A feed is another incarnation of complete slothfulness. Mine would be a step into the direction of a mindless audiophilic apocalypse: a music service perfectly accustomed to what I want to hear at all times, from my phone or pc. By using this, the authenticity in discovering, communicating, and sharing the most obscure artists would vanish into apathy. The artistic qualities of music rely just as heavily upon the efforts of the listener as the composition of the artist.
As the great critic Piero Scaruffi once said, “The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art.” This idea that greatness, creativity, or artistry can be equated with popularity couldn't be more inverted. By learning about a band without research or discussion, that band loses its sense of expression. Hearing “All you need is love” on the radio won't invoke any life changing pacifistic realizations. However, when grinding hours of research or discussion into a topic yields some artist with a similar musical nature, something else will be going through your head when listening than if your parents just had the artists’ records in your basement. For these reasons, by a band being able to be popular, by a band being accessible, the band thus is interpreted more simplistically by listeners. Only through obscurity can a listener ever hope to find musical enlightenment.
The feed would bring me to musical limbo. I would listen to new artists, with more eclectic instrumentation and varied stylistic song structures. But I would comprehend it like a true plebeian, with thoughts like “This is good,” or “This is bad.” I would lose all sense of purpose in this art, rendering it useless. The feed would corrupt my soul through the allowance of laziness.
As the great critic Piero Scaruffi once said, “The fact that so many books still name the Beatles "the greatest or most significant or most influential" rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art.” This idea that greatness, creativity, or artistry can be equated with popularity couldn't be more inverted. By learning about a band without research or discussion, that band loses its sense of expression. Hearing “All you need is love” on the radio won't invoke any life changing pacifistic realizations. However, when grinding hours of research or discussion into a topic yields some artist with a similar musical nature, something else will be going through your head when listening than if your parents just had the artists’ records in your basement. For these reasons, by a band being able to be popular, by a band being accessible, the band thus is interpreted more simplistically by listeners. Only through obscurity can a listener ever hope to find musical enlightenment.
The feed would bring me to musical limbo. I would listen to new artists, with more eclectic instrumentation and varied stylistic song structures. But I would comprehend it like a true plebeian, with thoughts like “This is good,” or “This is bad.” I would lose all sense of purpose in this art, rendering it useless. The feed would corrupt my soul through the allowance of laziness.
=/= 
I really like this commentary on music consumerism. I'd never thought about it like this.
ReplyDelete