Comments | philmosophy: Turn that crap off!

philmosophy

Turn that crap off!

Feb 01, 2008 20:14

Disclaimer: I am going to come off as closed-minded and stereotypical a lot. But to be honest, I always try to encounter people with a benefit of the doubt. I have befriended different types of people from all over the spectrum of lifestyles, personalities, races, etc. I do not aim to offend and I do not consider myself above anyone. Really.I have ( Read more... )

Comments 12

pqowlaks February 2 2008, 15:53:16 UTC

As far as stereotypes go, yes, you would probably be right in assuming the "black man walking down the street, pants down to his knees, boxers showing, tight, white wife beater, bling, etc" listens to rap and hip hop music, but then you are not taking into consideration other genres of music he might listen to. Most people I have met may seem to relate or listen to one genre MOST, but still appreciate and enjoy listening to other types of music as well, even if that isn't portrayed in their style of dress, etc.

As far as Slipknot goes, when did you decide their music "does not sound good"? That statement goes beyond you just not enjoying the way it sounds, but saying that nobody could possible find it pleasing. I'm not sure if that's what you intended, I don't think it is, but I have to disagree with the statement. While I'm not a huge fan, and haven't listened extensively to their music, I haven't heard a Slipknot song that I thought sounded bad. In fact, I recently heard a song by them that made me want to hear more because I ( ... )

philmosophy February 3 2008, 05:57:50 UTC

Yes, you're right. Just because a person looks like they portray a specific genre of music doesn't mean they must not listen to any other type of music. I did mention that, though, by saying that of course he can be a fan of classical music. But that is not portrayed from the image he chooses to show.

As for Slipknot, when I'm at home during breaks, I'm working in a factory that consists mainly of young people that listen to Slipknot and other artists of the same genre. Granted, my judgment of Slipknot's music must not be very accurate, but it was my opinion that both the music and the sounds of their voices were cacophony to my ears. This does not mean that I believe that their music does not consist of any meaningful substance or that it doesn't have the potential to possess euphony. But upon hearing Slipknot and other bands within that genre, I immediately didn't like the sound.

About what you mentioned about artists and them wanting to survive by creating it, you're right. People do want to be able to survive and be appreciated ( ... )

c4us4_su1 February 2 2008, 23:06:40 UTC

Hi, I just added you as a friend. Please feel free to add me as well (I don't have any entries yet but I soon will). I hope I don't sound adversarial, but your post made me think a great deal ( ... )

philmosophy February 3 2008, 06:13:01 UTC

Hi, thanks for adding me. I'll be sure to add you back.

About your question with me liking Tori Amos' version of the song better than Nirvana's. It is indeed the sound that I like better. I don't know what it says about me as a person, but I suppose I go for a more mellow sound than a fast-paced, more rebellious sound. Tori Amos doesn't change the meaning of the song when she sings it. What I mean by that is, she doesn't change the lyrics. What she does do, though, is leave out a part of the song that I think is the best part. So therefore, I find it quite odd that I like her version (still!) more than Nirvana's. But like I said, it's about the sound. If both songs contain t he same lyrics and content, but the music is changed, you're bound to choose one over the other (at least a little). So, to answer your question, I think she has a highly marketable sound. But then again, the way we all interpret sounds is highly subjective and based on opinion. You may prefer Nirvana's version or someone else's version and despise Tori's slow, ( ... )

c4us4_su1 February 3 2008, 08:20:51 UTC

Don't we all look at art (at first, at least) as if it's a big secret? Be it a book, a film, a painting, whatever. We need to guess/interpret the secret. So, is it more artistic that the artist is keeping the secret to himself or is it artistic to share the secret? I would say that this is true, especially for abstract art. The "secrecy" of which you speak, I think, is a big reason why many people dislike abstract paintings. When they look at a Kandinski or a Pollock, they see an incoherent jumble of colors and patterns. The apparent meaninglessness of the art makes them very uncomfortable, psychologically speaking. An article I read called such art "windows into nothingness", because the audience cannot figure out the "secret" the artist has embedded in the painting. Whereas this "secrecy" makes many people uncomfortable, many people enjoy abstract art for this very reason. Perhaps the "abstract-ness" of the painting conveys a meaning from artist to audience that transcends the confines of language. In that sense, maybe it makes us ( ... )

philmosophy February 3 2008, 15:35:20 UTC

Very good point about art still being a secret because the secret, if the art is if fact distributed, is never correctly guessed by the audience. But leads me deeper into the question ( ... )

moonvoice February 3 2008, 01:28:52 UTC

Hiya! :)

And here's another question I asked someone in my replies to my last entry: Is art only significant if the observer reveres the art in the same way the artist does?

Oh no, definitely not. If a person was the hypothetically believe that it's only art if the audience reads the meaning as the artist intended, then that person is subscribing to the base idea of 'hypodermic media.' In other words, you fill a needle with your meaning, you inject it into the audience (through TV, a gallery, whichever), and then they have no chance to interpret that meaning because it's already floating in their bloodstream. It takes the power away from the audience to negotiate meaning, which is where the meaning of art and media comes from ( ... )

philmosophy February 3 2008, 06:26:28 UTC

You excited me with what you said about "hypodermic media". Yes, it would be terrible if art were more a brainwashing device like mass media is today. You mentioned that the artist creates something for the audience to interpret themselves. Yes. That's true. And that is what makes it interesting ( ... )

Checking in dwittkower February 6 2008, 00:47:54 UTC

My professor did a few minutes of research on them . . .

Sorry, this is mostly off-topic.

I just wanted to check in, and make contact online. I was curious, though, about the comment quoted above. I was wondering whether "few minutes" was italicized because this seemed like a small amount of research on a topic under discussion, or a large amount of research on a Metal band. Both are, of course, reasonable assertions.

Anyhow, I hope you'll have some thoughts about Young-Hae Chang Heavy Industries, since I know you are involved in some poetry stuff. And I think Young-Hae is doing fabulous and interesting work.

Re: Checking in philmosophy February 6 2008, 04:04:47 UTC

About the quote...

In class, you literally said "a few minutes of research". I wanted to emphasize that the actual band information I got from you in class was just a skimming.

Sorry for the confusion.

Re: Checking in dwittkower February 6 2008, 12:23:21 UTC

Oh, no confusion. Just curious and amused.

Actually, as long as I'm writing something here, I might as well include something more substantial.

You mention cake. What about Durian?
The typical response (and with good reason!) is to say that different people enjoy different things. But we are trained to and train ourselves to enjoy different things. I may, for example, turn to Slipknot or NIN or whoever because they give expression to my anger as, e.g. a misunderstood teenager. I primarily enjoy emotional consonance, not the sound itself, which I come to appreciate and enjoy because I keep listening to the music - not for aesthetic, but for personal/emotional and social/political reasons ( ... )

Re: Checking in philmosophy February 6 2008, 14:53:31 UTC

Yeah, you're right. It is a very likely scenario. It's likely in many ways, too. You mentioned the scenario being you liking the content of a song and then training yourself to like the music. As a high school student, I had a fascination with Marilyn Manson for a while because of the content (but not all of it). I had trained myself to eventually like the music that went along with it. I found myself especially liking his music when I came across songs that had more euphony to them. But that's not strange to come across with people like Marilyn Manson or bands like NIN. They have their loud, fast, cantankerous songs and then they have their slower, more mellow songs ( ... )