Hello, Doctor Darling!

Program Note

2011-10-18T07:00:00.001-07:00

I, II, III, IV (so titled as a recitation of the piece's movements) overlaps repetition, refrain, and return. It is a long piece. The piece considers the vibraphone, in that it takes predominantly the vibraphone into account. It is obsessed with motifs, so much so that it cannot create a mature one. It attempts to appeal to the visceral by stifling expression. It exploits clarity. It is music about music, in the sense that it is absolute music about music. It is absolute music about music where music about music is usually seen as extramusical. It is absolute music to a severe, wholly extramusical degree.

--

November 12, 8pm, Adams House Pool Theatre, Harvard Square, perf. by Alex Lipowski.

Where To Find A Catalyst For My Curiosity

2011-04-08T08:03:00.000-07:00

First post in a long time, even more so when you consider that I'm not even sure my last post is true anymore.

Last night I lay in my bed having more than mild gas pains. I don't know what I ate to get me there, all I had was a Vietnamese salad, it's really not important. I was lying in bed with pain; I couldn't lie on my stomach, even lying on my back was rough, but I was trying to force the gas, you know, out. (Needless to say that my fiancee was not there with me; no amount of spousal pain relief would, for her, be worth turning the precious heat sealed under the covers into a brimming-over dutch oven of flatulence.) When this didn't immediately happen, I started thinking about fantastic situations in which I would be relieved of my pain, e.g. my abdomen being pierced with a large needle and blown open such that the gas would freely escape into the air through my intestinal wall and skin, all while causing me no pain or injury, and while making the pleasing "thhbbbbt" sound that a balloon makes when you inflate it, and then let go if it so that it flies around the room as it deflates.

As I thought about the balloon, and as I was in pre-sleep imagination mode, I naturally gravitated to thoughts of whether the outlandish solution of piercing my belly would lead to the outlandish situation of making me fly around the room backwards as well. I knew, of course, that I was too heavy for this to be possible, but what about other beings? An ant can lift several times its own weight; now, I know an ant fart would not send it flying in figure eights through the air, but I begin to wonder about whether it at least be slightly displaced.

I have no idea how the digestive system of an ant works. So there was that obstacle. But I also could not imagine that an ant's tiny body could hold enough air to create a flatulence powerful enough to move it. I started thinking of other small but rounder animals; a mouse maybe? My brain touched the tip of some memory of my Dad telling me about an animal that was relatively large, but when you held it in your hand you could not feel that it was there. My inner projector went from scenes of my Dad to trees to sunlight to a porch with Adirondack chairs... childhood vacations to the Adirondacks. During childhood vacations to the Adirondacks my Dad (because it's the kind of thing he would do) and I (because who knows) would sit on the porch in Adirondack chairs with sunflower seeds in our hands, attempting to sit perfectly still in an effort to entice the corporeal feeding of a bird species more trusting in the state park than it was in our backyard: the chickadee.

And it was true: I did get to hold a chickadee in my hand, and it was like holding nothing at all. If I closed my eyes I could feel the seeds being picked off my hand as though from a hovering bird, but without the air displacement I would feel in that case. The chickadee felt like nothing, but was much larger than an ant, and I began to wonder what effect flatulence might have on a chickadee.

More to the point: in arriving at a species capable of flight I had arrived at another factor which helped the idea of an animal being displaced by farts. If a bird were in flight, there would be significantly less friction, perhaps enough less that a fart could move it.

At this point, when imagining a bird in flight, my mental slide show came up with a blue jay or something similar. I don't know why, but the question was obviously not about weight anymore. I had a few seconds (or nanoseconds; who knows in pre-sleep imagination time) of simply picturing a blue jay in flight, gliding, wings outstretched, suddenly encountering a little bump in its trajectory (turbulence?) as it let out a little puff of gas. Not being inconvenienced or surprised, and certainly not embarrassed, but simply encountering a normal little puff-bump during a routine airborne errand.

It occurred to me that, much like with the ant, I know precious little about the digestive system of birds. Frankly, I don't even know if birds fart, although since my intuition was that birds resemble humans more than ants do, it seemed at least more likely. Birds, I do know, subsist mostly on seeds (or similar roughage) and insects, and it occurred to the fifth-grade biology student in me that birds, while living in the same world that humans do and dealing with a lot of the same issues, have a digestive system that is built totally differently, designed to better suit their needs, which include eating seeds and insects and not necessarily getting five servings of fruits and vegetables as well as requisite protein and carbohydrates every day.

And this, I think, is what drives passion in biologists. Birds are very cool and obviously very different; these are not things a biologist is meant to catalog. I suddenly realized very clearly how fascinating it would be for someone predisposed to the life sciences to learn as much specific information about a bird's digestive system as possible. How do these similarly functional but dissimilarly functioning machines work? What led them to work like this? Why do we never see a bird rip open an orange and enjoy the whole thing? A biologist, driven by an enviable curiosity about the way animals work, about fundamental (and I mean fundamental) difference something as basic as lifestyle, would want to know everything about these things, as thoroughly and expeditiously as possible.

I began to think of myself as an artist, partially because of a comment a colleague had made to me earlier that day about my process and work. He told me, very honestly, "You're not lazy, but you do need something to get you going. You are often in need not of incentive, but of a catalyst." He was referring to a person: a teacher, my aforementioned fiancee, or perhaps the administrator of a deadline. But there's something more to it for me, because he's right; as curious as I am and as desperate for knowledge as I am, I often lack the spark to really get into something, to really explore. I find myself, frustratingly, content with ruminating on the subject of my curiosity rather than investigating it.

I imagined a biologist faced with a bird. I don't know if the bird is alive or dead, it doesn't really matter because it's a fantasy, and you'll soon see that for my purposes it helps for it to be both. A biologist is faced with a bird and needs to know how its body works and why it works the way it does. The bird is floating there in front of them and they can only spend so much time examining it from the outside before they have to dissect it. They have to open it up and look inside it at every little piece of innard, every individual bone and organ and investigate what role each tiny thing plays.

I imagined myself faced with the same bird, faced with the same task of finding out everything about it, needing to dissect it. My position as a vegetarian notwithstanding, I know that in order to really find out what's going on with this bird I need to cut it open. I don't need to kill it, the bird is neither alive nor dead. But I need to get inside it. But--and remember this is my imagination here, with supposedly limitless bounds--I was unable to force myself, my imaginary self, to do anything but stroke the feathers. To look up close at and pet the soft, blue feathers on this bird. Faced with the task of investigating, all I wanted to do, all night, was pet that damn bird. Gently and carefully, for the foreseeable future.

Now, there is a lot to be learned about a bird by petting it, or by feeling its feathers. An awful lot, and also an awful lot that a biologist would likely miss by moving to dissection too soon, especially taking into consideration the stereotypical scientific personality. There is not a lot of Zen involved in cutting open a bird and sorting its organs, and I maintain that placid reflection is as much a key to my (or anyone's) intelligence as dedicated research.

But I also know, that I'm missing something. I know so much about what it means to be "with" the bird, to experience the bird, to enjoy a bird for the sake of the bird and nothing else--and that is incredibly valuable. But I need to force myself to sort organs. I need to be aware that although it's tedious, although it's often hard to see the value in it, although it's gooey, there is a certain understanding that can only come from complete, procedural dissection, classification, and disfigurement. To attain a greater understanding based on an unchallengeable and vast bed of information can be as much a "higher plane" as attaining the literally indescribable understanding of an empirical experience. I'm hoping that my convoluted fart-chain of thought last night will act as a catalyst in this way for a bit, for me.

A Thing

2010-09-29T11:26:00.001-07:00

I am interested in the cultural, rather than the perceptual, ramifications of music.

Hello, Doctor Darling!

2010-09-28T13:10:00.000-07:00

Turns out the Monty Python sketch after which this blog is named has been on YouTube all along. For your entertainment:

Artist's Statement

2010-06-28T14:41:00.001-07:00

Had to write one in 250 words or less. This is what came out.

---

I am an academic, experimental musician who finds value in the production and consumption of commercial music. I think music is, as all art, sacred in a way, especially when unadulterated by ulterior motives; but I admire commercial music, which must accomplish an estimable goal. This relationship with commercial music has informed a tendency I have to write concert music that is clearly conceptual, that draws attention to its concept (the idea [or "gimmick"] behind the piece) far more than to its material (the notes and rhythms that make up the piece). It is with these concepts that I attempt to be incisive and moving; I see my music as essays on my philosophy of life. I also musically probe the philosophies of my audience; my most treasured reason for making music is the opportunity it affords me to interact meaningfully with others.

