From Oeivind Idsoe Sent Tue, Jan 6th 1998, 22:45
From Oeivind Idsoe Sent Tue, Jan 6th 1998, 22:45
H James Harkins wrote: > Yes, a bit. I was responding to a certain degree of urgency, > life-or-death-ishness, that seems to me to be somewhat out of proportion > to the actual issue at hand. *Music is not going to die* b/c of "laziness" > on the part of consumers. If Jacques Attali (Noise: The Political Economy > of Music) is even 1/2 not a flake (and he does say some flaky things, > admittedly), the current system (which he calls "repetition") is a dead > end street. Yes, but what is "the current system"? Isn't it the endless reproduction of CDs, records and singles in a Capitalistic system which focues on receiving rather than producing. The consumer is just buying records and not participating in the musical process (other than through the consumption of records). It's not laziness in the personal sense of the word but the way the system has organised music and made it sort of empty. (it's been a while since I read Attali, too, and maybe I'm just forcing my own interpretation on the subject...pardon me if I do). > Electronica contains the *seeds* of a new mode which he calls > "composition"--if I remember right (it's been a while, I might be getting > some of this wrong), a real DIY attitude, people getting together and > *making* music regardless of where it goes. As long as the gear's > available, people will keep doing it, on the side, under the table, > however. It will continue. Even if the technological infrastructure > collapses, we'll pick up sticks and hit things, and start singing. We, as > a species, simply can't help ourselves! It *will* continue. Keeping it > going in this particular form (CDs and 12"s) is small potatoes compared > to that. It is correct that *some* people will pick up sticks and hit things, but I seem to remember that part of Attalis point is that he wants as many people as possible to participate in this process (make their own music...or just play music). Electronica itself isn't necessarily the solution to this problem, because it makes use of the process of repetition the same way that other music does (not repetition in the sense of repeating musical structures/motifs/themes/beats/whatever, but repetition as production of goods (I think...or am I suddenly quoting Benjamin?)). However, the so-called democratization of music through the evolution of technological means is part of it; equipment gets cheaper and "anyone can do it". This isn't new, though, as rock postulated the same doctrine. "Anyone" can pick up a guitar and "anyone" can play drums. Attali's main point (I, again, *think*) is that the whole music industry should somehow be "bypassed". Music as valued in itself, and not as valued through its participation on the free market as a commodity. In other words, people should just make music and forget about what comes afterwards (contracts, records etc.) - they should make music because of its intrinsic value. or something like that. ;) > I guess I didn't mention I'm a composer myself, and will probably be poor > forever because of it. My work isn't at all commercial, and when I'm out > of school, I'll be fighting exactly the same battles as Gil, sm, & others. I make music, too, and that's why I'm staying at university as long as I possibly can. At the moment it seems like the only alternative to taking a 9-5 job and being too tired to make anything remotely close to music when one gets home. It's sort of cowardly, of course, but love often does that to people. :) > But there *must be another way* than screaming at and alienating the > people who are most likely to support you! (You didn't scream--good for > you--) I agree -- screaming is not the solution (unless your Merzbow and want to scream you into a higher state of tinnitus!). After all, we're civilized people, aren't we? /Řivind/