Whatcha listening to?

For the discussion of Movies, Television, Comics, and other existential distractions.

Moderator: Moderator

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Ezra Lb. » Mon Oct 06, 2014 4:17 pm

Artsy means pretentious unsophisticated cultural critique. Not saying anyone here leans that way.

Least of all you, right Frank? :wink:


Just sit back and listen to the fucking music and hear what there is to hear. If you don't like it just say so. If you do, why qualify it?

Absolutely. And nothing on god's grey earth is more detestable than the musical border patrol.


...the rich-girl pretentious "artsy" sort, who would do things designed to be "artistic"...

Yeah I've met those people. Art as lifestyle, stance, projection. I figured out pretty early on I didn't have any talent and while that was disappointing the last thing I wanted to do was fool myself which would have been worse.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
Steve Evil
Posts: 3519
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Some Cave in Kanata
Contact:

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Steve Evil » Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:16 am

Ezra Lb. wrote:[i]Artsy means pretentious unsophisticated cultural critique.


True enough, though I am bemused by certain breeds of rock critic who hurl that epithet at anyone who even makes the attempt. . .

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby FrankChurch » Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:58 am

Here's some: Nights In White Satin is artsy. When Doves Cry is artsy, but they are both great artsy.

Vangelis? Artsy.

User avatar
Ezra Lb.
Posts: 4547
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:02 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Ezra Lb. » Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:08 am

Steve E, just for the record, I was quoting Frank. I think words like "artsy" and "pretentious" used as criticism are simply placeholders for lack of thoughtfulness. If someone really wants to explain why something doesn't work those are not the words you use. And the number of music critics of any genre that are worth reading I can count on the fingers of one hand. There's something about music that frustrates analysis. Most of the time you think you're talking abut music when you're really talking about something else.
“We must not always talk in the marketplace,” Hester Prynne said, “of what happens to us in the forest.”
-Nathaniel Hawthorne, The Scarlet Letter

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby FrankChurch » Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:22 am

What about the term esthetic? You can say that different people look at that word different--rightly.

Mark Tiedemann
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Mark Tiedemann » Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:53 am

FrankChurch wrote:Here's some: Nights In White Satin is artsy. When Doves Cry is artsy, but they are both great artsy.


I can see how you could say Nights In White Satin is "artsy"---it's going for transcendence through a ballad form and the orchestration lends it a bit of classical flavor. Don't see it in the Prince tune. Pretty straightforward, not much adornment, just sincere, handicapped if anything by that unfortunate tinny 80s beat track.

Vangelis? Artsy.

Maybe, but also brilliant and genuinely transcendent. Some of his material very successfully takes me out of myself and I feel like I'm floating. He's also one of the very few musicians I've heard who can get real blues out of synths. I love synths, but they do have their limits, and blues and synths usually don't go together. Vangelis can pull it off. Listen to the Blade Runner soundtrack. Synthesizers, blues. Mmmmm.

(I should perhaps add here, that in the case of Vangelis---not rock. Not any sort of. Just the one album he did with Aphrodite's Child and a few things he did with Jon Anderson, but by himself he's overwhelming not rock.

User avatar
Steve Evil
Posts: 3519
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Some Cave in Kanata
Contact:

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Steve Evil » Tue Oct 07, 2014 1:38 pm

Ezra Lb. wrote:Steve E, just for the record, I was quoting Frank.


Yes, I was responding to him. . .should have specified in the quote. Judging from your post, we appear to be of one mind on this.

One man's "pretentious" is another's "profound". The line is thin, and subjective. Who's to say?

User avatar
Steve Barber
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:02 am
Contact:

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Steve Barber » Tue Oct 07, 2014 4:16 pm

(Caveat: Artsy is in the eye of the beholder.)

I would take exception to Vangelis as being artsy, which as we have noted implies a degree of self-conscious showing off. Vangelis is simply Vangelis. Spiral -- both the album and the specific track -- was truly magnificent.

In a way, some of the rock operas -- Tommy for instance -- were artsy. The film Moulin Rouge -- one of my favorites -- was artsy. (But reveled in it.)

The Alan Parsons Project could be very artsy. (Tales of Mystery and Imagination, Eye in the Sky and Stereotomy in particular. Good stuff on them, but a little too self-conscious.)

I tend to think that "artsy, with rare exceptions, cannot by definition be transcendent -- except where, in cases like Moulin Rouge, the self-conscious "transcendent construct" (whatever it is) is part of the overall experience.
All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

Mark Tiedemann
Posts: 2575
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:51 pm

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Mark Tiedemann » Tue Oct 07, 2014 5:30 pm

Steve,

Nicely put. I suppose another term for what we're discussing is the old "art for art's sake" which is a self-consciously artful pose that intends nothing else but its own self representation. That can nevertheless be impressive. Consider Gaudy.

User avatar
Steve Barber
Posts: 294
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:02 am
Contact:

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Steve Barber » Tue Oct 07, 2014 5:45 pm

Mark Tiedemann wrote:Steve,

Nicely put. I suppose another term for what we're discussing is the old "art for art's sake" which is a self-consciously artful pose that intends nothing else but its own self representation. That can nevertheless be impressive. Consider Gaudy.


I suppose you're making a double point there with Gaudi, a tongue-in-cheek reference perhaps, but yes. His works were certainly self-consciously "different". In his case "artsy" certainly applies, but as with Baz Luhrmann's works Gaudi pushed it focally rather than pretended it occurred naturally and organically.

(For the uninitiated, Gaudi was also the final "official" Alan Parson Project release. The first track on the album references Gaudi's premiere architectural work, La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona.)
All I need is a change of clothes, my Nikon, an open mind and a strong cup of coffee.

User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby FrankChurch » Tue Oct 07, 2014 6:25 pm

Harlan is certainly not artsy. He is just too street. Street and artsy do not jell.

User avatar
Rick Keeney
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby Rick Keeney » Thu Oct 09, 2014 4:41 pm

Jesus. "gel"


Coleman Hawkins and Bill Evans

User avatar
Rick Keeney
Posts: 1099
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 4:40 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

to be a rock and not to roll

Postby Rick Keeney » Fri Oct 10, 2014 8:56 am

I am listening to an icon who is discussing an artefact.


User avatar
FrankChurch
Posts: 16283
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 2:19 pm

Re: Whatcha listening to?

Postby FrankChurch » Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:55 pm

Doug, Steve Evil, is this artistry:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS0rl7IGHwA

It's new music from old.


Return to “Pop Culture”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests