Purity vs. The Whole World: Taste vs. Truth: Opinions vs. Convictions

[snyprrr]

How do I possibly reconcile all the various influences I have garnered here living in the Late 20th Century? Do you have the same problem?

I want to write silly love songs,... aaaand really Serious, Meaningful Music.

Oh, the calamity!

[The new erato]

I want to write silly love songs

That was Paul McCartney, dude!

[greg]

Where's the poll?

[starrynight]

I can reconcile them.  I don't want to hear really serious complex music all the time, sometimes simple joyful music gives me pleasure. 

And maybe you could even compare this is the past to lighter music co-existing alongside serious music.  For example Mozart did some simple light contredanses, but he also wrote very serious pieces like his Requiem.

[Marc]

Where's the poll?

Yeah, could have been a fair competition ....

.... until The Day Before You Came ....

[Mirror Image]

This is just stupid now. I thought the Sibelius vs. Bruckner poll was stupid, but this one really takes the cake.

[snyprrr]

This is just stupid now. I thought the Sibelius vs. Bruckner poll was stupid, but this one really takes the cake.

It's not a poll. It's a serious existential question. I have totally conflicting influences in my life, from the highest to the lowest. If I were to write a symphony to include the whole whole, I would have to include music a whole lot crasser than Mahler could dream of! Did he have to live through the '60s? the 70s?? the 80s ??? Oh,... poor Mahler???,...ha!,... he never had to have 'Safety Dance' inflicted on him!!!

In this day, approaching an 'a minor' chord should be a grail-like pursuit.

Anyhow, Xenakis wasn't averse to seeing influence in the basest things, and I can see him liking "Safety Dance''s bloop-bleep keyboard part. But, ... a lot of things happened in the '80s ...



Anyhow, the point of this Thread is the reconciliation of our diametrically opposed influences,... like,... Ted Nugent and Bach .

[Mirror Image]

It's not a poll. It's a serious existential question. I have totally conflicting influences in my life, from the highest to the lowest. If I were to write a symphony to include the whole whole, I would have to include music a whole lot crasser than Mahler could dream of! Did he have to live through the '60s? the 70s?? the 80s Oh,... poor Mahler???,...ha!,... he never had to have 'Safety Dance' inflicted on him!!!

In this day, approaching an 'a minor' chord should be a grail-like pursuit.

Anyhow, Xenakis wasn't averse to seeing influence in the basest things, and I can see him liking "Safety Dance''s bloop-bleep keyboard part. But, ... a lot of things happened in the '80s ...



Anyhow, the point of this Thread is the reconciliation of our diametrically opposed influences,... like,... Ted Nugent and Bach .

Okay, I understand where you're at for this thread. You're asking how somebody can go from listening to a rock band like U2 and then turn around and listen to say Rimsky-Korsakov for example?

A lot of this has to do with the environment we're raised in and what we grow up listening to. For me, jazz was a big influence (still is) on me. My Dad was so passionate about jazz that I couldn't help but to get into it at some point, but what's interesting is my Dad also loved classical music and rock, so I was always balancing this jazz, classical, and rock thing. I just listened to each genre with different ears, because they all require different approaches. I can kind of let go and just relax with jazz, with rock I can be crude and not give a damn about the world, and with classical I tend to go inward to search for a deeper meaning. Does any of this make sense? Each of these styles affect me in different ways.

[starrynight]

If I were to write a symphony to include the whole whole, I would have to include music a whole lot crasser than Mahler could dream of! Did he have to live through the '60s? the 70s?? the 80s ??? Oh,... poor Mahler???,...ha!,... he never had to have 'Safety Dance' inflicted on him!!!

In this day, approaching an 'a minor' chord should be a grail-like pursuit.

Anyhow, Xenakis wasn't averse to seeing influence in the basest things, and I can see him liking "Safety Dance''s bloop-bleep keyboard part. But, ... a lot of things happened in the '80s ...