My status as a composer makes me a cultural critic. It is the critic in me that thinks people who say music takes them to a place that is "beyond words" are wrong; I am an experimental musician that believes in the academics of aesthetics before the transcendence of aesthetics. What I think people are talking about is music that they could describe, but, in that divine moment of being touched by it, don't bother to try for fear of interrupting true beauty. Though I am academic, conceptual, critical, and sometimes commercial, even I cannot deny the ambition to create a moment like this.

Performance Announcement

2010-01-17T17:33:00.001-08:00

Just a quick announcement:

Matt Donello of the performance group YouCanJustParkRightHere will be playing my new percussion piece, Water dripping from a leaking pipe behind drywall on Tuesday, January 19th in Brooklyn.

Info:

Time: 8:00 pm
Place: Galapagos Art Space, 16 Main St., Brooklyn
Cover: $10
Also on the bill: Pieces by Ligeti, Scelsi, Dillinger Escape Plan. Bands: Dan Crowell Ensemble and The Skeleton.

Hope you can make it!

Recent Music Inspired By Me, Ian Power

2009-09-29T19:34:00.000-07:00

Steal $20 From Ian Power, by Nicholas Deyoe:

And Banana Suit by Ben Hackbarth:

Banana Suit was also partially inspired by Bob Pierzak's Endangered Banana #3.

iTAP Prose

2009-09-07T13:54:00.000-07:00

My lips great drying as he software tour my head break. Slow, so very slow, he began to unborn my silver blood. I gotten wets as he license my early anderson which that he'll never least, anderson form ones global moment, I believe himself. He came into me like a free travel, anderson my mouth open. . .

----

Today waste, at first, like anything other days. Around, should, dream, break, special time world on my novel. Button what made today different waste they break.

----

My beautiful. What division paid could have image such a visit in history will long. Your area to me like raised, waste over me, rent me color yet control reference, always nursing life. Some, your area also they window, push so hard again me, yet always environment. I support your area like most natural phenomenon, even dance anderson even products, give life along with a control remember that it cannot be easy take strong back.

Interlude, for percussion quartet and carillon

2009-09-06T10:39:00.000-07:00

This piece was performed in April 2009 by red fish blue fish and Scott Paulson on the campus of UC San Diego.

Twenty Dollars II

2009-08-09T20:12:00.000-07:00

Ebay Art, Second Installation.

The Entire Schnittke Viola Concerto

2009-07-09T17:10:00.001-07:00

Click for higher resolution.

Ligeti for Two Pianos

2009-07-09T16:53:00.001-07:00

Piece from May 17th's "Bodies" concert at UCSD. Ian Power, Kathleen Gallagher, David Medine, and Bodies, performers.

Twenty Dollars

2009-07-09T16:50:00.000-07:00

Ebay Art from about a year ago.

Vomit Sequence

2009-02-24T16:52:00.000-08:00

:-)

:-]

:-|

:-(

:-{

:-X

>=-X

>:-O###########

:,-(..

......................................................................................

2009-02-17T14:30:00.000-08:00

............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................................
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

.

.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Two Album Reviews I wrote for THE SCENE

2009-02-01T14:06:00.000-08:00

Colby O'Donis - Self-Titled

Colby O’Donis is a sad story. Not in terms of life story; he’s 19 years old, has taken guitar lessons with Carlos Santana’s rhythm guitarist since he was 11, has had record deals since he was 10, and has worked with Platinum producers Full Force since he was nine. He is a sharply honed, polished talent that has made a name for himself at an early age. What makes O’Donis’s case a sad one is that evidently no one has shown him the other end of the records he’s produced, because he hasn’t figured out that it takes more than a sweet voice, an ear for beats, and rumored guitar skills to make an entertaining musician. This sad story is summed up nicely in this sad quote: “Performing and entertaining is what I live for,” says O’Donis. “I want to be able to show the fans that I’m a ‘real’ musician as well as a singer and dancer.” In addition to being totally offensive to every singer that’s ever lived, he demonstrates a clear lack of understanding that virtuosity on pretty much any instrument is not enough to make a pop star, especially in his genre; one must cultivate a character, a personality, and take some risks. This record does not.

