From: marck@nwu.edu (Marck ... high above the kitchen)
Subject: Repetition, Repetition, Repetition (was Re: The Best Band in the World II)
Followup-To: rec.music.misc
Organization: NU ACNS
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:57:56 GMT

i've been saving this one for a few days, trying to figure out precisely
what it is i want to say.  i think i'm finally in the right frame of mind
to take a shot at it.

In article <rleroux1.711656606@sol.UVic.CA>, rleroux1@sol.UVic.CA (Roger
Leroux) wrote:
> In <1992Jul20.154244.27868@nic.unh.edu> sjk@kepler.unh.edu (Stephen J Kenny) writes:
> 
> >Does anyone REALLY think that guitar-based music is
> . . .  
> >	2) Going anywhere new?
> 
> Not really, but then again, REAL musical creativity has been mostly stifled
> in the past decade (formula music and MTV has helped create this situation).

so, will somebody please explain this "formula" thing to me?  no, better
yet:  will somebody name an artist who has released more than one album who
*doesn't* have some semblance of a formula?

to me, the comment "creativity is stifled by formula music and MTV" is
entirely too easy to make and misses the mark.  every band that roger later
mentioned in his post (BOC, steve earle, eric johnson, jethro tull, etc.)
have a "formula" of some sort that they apply to their music ... it's what
immediately makes that music recognizable to you when you hear it.  it's
what makes roger *like* these guys, to some extent.

formulas have controlled music since the beginning of time -- anyone who
takes the most basic music history course is taught to recognize "symphony
form" and the structure of a motet.  to say that this is a phenomenon of
the last decade is only ignoring the Big Picture.  it's always been this
way.  everyone has a recognizable sound that connects their work together
... you can't help it.  and when several people have similar sounds (i.e.,
the Seattle scene over the past several years, or remember when Manchester
was All The Rage?), their music magically becomes a Formula, which
immediately makes people out there shun it.

likewise, while MTV is alleged to be the Evil Master of the (musical)
Universe right now, in other decades one could easily point to other
equally (or perhaps more) controlling media:  radio in the 30s, early
"American Bandstand" type shows in the 50s and 60s (in both the UK and US).
 in the 18th century, it was the royalty who called the musical shots (and
just about everything else).  MTV is only the latest in a technologically
improving Board of Image Directors who tell us what's-hot-what's-not in the
world of music.  to a lesser extent, SPIN, Rolling Stone, Q and other print
media do the exact same thing.  (lesser in the sense that print media
reaches fewer people than video media.)

if you have a problem with this, you can *try* to ignore all media.  stop
reading magazines and papers, stop watching television (not just MTV, but
all the other channels that carry vids now or that discuss the music scene
at all) ... and while we're at it:  stop checking out your friends' album
collections, because if you like your friends enough, you'll begin to think
that their music is "hep" too ... and then they've just become another form
of media.

okay, so my tongue is darting in and out of my cheek, but you see what i'm
getting at, i'm sure.  you can't blame MTV for anything.  they have no
responsibility to their viewers or whatever to give us "the good stuff." 
they just need to bring in a healthy audience share and keep the cost of
commercial time at a profit level.  don't get down on *them* 'cause they
seem to be doing their job well.

it would be nice if we could stop all the silly bickering bullshit that
goes on here to the tune of "i can't believe you think their music is worth
anything, it just shows how little taste you have
assumption-assumption-assumption" ... but hey, let's be real.  that'll
always happen.  still, the people who seem to have the most exciting,
interesting conversations on here are the ones who are genuinely excited
about music, who talk about why *this* group thrills them, and maybe why
*that* song seemed not to click with them ... and avoid the sweeping "this
genre sucks" stuff.

i'll probably pay for that one.


mlb


*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+* marck@nwu.edu +*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+*+
METALLICA DROOLZ                     || "Harder and faster and questions
m l bailey                           ||              and answers
northwestern university              ||  Finding the fine line between
high above the kitchen               ||              love and laughter"
Newsgroups: rec.music.misc,alt.rock-n-roll,alt.music.alternative