Anyhow, the point of this Thread is the reconciliation of our diametrically opposed influences,... like,... Ted Nugent and Bach .

You don't have to reconcile them, though I'm not sure I'm a fan of Nugent.  Ultimately if something is well crafted, has interesting enough musical ideas but has a structure which is solid enough to contain and communicate them then that is all that matters.  Different music has different purposes.  There's no reason that all different types of music have to be mixed together in a work either.  Even though Mahler said his symphonies embraced the whole world I'm sure there are types of music he didn't fit into his symphonies even if he may have liked them.  And what wrong with The Safety Dance anyway?   

[snyprrr]

Okay, I understand where you're at for this thread. You're asking how somebody can go from listening to a rock band like U2 and then turn around and listen to say Rimsky-Korsakov for example?

A lot of this has to do with the environment we're raised in and what we grow up listening to. For me, jazz was a big influence (still is) on me. My Dad was so passionate about jazz that I couldn't help but to get into it at some point, but what's interesting is my Dad also loved classical music and rock, so I was always balancing this jazz, classical, and rock thing. I just listened to each genre with different ears, because they all require different approaches. I can kind of let go and just relax with jazz, with rock I can be crude and not give a damn about the world, and with classical I tend to go inward to search for a deeper meaning. Does any of this make sense? Each of these styles affect me in different ways.

This is all well and good if all your influences are 'worthy'. That's why I use Nugent,... I'm totally embarassed that, just like your dad and jazz, I fell into crappy music in the '70s that I struggle to free myself from,... Guilty Pleasures,...

If you've ever seen me sit there thoughtfully, listening to something worthy, thinking High Thoughts, and then go straight to some gay disco music,... and trust me, i act as if both have the exact same quality,...oy, I should just write a 3 Blind Mice Symphony!!!



As I said, if all your influences are worthy, then you're just not as embarassed as I am. I seem to have a weakness to the silly.

[Sergeant Rock]

I seem to have a weakness to the silly.

You're not alone: my three Bs: Bach, Beethoven and Bow Wow Wow 




Sarge

[karlhenning]

Okay, I understand where you're at for this thread. You're asking how somebody can go from listening to a rock band like U2 and then turn around and listen to say Rimsky-Korsakov for example?

A lot of this has to do with the environment we're raised in and what we grow up listening to. For me, jazz was a big influence (still is) on me. My Dad was so passionate about jazz that I couldn't help but to get into it at some point, but what's interesting is my Dad also loved classical music and rock, so I was always balancing this jazz, classical, and rock thing. I just listened to each genre with different ears, because they all require different approaches. I can kind of let go and just relax with jazz, with rock I can be crude and not give a damn about the world, and with classical I tend to go inward to search for a deeper meaning. Does any of this make sense? Each of these styles affect me in different ways.

(Emphasis mine.)

There is the gist. I shouldn't ever suggest that the music of Jethro Tull is at all greater than that of Prokofiev; but that (a) the music of Jethro Tull is of its own character, which I enjoy for itself, and (b) on its own terms, Jethro Tull's music is very well made, and (c) Jethro Tull and Prokofiev fulfill different musical needs of mine own.

[71 dB]

I have totally conflicting influences in my life, from the highest to the lowest.

You are just like everybody else. Deal with it! I can listen to Swedish pop, new age, hardcore techno and Buxtehude one after the other without problems. Open mind helps. The music I make with computer includes all kind of musical influences I have got over the years. It's my life, my experiences and my influences. I do with them what I want/can.

[The new erato]

You're not alone: my three Bs: Bach, Beethoven and Bow Wow Wow 




Sarge

You're the candy man?

And re topic: You like what you like. Why shouldn't you? It's your life. And why is it necessary to reconcile it? I read Kafka as well as a monthly comic. So what? If other people find that strange, amusing, banal, moronic, I don't give a f..k. I'm grown up which mean I define my own references (as long as they are within the law).