What is even more exasperating than the 11 nearly identical bland songs, than the opportunistic repetition of his name on nearly half of them, than the proclamation on “Hustle Man” that he’s “been through the struggle” and “it’s a long way up”—what’s more exasperating is the precisely two fleeting moments of intrigue on the album. “Saved You Money” features an a capella breakdown with a great “raspberry” sound leading the way, and near the end of “Hustle Man” O’Donis takes his voice, which has been sweetly revolving around the same notes and timbres for the last hour, and catapults it through a cathartic, if auto-tuned melisma that lands in an octave normally heard only by dogs. Two moments of genuine risk and intrigue and possibility that go totally unexplored and unexploited on what is supposed to be a breakout album. The album is listenable, probably great for parties or clubs, and fine if you’re into the impression that even though life is good, there’s nothing particularly exciting about it, as O’Donis appears to be. The album is listenable, but inoffensive. Colby’s all Adonis, and no pop star.

----

Britney Spears - Circus

Circus, Britney Spears' sixth studio album and fifth to debut at number one, is an album that carries a stark internal split in tone. Specifically, where 2007's Blackout used references to Britney's paparazzi life paired with great music to create the ultimate comeback album, there are three or four tracks on Circus that overdo these associations and pair them with music that is, at best, annoyingly catchy. The condescending tone on these three or four tracks overpowers what is otherwise a charming album from the superstar. Where Dr. Luke (“Circus”), Bloodshy & Avant (“Unusual You”), and Guy Sigsworth (“Out from Under”) have offered sensual, earnest, relatable songs, Max Martin (“If U Seek Amy”) and Danja (“Kill The Lights”) take Britney's 2007 defiance toward the media and smugly turn it against the most loyal of her fans. This might pass as deliciously juvenile if Britney were ten years younger, but at this point in her career it seems out of place, and aggressively so. Given the hype surrounding these songs in particular, I'm led to believe that Circus was created by people that think Britney's fans either don't care about musical and/or lyrical content, or aren't able to distinguish between different types of such content. Please prove them wrong.

Conversation with red fish blue fish

2008-12-10T12:54:00.000-08:00

Last March I did a collective interview with four members of red fish blue fish, the percussion ensemble based here at UCSD. The publicity department never decided to publish it, and I was thinking about it the other day and thought I'd post it here. I talk with Jon Hepfer, Ross Karre, Matt Jenkins and Greg Stuart. I wrote this in March and am too lazy to change the intro, so some of the info there is out of date.

-----

UCSD's red fish blue fish, under the direction of Steven Schick, is a critically acclaimed percussion ensemble that this year will play concerts in venues from Washington, D.C. to Los Angeles to Taiwan. USCD's resultant percussion department ranks among the best in the world, and some of its members were kind enough to take time to answer some probing questions about the nature of the craft of percussion. Featured are Ph.D. students Ross Karre and Greg Stuart, and M.A. students Matthew Jenkins and Jon Hepfer.

When a composer writes for obscure instruments (or, conversely, everyday "household" instruments) in an ensemble context, the responsibility almost invariably falls to the percussionist to learn them and play them, when realistically many of these instruments can be played by people with little training in percussion or even music itself. How often and in what contexts do you think this delegation is appropriate? How much do these instruments act as a fresh outlet for creativity as opposed to weighing the percussion section down when they could be playing other instruments?

Ross Karre: It is entirely appropriate to delegate these sounds to percussionists if it is with percussion techniques that one expects these sounds to be produced. The ability to play standard percussion instruments is a learned expertise just like any other instrument. The only difference (and it's a big one) between percussionists and say, piano or guitar, is that with those instruments the interface is always standardized (white keys, black keys, six strings, etc.) and the variation of technique from each instrument within the keyboard or plucked string instrument family is slight compared to the difference in technique between timpani, vibes, and congas with hands. However, the extra percussion-specific technique of instrument versatility further enables percussionists to play found sounds because, in the end, percussionists rely on the interdependence of corporeal and aural sensations perhaps more than anybody. In other words, no matter what is to be hit, the objectives of each of the musical parameters (what, how loud, what timbre, etc.) can be individually calibrated based on context and what the composer asks more easily by percussionists because of their familiarity with such accommodations.

Jon Hepfer: Really, a percussionist's expertise needs to be more in using his ear and his artistic sensibility than his hands. After all, anyone can rustle leaves, pull a trigger or run their hands across a keyboard. Then again, anyone can drip paint onto a canvas, but wouldn't necessarily be Pollock. The percussionist's craft, in my opinion, corresponds more to their sense of reconciling the various art forms and being able to live in a world in which sound, time and vision cohere into something which is artistically compelling.

