I was reading a selection of short stories by Voltaire recently, and despite the (likely accurate) thoughts that are probably revolving in your heads, I found myself trying to put some coherence to my curiousity for these ancient texts and their transcendence of time. Admittedly, the stories themselves can often be extremely simplistic and if one takes Candide, or Micromegas, there are no twists, plot lines, or character development, as these would be fat, serving only to hinder and detract from the sole purpose which is that of simple story-telling. The character did this, and this is what happened. It is for this very reason that they make such compelling reading, as they rely more upon an amalgam of philosophy, common sense, and a manner of life that seems foreign to us now.
And yet, not so far-removed that we cannot recognise the situations and conundrums that they are often confronted with. The circumstances are far removed from our own, and yet the observations, and the reactions are so familiar as if to mirror our own distress, musings and general confusion that accompanies much of what we do in our every day lives. I constantly think back to my visit to Maeshowe in the Orkneys, where Viking graffiti scatters the walls, providing such simple epithets as "Thorfinn wrote these runes" or "Ingigerd is the most beautiful of women". Take the expression away, and they are hardly removed from the equally inane statements studiously carved into school desks around the world over time immemorial. Boredom can make artists of us all, even if the platitudes and cliches are possibly better kept to ourselves, but one has to be intrigued that the passage of time has done so little to this need to leave something behind, even if it is done carelessly, and with little consideration to the item being defaced.
There comes a point for many of us that listen to a lot of music where people can become trapped in the whirling plethora of references and opinions that seem to dominate so much of the industry today. This band sounds like this - any one want to count the number of Radiohead references that people seem to be able to find everywhere? - and so place it in your rolodex under [insert genre here]. It is an understandable method to decoding the explosion of information that seems to confront us today, as it is ridiculously easy to become lost. There are just too many bands, and I well know how many are just put off before they can find some entry into this scene. Hunting for rough diamonds in the wilderness might be fun, but sometimes the work is really not worth it. Easier not to start - and one can ask any of the number of botched attempts at romance as to their opinion on this. It would be easier to rely on the vicarious enjoyment of a romantic comedy, than go through the potential disappointment of the real thing.
In the world of music, there is that constant tension between the old and the new. People desire a new sound, the new hit, but conversely in doing, so demand the familiar in order to meet these criteria. I have long been intrigued by the fascination that we seem to have for the ancient arts - such as writing and music- as they seem to be so fundamentally written into our DNA, and yet we strut in our pomp and feathers, making Gods and devoting our lives to them, with very little understanding incurred. Certainly, technology and social mores will have their impact on both, and yet one cannot say that at their core, they are really profoundly so different. The birth of rock 'n roll, that was the atomic bomb to our very notion of a generation, was hardly far removed from much of what was already being played. Yet, invested in the right context, and suddenly it became a movement, the reverberations of which we are still trying to decipher. And truly, each decade had its own innovation, much of which was profoundly different from what came before (at least, to start with, and in reference solely to genre definition), and yet there always remained that core that we looked to. I suppose the question is, can one deconstruct music to something nonsensical to our ears? Of course we can, but then the notion of music becomes blurred, and one becomes embroiled in a serious discussion as to what "music" even is.
I must allow, however, for the criticism that I am often blinded by my own musical leanings to be able to properly make this point. There are many albums in my collection that strike such a profound chord to me, and yet, played to another, there is a complete lack of empathy or understanding. And I mean this in the sense that the whole style is something foreign and hence strange. I will never forget buying Okkervil River's The Stage Names and Spoon's Ga Ga Ga Ga Ga, at the same time, and being told that the "Spoon is great, but that Okkervil River is very strange music". I admit, I don't understand it, as in my lexicon, these are two of my favourite bands, and although they are dissimilar, it is not to the extent that the one should not vaguely translate to the other.
So is the point then simply that music is entirely dependant upon its presentation, as opposed to any core structure? I suppose the point is fairly made, as many of us have become so accustomed to Verse - Chorus - Verse paradigm, and the Pentatonic, that we need not know anything about it, to be able to recognise it, and hum along to it. It is always the mark of a "mega" hit, when people can sing along the first time that they hear it. Of course, these seem to be marked by a move towards deconstruction, as opposed to any notion of complexity, as the present hits seem to be the brainchild of the tribal rhythms so predominant in much of popular music today. It is not a critcism, as all will know that I am certainly not one to advocate that we should all be listening to heavy classical music, or attempt to unravel the convolutions of jazz.
I suppose the consideration as to the contradictions that we all seem to face in our every day, as there are few things so divisive as music, and yet it embraces such a fundamental part of human nature as to touch at our notion of self, even if we don't want to think about it. This may be too simplistic, as it might be said that the importance lies in the presentation, and not necessarily in the core elements. The R&B fan is unlikely to listen to metal, nor should the folkie have 80's electo-pop inflicted on him. Perhaps, but that is just another contradiction, as how can only certain music just make sense, whilst the rest remains in the void of noise. I suppose I lead myself down the road to a discussion of culture, and nature vs nurture. We value the ideas and connotations that we associate with music, as opposed to the music itself. For many, what they are listening may be irrelevant beyond the need to dance, drink, or wallow in nostalgia, and thus one can become involved in the notion of music as only a trigger to the human brain. I don't believe that but then I can think that it might be nice to be able to call up Levi-Strauss and see if the afterlife has any insights.
0 comments:
Post a Comment