Thursday, December 2, 2010

Why Amanda Palmer is Brilliant - Part 2

You MUST watch the video through to "The End".

8 comments:

soin said...

oh no. sort of similar to we will puncture your costly car tyre if you park here

Sherry Wasandi said...

@soin: Parking a car equals domestic violence?

@Alok: Don't know where your comment disappeared off too, but I did get it mailed to my inbox.

This post isn't about brilliance in terms of musical talent. For that, refer to Part-1.

Though I agree completely with the concluding line, I fail to understand the astounding levels of popularity Opeth is enjoying these days. I just don't find their music to be particularly exceptional. Don't see myself having ANY of their works on replay. To each his own, I guess. Opeth just bores me.

Alok said...

The video's great (with a nice concept); has it been made by Amanda Palmer too?

I avoid putting a song on replay because it drains the soul out of it. I rather like Songs that flow into others, fitting into a larger whole. This "whole" is my (and Opeth's) definition of an Album.

I prefer songs to take me through journeys in my mind, akin to the effect literature has on me. Except that songs aren't as specific and deal with raw emotions. I prefer to imagine situations and stories that fit the order of the emotions. Opeth songs create some of the most interesting structures in my head. At some times they are strong enough to elicit images (Forests, Mountains, Beasts...).

The best part, however, is how, besides being so complex and diverse, they lead into each other and have a role in the Album.

Anyways, I'll stop being an Opeth fanboi here. To each their own.

A last word: Musical opinion is idiosyncratic unless it is guided by peer pressure and mass cultural trends, where it stops being about the individual and describes a collective instead.

Alok said...

P.S. I think my comment was removed because it contained a link to illegally uploaded copyrighted material. Or maybe it's just a server glitch.

Sherry Wasandi said...

@Alok: I get your point. Completely.

But I think that our approach to music branches off in separate directions at the very base of things. I look for singular pieces of music that influence me significantly in one way or the other. Instead of the subtle and suggestive, I have now developed a preference for the extravagant yet cryptic.

I appreciate your insight greatly though. Because it helps me finally understand where it comes from.

All good music and art is to be respected. Even if one may have preferences within them. Opeth may be great at what it does, but it's just not my favorite flavor of ice-cream. Doesn't mean I don't like most of them, in general.

Alok said...

May I ask a question (and this is just out of curiosity):

When you say "influence me significantly in one way or the other", can you explicitly state these "ways"? through emotions? Or are there other channels?

This interests me because it helps me keep a theoretical framework in my mind. (People's tastes in music can be placed in four categories: Cultural(popularity), Emotional(feels good), Rhythmic(dance), or Structural(art-for-art's-sake))

Sherry Wasandi said...

@Alok: Whimsical.

Aren't all concepts of aesthetics or musical preference, in actuality, based on whim?

By "influences me significantly", I mean exactly what you did when you said "take me through journeys in my mind". Only, my journey is more Broadway than subtle art.

The "interesting structures in my head" that you mentioned with regard to Opeth, I experience when I hear classical pieces. Many of them, but Bach or Mahler specifically. They overwhelm me.

Alok said...

Alright. In my model, this is close to "art-for-art's-sake", but not exactly. It seems to have a bit of the cultural in it.

Whim - I don't think so. There's something deeper. Something like the physical laws.