[Grazioso]

If you feel the need to reconcile disparate interests, then you're probably making the mistake of letting some abstract notion of personality get in the way of reality. Trying to make the territory conform to the map is a fool's errand. 

Part of the supposed problem, I think, is that you're foisting the terms "serious" and "meaningful" on one type of music, classical, implying that those things inhere in the music and aren't present in other musics, like pop or rock. Yet it takes not merely a piece of music, but also a listener, to start handing out value judgments like "serious" or "meaningful." You might also find meaning in a three-minute dance tune, and both you and the songwriter can take it seriously.

I regularly glide between "high" and "low" entertainment. While I can assert that, yes, Shakespeare and Mozart possess more complexity and sophistication than your typical beach novel or pop song, that doesn't mean they'll always suit my needs or moods. I might listen to a rock song and hang on every note, every tiny nuance, because it speaks to me at the moment, and yet remain unmoved by a Mahler symphony. And then another day, vice versa.

Human needs are complex. Don't try to force round pegs in square holes.

[scarlattiglenross]

I love both. Don't see any need to fret over it.

[snyprrr]

If you feel the need to reconcile disparate interests, then you're probably making the mistake of letting some abstract notion of personality get in the way of reality. Trying to make the territory conform to the map is a fool's errand. 

Part of the supposed problem, I think, is that you're foisting the terms "serious" and "meaningful" on one type of music, classical, implying that those things inhere in the music and aren't present in other musics, like pop or rock. Yet it takes not merely a piece of music, but also a listener, to start handing out value judgments like "serious" or "meaningful." You might also find meaning in a three-minute dance tune, and both you and the songwriter can take it seriously.

I regularly glide between "high" and "low" entertainment. While I can assert that, yes, Shakespeare and Mozart possess more complexity and sophistication than your typical beach novel or pop song, that doesn't mean they'll always suit my needs or moods. I might listen to a rock song and hang on every note, every tiny nuance, because it speaks to me at the moment, and yet remain unmoved by a Mahler symphony. And then another day, vice versa.

Human needs are complex. Don't try to force round pegs in square holes.

Perhaps it's those moments where I catch myself belting out Benny Mardones like a little girl that I run and put on some Pettersson??,...haha oy!!



Thanks everyone for the insights. Perhaps there is an extremely Dark Music floating somewhere outside of my reach, where,... no,... I, I,... I just can't bear to look!



Frankly, ABBA was wrong for me to put in the Thread Title. I like them. For some reason, Ted Nugent looms in my memory as an influence I would have to atone for some day. And this has nothing to do with the Nuge today,... this is more like how he started off as, I'll say 'honest', with the Amboy Dukes, and then he degenerated to Wango Tango,... and perhaps I felt betrayed.

Perhaps KISS is a better example of betrayal. I'm going to change the Thread Title.

At this point, seeing how far down the bowl Gene Simmons has gone for the love of money, I am sorry that they wrote so many catchy songs that I just can't deny.

[snyprrr]

You are just like everybody else. Deal with it! I can listen to Swedish pop, new age, hardcore techno and Buxtehude one after the other without problems. Open mind helps. The music I make with computer includes all kind of musical influences I have got over the years. It's my life, my experiences and my influences. I do with them what I want/can.
[/quot

know,... I'm just Whiney McWienstein!,... maybe I am just afeared of my own open mind? I can come up with some bizarre stuff sometimes,... now if I was really trying to be strange, oy, yes, that's scary!

[snyprrr]

Actually, I can simply relate this to Xenakis alone. I remember feeling like how he had 'sold out' in his later works,... like, WTF, man, you're Xenakis, you can't be writing this crap.




Of course,... now, hrhm,...uh, yea ,... I can't wait to hear every last calcified note! Oy!

[greg]

Yeah, I could imagine you at his grave, begging him to write "just one more glissando." If you leave a $100 bill there, that might work. Well... if you have it, you know, after spending all of your other money on his other CDs...