The power of Alternative 4

[D Mullholand]

This "music only for themselves" is funny. Art is always made to share, to connect and communicate with other people in a creative way. Otherwise, it becomes a lame excuse and a potential slip into creative solipsism as advocated by Christian Vikernes.

Originally posted by requiem
But the difference is, some people know what metal is supposed to be about.

And it ain't dollars.

"Metal" is about "Fred." But you're right about dollars.

 

[mehdi.i.e.e.e]

Originally posted by D Mullholand
This "music only for themselves" is funny. Art is always made to share, to connect and communicate with other people in a creative way. Otherwise, it becomes a lame excuse and a potential slip into creative solipsism as advocated by Christian Vikernes.

when you create music, you try to create something that pleases you first. then you try to share it and if somebody else likes it, that's cool. you're very right about the art blah blah, but you don't create art in order to please someone else before to please yourself. if metallica had wanted to play it safe, they would have released 'black album II'. instead of that they released something people like less but that themselves like more [at least, the remaining members hehe].

bleakaffinity is very right in my opinion : they do whatever they want, and if you think they owe you something, then you should better start your own band

rauha,
mehdi

 

[requiem]

Originally posted by mehdi.i.e.e.e

when you create music, you try to create something that pleases you first. then you try to share it and if somebody else likes it, that's cool. you're very right about the art blah blah, but you don't create art in order to please someone else before to please yourself.

Absolutely, I agree with that.

But lets not lose sight of the bigger picture. Metallica's massive watering down of their sound to be more palatable to a larger audience, coupled with their attacks on Napster and fan websites, doesn't say to me that they are purely following their artistic heart.

More like their wallets, or at least egos.

They can play whatever they want, but their actions speak for themselves. And that's why so many of their fans have turned against them. Otherwise there wouldn't be a problem and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

[requiem]

And futhermore, if Metallica's metamorphisis into a 4 minute radio rock song band is their idea of furthering their art, then I must be missing the point of art.

 

[mehdi.i.e.e.e]

i totally agree on the fact that metallica's behaviour has been pretty disgusting these last few years, and but i'm not supposed to tell them how to behave [i'm not their mum for those who doubt], so disagreeing with their behaviour choices won't prevent me to enjoy their artistic choices.

Originally posted by requiem
And futhermore, if Metallica's metamorphisis into a 4 minute radio rock song band is their idea of furthering their art, then I must be missing the point of art.

and if you didn't wrote this last sentence, i'd have been more keen on agreeing with you. sorry but of course you're missing the point of art mate : there's no absolute point in art

seriously, then again, i'll repeat you that some people like '4 minutes radio rock song bands', and that doesn't make them idiots. and better a good '4 minutes radio rock song band' than a bad 'conceptual' or whatever band

peace,
mehdi

 

[pagan2002]

just pack it in. get out more.

 

[Terry Armageddon]

Originally posted by mehdi.i.e.e.e

and if you didn't wrote this last sentence, i'd have been more keen on agreeing with you. sorry but of course you're missing the point of art mate : there's no absolute point in art

seriously, then again, i'll repeat you that some people like '4 minutes radio rock song bands', and that doesn't make them idiots. and better a good '4 minutes radio rock song band' than a bad 'conceptual' or whatever band

There is definately an art in making radio hits. Thats why millions of people buy chart singles and its almost respectable because some people are very good at it (to quote Ian Mackaye) but it's a totally different 'art' to independent music and that should be obvious for all to see.:zombie:

 

[requiem]

Nietzsche said that art is such that it isn't able to be enjoyed or understood by the majority.

So in his view, whatever pop songs are, they aren't art.

I suppose now, we could discuss what is and isn't art, but I don't think Danny would like that...

Anyway, I just pulled out 'Eternity' after a month or so of having not been played, and it's awesome. I love not listening to something for a while, because when you put it on next it sounds fresh.

 

[mehdi.i.e.e.e]

Originally posted by requiem
Nietzsche said that art is such that it isn't able to be enjoyed or understood by the majority. So in his view, whatever pop songs are, they aren't art. I suppose now, we could discuss what is and isn't art, but I don't think Danny would like that...

you dude seem to be easily influenced by other views. i don't agree with Nietzsche, and i think a message board is made to post messages, so if we don't discuss here, what are we supposed to do? usual 'anathema rules' stuff?

in my opinion, pop songs are art, whatever nietzsche says. as long as it's music that please some people, it's art. that's all.

oh and yeah, 'Eternity' rules

peace,
mehdi

 

[pagan2002]

anyone who writes a good song is an artist. anyone who writes a bad song is still trying to be an artist.(most of the time) in the end, there's absolutely nothing wrong with writing whatever you want to, because there's only 2 distinctions. either it comes from the other side, or it comes from someone's personal marketing plan. for hearsay or those other stereotypical "bands", read "mcdonalds".
for bad religion think of a cool, down to earth kinda restaurant that serves excellent food.
so what anyway. anyone feel like talking about world war three?

 

[LoboUivante]

pop aint art.

pop is : verse chorus verse (sometimes bridge) chorus

 

[requiem]

Originally posted by mehdi.i.e.e.e

in my opinion, pop songs are art, whatever nietzsche says. as long as it's music that please some people, it's art. that's all.

Then we disagree.

