I should have been a musician or is it too late? Because I feel like I got the music in me.
*******
This weekend, I was in a discussion with a friend who happens to be a musician and I think I got a little too deep on him.
Jokingly, I was questioning his pick for music at a party. I never had him pegged for a guy who listened to that type of music. He told me as a musician he has to appreciate and respect all types of music. Which I agree with to some extent in that you can find good in all different music styles. But then I pressed on…
What is the difference between a musician and an artist (in a musical sense)? Yes, they can be one in the same and yet they can be miles apart…like a drafter to an architect. A musician can be fine with all different styles of music and at one with the world, but I think an artist is more discerning. A musician can play music, an artist can make music. It is my opinion that an artist has to be critical, that is how an artist forms their vision for their work to create something that is unique. I believe that an artist strives for beauty, emotion, and a connection with the human soul and cannot settle for music that is market driving and formulaic.
It wasn’t so much a discussion on different styles of music. It was about good music vs. bad music and why do people settle for bad music. Certain genres are more likely to produce bad music, but you can still find gems.
And then my friend made the mistake about talking about technical ability. A musician can be technically good, but only an artist can write a good song. What happens a lot in music is that you have a band that wants to prove how good and technical they are, that they miss the whole notion of creating something that connects with people. Sure, they will connect with musical geeks who are into technical abilities. An artist can be very technical too, but they know how to use it…as in editing their ability for the greater good of the song, not to prove their ability.
I don’t know if my terms of musician and artist are the correct terms for this discussion, but it is the best I can come up with now. I am defining an artist as a musician plus that something special, call it magic. Artists write their own music guided by their own principles and theories. A musician…as someone who can play music.
Anyway, what is this mess above about? I wish that I had the musical skills to back me up. I am all talk and no action. Theories, sure, I’ve got loads of theory. But what good are they if I can’t implement them?
I guess that makes me a critic. I hate critics.
This weekend, I was in a discussion with a friend who happens to be a musician and I think I got a little too deep on him.
Jokingly, I was questioning his pick for music at a party. I never had him pegged for a guy who listened to that type of music. He told me as a musician he has to appreciate and respect all types of music. Which I agree with to some extent in that you can find good in all different music styles. But then I pressed on…
What is the difference between a musician and an artist (in a musical sense)? Yes, they can be one in the same and yet they can be miles apart…like a drafter to an architect. A musician can be fine with all different styles of music and at one with the world, but I think an artist is more discerning. A musician can play music, an artist can make music. It is my opinion that an artist has to be critical, that is how an artist forms their vision for their work to create something that is unique. I believe that an artist strives for beauty, emotion, and a connection with the human soul and cannot settle for music that is market driving and formulaic.
It wasn’t so much a discussion on different styles of music. It was about good music vs. bad music and why do people settle for bad music. Certain genres are more likely to produce bad music, but you can still find gems.
And then my friend made the mistake about talking about technical ability. A musician can be technically good, but only an artist can write a good song. What happens a lot in music is that you have a band that wants to prove how good and technical they are, that they miss the whole notion of creating something that connects with people. Sure, they will connect with musical geeks who are into technical abilities. An artist can be very technical too, but they know how to use it…as in editing their ability for the greater good of the song, not to prove their ability.
I don’t know if my terms of musician and artist are the correct terms for this discussion, but it is the best I can come up with now. I am defining an artist as a musician plus that something special, call it magic. Artists write their own music guided by their own principles and theories. A musician…as someone who can play music.
Anyway, what is this mess above about? I wish that I had the musical skills to back me up. I am all talk and no action. Theories, sure, I’ve got loads of theory. But what good are they if I can’t implement them?
I guess that makes me a critic. I hate critics.
7 comments:
I love this post!
I think this can be said of anything that can be considered a work of art (literature, poetry, movies, etc). It's the difference between a peom that connects with its audience on a deep level and a poem that is in perfect iambic pentameter. The second one will usually be the one that is appreciated by the people who "understand" literature.
I do not think that music that is technically elaborate but not artistically so is necessarily bad music, though. Everyone has a different reason for liking the things they do and it is incredibly difficult to make objective value judgments. I probably just say that to justify my guilty pleasures.
I agree totally with what has been said here. I'm pretty excited to come in on this conversation. I too feel like I missed the boat in never taking guitar or piano, but I have my reasons which I've tried to come to terms with. Technically music is art. It takes dead air space and fills it with harmony that connects with people like the way a painter fills a blank canvas and turns it to a work of art. Good music can create images and colors in your mind. A good song can mean something different to everybody, much the way a painting can. Both are ways to translate emotion. However, I tend to be critical of my favorite art form and I only seek out artist who understand this connection and recognize that music is art. They do this by experimenting with sounds the way an artist experiments with colors and brush strokes. Good artist push the barriers and aren't afraid to take some chances. Good artist don't want to get stagnet. Their focus is on art, not making what is going to sell best. That's a good artist is to me. That's the differences between Thomas Kincaid vs. Warhol, or Matchbox 20 vs Radiohead.
One thing that I forgot to mention was that art is naturally subjective. It is possible for music to appear to lack artistic merit intentionally like a parody of sorts.
Since I did take piano and guitar earlier in life (and am way out of practice) I actually understand the technical side better than I understand the artistic side.
BB,
good comments and very true thoughts on artists. You always have good take on music.
Dust,
I am curious what your guilty pleasure is that you are trying to justify?
I agree art and such is subjective and each person will be able to connect with something on their level. However, I think there are some eternal principles or guidelines that can make somethings more right or beautiful than others. The eye can recoginize balance and proportion and the ears understand a good chord progression and melody. The struggle is how to maintain these principles without repeating yourself to create something that is given to a simple formula. Or is that a bad thing?
Formulas can be good and bad. To some degree perspectives on balance and proportion are formulas that are difficult to quantify.
I've been considering doing a guilty pleasures post for a while. I'll have to think of some of the biggies and post a list shortly. I can assure you that I have more than one musical guilty pleasure.
Very interesting post. I do not have any expertise in this area so it brings a question to my mind: I can be taught to appreciate music by my husband (to a small extent), but it doesn't come naturally. So what does that make me? Is my brain not connected the same as other people, like all of you, and is something truly wrong with me, as BB would probably surmise. Like my sense of humor is way off too. Alas I must conclude, I am a mutant, neuronally challenged by faulty connections between my right brain and left brain.
No I wouldn't call you a mutant. I think you just need to slow down a bit when a good song comes on and learn to appreciate it
Post a Comment