'm an intelligence snob). I believe that most humans are just fucking inherently lazy. Most of us have the ability to appreciate an art but it seems the majority either ignore it all together or settle for crap.
Too bad cuz there's so much being missed. For some it could be a painting, for another a book or for someone else a floral arrangement. And even within the realms that one finds their artistic joy there are also "genre" that may or may not speak to the observer/participant. Examples? I love Van Gogh, Dali, Escher, Rambrandt and Rafael. I do not like Picasso. There's not much in the sculpture world I don't like. Writing? Not a huge cheesy romance fan, like some surrealists. And here's an example of how taste can change with age...I used to love fantasy but now Tolkien, Brooks, et al bore me to tears. I've grown into historical fiction.
Where my snobdom really comes to a head is music. Let me start with I don't like country BUT...I have to give credit for its musicality, abundance of real artists and creativity despite the fact that they need to find more lyrics besides the dog died, my wife left and the truck broke down.
Ok...Rap and hip-hop...it's all contrived b.s. Alright...yes Rap is just what my generation used to call beat poetry and belongs in that realm not in music. Hip-hop...a whole lot of digital and electronic enhancement with no thought process to melody, rhythm other than that of the sex act or lyrics (again just describe hooking up).
Motown - I realize this week that I was and still am a big fan. There was lot of creative processes required and expected. No just anybody got signed, recorded or toured. Melodies, harmonies, lyrics, arrangements...took a lot and stand on merit even today. Gladys Knight and the Pips, Aretha, Patty Labelle, Smokey with and without the Miracles, The Four Tops, The Drifters, Martha Vandrelle, Stevie Wonder...timeless and for the ones still with us, on top of their games.
Classical - I'm a complete "long hair" geek with one exception...opera. My ears just can't take it. But give me concertos, symphonies overtures played by full orchestras or a string quartet. Include a full range of percussion from kettle drums to timpani to marimba and vibes, chimes...the whole thing. I also love ballet, not only the dance, music too.
Musical theater - gotten old over the years. In context OK at best at this point in my history. Lloyd Webber is proof that you don't have to have any real talent to have a hit show. Listen carefully to the soundtracks of all his shows. He repeats melodies not only within his catalog but within a show. :::snore::: And if one more show comes to Broadway with a score of nothing but 70's and 80's pop songs? :::vomit::: I know there are writers/composers out there with an original idea. Somebody hire them please.
Which brings me around to rock. Especially starting out as an alt-nerd and now coming into the indie world 35 years later...this is where my snobbishness soars. There is way too much hack drek out there that is not music, it's not talent, it's not anything but the waste of $200 on a scalped nose-bleed arena seat ticket or $30 CD anthology of an "artist" that sucked from day one. But sadly I see that that is the pablum that especially my fellow countrymen seem to thrive on. Apparently those of us with very high expectations of the actual music and the artists are in the minority and a small one at that. Personally, I need them to be artists in the trues sense - trying to recreate an emotion within me and make me more than an observer, an actual participant of their art. A true musical artist spends their whole time on stage trying to connect with the people. It is rare to find this with more than a few "arena artists"...they are depending on their sound and light people to distract you from the fact that they suck.
Ah but taste is subjective. There are those of you reading this that are ready to argue with me and you rightfully should feel that way and I look forward to some real convincing responses but think them out. I want it proved to me that I'm wrong about the "lazy thing". Prove to me that there is musical merit to some of this crap. Show me that it's just like the Picasso and the Tolkien and the opera...there is real craft being expressed and it's just not my taste. Understand though that I have enough musical background that I listen with the ear of a vocalist and an instrumentalist. I sang in church, school and amateur theater for a number of years. I played flute for 8 years and piano for 3. I judge vocals by ability to carry a tune, stay on pitch, head & chest support and proper breath control. Now I'll give you that there are some rock vocalists I like whose techniques suck but they can carry a tune in a paper bag and stage on pitch. I also listen for copy-cats a.k.a. "myspace music"...no more knock offs of FOB, TAI, A7X, NIN, Alk Trio, Nirvana, etc. If you don't have an original idea then you're just faking it.
Also you must be able to keep an open mind. Don't tell me a band or artist sucks cuz he/she looks a certain way, acts a certain way. Now I will say I do have my own prejudices in that area...if I've met a musician and they're an asshole then I'm not gonna buy their music or go to their shows. I might listen to an occasional on-line track but that's it. Although I have to say that most of the true jerks I've met are shitty musicians. As for the ones I haven't met but know have been thrown in jail or come off like assholes in interviews...I'm writing their band off :::Escapethefate::: I sincerely invite any genuine effort to prove to me that I'm a cocky bitch and totally off-base on this. I'm looking forward to the person who can convince me that Tommy Lee has one redeeming quality or that Mick Jagger can really sing/write lyrics. Bring it on.