I’ve been reading sections of Mein Kampf for history this evening. I’ve
come across a couple of gems I would like to point out. It’s amazing to me how,
although we are so far removed from the rabid anti-semitism and nationalistic
frenzy that was the Nazi party, some of the same sort of arguments and tone of
voice are heard today.
Read the rest of this entry »
Is the album a dying art form? (By “album” I mean a group of songs ordered
specifically and released together.) I was reading an article about it a while
back that got me thinking (sorry I don’t remember where.) With services like
iTunes and this new Napster pay service, when you can pick and choose one song
at a time, does it banish the uncertainty of “the first listen,” having just
torn the shink-wrap off the latest album from your favorite band or a young
upstart?
I’ve always found that some of my favorite music is not the remixed radio edits
I’m bombarded with, but the companion tracks, oft-forgotten gems of the same
album. The example that readily comes to mind is that of Smash Mouth’s Fush
Yu Mang. While it doens’t quite fit, as the radio-release (“Walking on the
Sun”) is also great, if not over-played, the boys of Smash Mouth also slipped in
very different, yet equally great songs such as “Nervous in the Alley,” “Flo”
and “Fallen Horses” that I might never have thought to download were they not
connected in some way.
In addition to marketing and efficiency, there exists the idea that through the
selection and ordering of a set of tracks, an artist can say more than each song
individually. Rob Dougan has certainly made the effort, his use of “Pause” (a
short track of Silence) and the inclusion of “Prelude” as an introduction to
Furious Angels shows thought to something bigger than “just getting it
out there,” something I feel is missing from more and more music now-a-days.
I’m glad that a few of these new sites seem to have features that allow you to
buya whole album at a time, but I can’t help to wonder if, seeing the slow
release of a song at a time might to be too inviting to the musicians of today;
an alternative to the hetic and often trying process of writing and recording a
group of songs at a time.
That’s also not to say that the album is a perfect art form. I certainly don’t
like “Pacifc Coast Party” stuck between its betters on Smash Mouth or the
second version of “You Are my Number One” on Get the Picture?.
Maybe I’m reading too much into it. It seems to me that the album indicates a
dedication to the work, persistance and patience. I never use the “shuffle”
feature on my CD player.
What do you think?
I’m too lazy and tired to write more about the Dems. Besides Chris
anyway.
Enjoy
(This rant-like thing is in response to an article about “feminist art”
distributed by my drawing prof the other day. I think you get an idea of what I
thought of it. Sorry for all the flowerly language. I’m feeling metaphorical
today.)
I’ve never cared much for feminists. More than any other group, they seem to
make mountains out of mole hills and generalize far more than they should.
Because of this, I take issue with the assertions of Rosemary Betterton. She
takes issue with the common practice of using female nudes as the subjects for
art, seeing it as a subjugating and male-serving ideal. On page 220 for example,
Betterton admits that she cannot assume how other women think of art, she
implies that, “knowing feminism” they would see the way she does.* To me this
means that, unless it’s explicitly pointed out and explicated, most would not
see what she sees. In a court of law, that would be called “leading the witness”
and is very much frowned upon. I, being female and aware of the feminist ideas,
have yet to look at the work of classical artists and go “Wow! That’s
subjugation!” unless that was the artist’s intent. I certainly don’t feel that
admiring the female body is an act of dominance or subjugation. I personally,
would much rather work from the bodies of females than males for purely
aesthetic reasons: the female form is generally softer and smoother than the
male, often lending a dynamic to a piece that would be completely different were
the subject male. I don’t deny that, in the past, women were treated as less
than they were, and I feel that this is the molehill out of which Betterton’s
making her mountains. I feel that it’s important we keep the ideologies of the
period close at hand when considering the art. To her mentioning of the
portrayal of women in modern media, I feel this is naught but a self-subjugation,
being of free thought, will and expression, women have the ability to say “hey,
that’s crap” and move on with their lives. Why can’t they say the same for this
“repression” they see in art? It seems to me so much more energy efficient than
tilting at windmills.
* “…While I am quite clear that my pleasure in a female nude by
Valadon [a female artist] is greater than in one by Renoir, I certainly cannot
assume this to be true for all women. What makes the difference? Not
socialization, but certain kinds of knowledge and experience, of which for me
the most important is an awareness of feminist ideas.”