The prerequisite for art has to be more than a capatilist market of 13 year olds. If I've learned nothing else from a 4 year arts degree, I've at least learned that.

Not that it makes any difference in the long run.

 

[Terry Armageddon]

Originally posted by LoboUivante
pop aint art.

pop is : verse chorus verse (sometimes bridge) chorus

The Beatles were verse-chorus pop and they were the most consistent 'artists' that I know of. Even though they were a pop band, they did a lot for songwriter/musicians as a lot of bands didnt write their own stuff before then. Lennon was deffo an artist

 

[requiem]

Originally posted by Terry Armageddon


The Beatles were verse-chorus pop and they were the most consistent 'artists' that I know of. Even though they were a pop band, they did a lot for songwriter/musicians as a lot of bands didnt write their own stuff before then. Lennon was deffo an artist

Yeah... I don't know if song structure has anything to do with art. I think that would be to simplistic. Because I consider the Beatles to be artisits as well. Perhaps even genius's in their (strawberry) field.

I'm just reticent in calling Britney and the Backstreet Boys art with a capital 'A'.

Danny C, for instance, is an artist with a capital A.
Britney Spears is a babe with a capital B. But Danny's the artist.

 

[D Mullholand]

Originally posted by mehdi.i.e.e.e
when you create music, you try to create something that pleases you first. then you try to share it and if somebody else likes it, that's cool. you're very right about the art blah blah, but you don't create art in order to please someone else before to please yourself. if metallica had wanted to play it safe, they would have released 'black album II'. instead of that they released something people like less but that themselves like more [at least, the remaining members hehe].

Art is not about pleasing someone. Entertainment is about feeling-good/pleasing. B.S. and B.S.B. (bullshit boys?) are entertainment. Metallica right now are about song engineering and marketing. Very professional attitoode.

By the way: even some of the poppiest Beatle songs are more intricate and musically advanced than the most "progressive" Metallica songs from the 80's. Not to imply that one is better than another, but fact. "4 minutes" doesn't mean anything until you hear the real thing.

 

[mehdi.i.e.e.e]

Originally posted by requiem
Then we disagree. The prerequisite for art has to be more than a capatilist market of 13 year olds. If I've learned nothing else from a 4 year arts degree, I've at least learned that.

then i wonder what kind of narrow minded teatchers you had. as Terry said, writing hit songs for 13 years school girls is an art, like it or not. there's room for every taste, even the ones who differ from yours.

there's an audience for Britney Spears, so i think we can call her an artist. she's into her stuff, she does it perfectly, so what's wrong with that? art is not an elitist thing that can be only understood by the chosen ones - even your little sister can understand art, you know. long live Madonna!

peace,
mehdi

 

[requiem]

Originally posted by mehdi.i.e.e.e


then i wonder what kind of narrow minded teatchers you had. as Terry said, writing hit songs for 13 years school girls is an art, like it or not. there's room for every taste, even the ones who differ from yours.

there's an audience for Britney Spears, so i think we can call her an artist.

So if there's an audience for something, then it's art?

As for my apparently narrow minded lecturers, I think they'd find your stance highly amusing, as I do.

I think you're generally confusing the definition of 'art' with a job or skill. Of course, the people who write Britney's songs are skilled at their job to an extent. Just like a plumber is skilled at fixing pipes. Unfortunately, there's a difference between being highly skilled and being an artist.

Art is an expression of the artist's unconscious, creating something tangible from the intangible which is neither modified nor restricted by the artist in order to make fiscal gain.

It's a simple and accepted definition. Taste has nothing to do with art.

 

[mehdi.i.e.e.e]

Originally posted by requiem
So if there's an audience for something, then it's art? As for my apparently narrow minded lecturers, I think they'd find your stance highly amusing, as I do.

oh yeah, yeah, whatever, spare me your pretentious self-loving lame sarcasm will you it seems that you think because you studied how to hold a brush or learned by heart 200 chords and scales [you said you studied art but didn't mention which one, did you?], you've got the very truth about it. it's a shame.

I think you're generally confusing the definition of 'art' with a job or skill. Of course, the people who write Britney's songs are skilled at their job to an extent. Just like a plumber is skilled at fixing pipes. Unfortunately, there's a difference between being highly skilled and being an artist. Art is an expression of the artist's unconscious, creating something tangible from the intangible which is neither modified nor restricted by the artist in order to make fiscal gain. It's a simple and accepted definition. Taste has nothing to do with art.

you're talking about art as if you were talking about math or geometry or physics. art is not a science, art can't be limited by such descriptions. i guess you're the kind of man who don't think techno music is art, or samples are everything but music. i'm sorry dude, but limits of art aren't the limits of your understanding. tell me what's the difference between Anathema and Britney Spears? they both play songs that a lot of people enjoy. different styles, different concepts, but then again, who cares?

and i do think art has to do with taste. art is the most subjective thing there is, and you can never speak about art being totally objective : objectivity [does that word exist? haha] needs truth to exist. and there's no truth when it comes to art - each art lover has his own truth.

i don't care if people like boys bands, posers, jazz or grindcore. i consider all of these styles as art - that's all. you're a bit elitist, aren't you?

peace,
mehdi

 

[pagan2002]

i think everybody is a (f)artist

 

[D Mullholand]

Sieg Heil!