Greg Stuart: I find that what is properly called percussion playing, and here I refer largely to works in the post-Zyklus tradition, are actually the ones exerting an enormous "weight" on the practice. As with weather, very little actually happens in a "high-pressure" system, such as the one found in formal percussion training (despite the weather being dubbed “beautiful” as we all go about our day). Under this pressure we feel comfortable and know where we are, but we are also unable to be swept away by the noise produced in dynamic "low-pressure" systems. From my perspective, these low-pressure systems are created precisely by performance situations in which performers with little percussion or musical training can participate.

Percussionists have a reputation of being more rhythmically accurate than other instrumentalists. Why is that, and is it deserved?

Matthew Jenkins: A great many percussionists' musical foundation is founded in executing rhythms. In many circles percussionists are not taught to think melodically or harmonically like many other musicians, and as a result a significant portion of percussionists develop a natural ability to execute rhythms accurately and easily. It isn't an approach I embrace when I teach percussion. The percussion world would benefit greatly from a different approach to percussion pedagogy centered around a more versatile and musical approach to performance. This would certainly do something to change the stereotype.

Greg Stuart: I think that percussionists have this reputation because striking is the dominate mode of percussion playing. Striking (particularly in large, “readable” gestures) is visually compelling and is often equated with “intense” and/or “visceral” rhythmic experience. In part, this has to do with the overall directness of correspondence between striking as gesture and as perceived sound, but it is also has to due with the fact that instruments with shorter event durations, or envelopes, are generally, although not exclusively, favored in percussion setups. A shorter envelope is usually preferred because it makes the location of a sonic event more quantifiable, either in relation to a score or temporal-field of a piece, and thus allows for a determination of accuracy to be made. In general, I don't think that rhythmic accuracy is the province of any particular set of instrumentalists and therefore do not feel that this reputation is deserved, but I can see how percussion is viewed this way given its current practice.

What music for totally "un-pitched" percussion strikes (har!) you as the most interesting? What areas of percussion music without (at least specific) pitches do you think are yet to be explored in potentially interesting ways?

Ross Karre: Pitch is just a component of timbre. For example, I don't see the pitch material in pieces like Zyklus or King of Denmark as being different than the noises. I would dare to say that I don't really hear them that differently anymore, in terms of their visceral impact.

Jon Hepfer: I love pieces that have an inherent problem or issue at their core. For example, my favorite piece is Vinko Globokar's Toucher, which takes a text of Bertoldt Brecht's Life of Galileo, translates it into French, and then asks the percussionist to find seven instruments which mimic the 13 basic vowel sounds of the French language. The percussionist then recites the text to the play, which each French syllable corresponding with its instrumental counterpart. In this piece, Globokar uses a very simple premise to create an end result that is complex on many levels. The piece asks questions: How do music and speech correspond? Is it possible to find a musical language that can create drama without using tonality (as is the case of traditional musical drama)? And so on.

Ross Karre: A different argument along these lines (which does create a compositional problem with respect to keyboard instruments, orchestral noises and found noises) is that of context. Zyklus uses marimba, vibes, gongs, triangle, hi-hat, etc. However, we don't play the marimba like a Guatemalan Marimbist, the Vibes like Milt Jackson, the gongs like a Javanese Gamelan, the Triangle like a Janissary band, or the hi-hat like Gene Krupa. Instead, we shamelessly remove those instruments from their original contexts and (mis-)appropriate them, as if listeners could just forget these instruments' origins. The problem is that listeners don't forget. They might hear the hi-hat and think of the opening to Bush's "Everything Zen" or Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit". The vibraphone reminds them of The Postal Service and the marimba is that sound from American Beauty or Rugrats. Pitched and non-pitched percussion has a familiar timbre that is hard to remove from its context. The best example is the recent steel pan phenomenon in modern percussion. You can take steel pan out of Trinidad but you can't take the Trinidad out of Steel Pan. I find this problem to be much more complicated than pitch vs. noise.

It what senses are un-pitched sounds more or less dramatic, authoritative, or versatile than pitched sounds?

Ross Karre: They aren't.

Matthew Jenkins: Un-pitched sounds and noises have historically demarcated boundaries between specific or significant events in both musical and non-musical contexts. Exceptions to this would be a church bell or many alarm clocks. However, the sounds of a building falling, a train coming, a car crash, or a Babe Ruth home run are all noises with little or no pitch center.

Greg Stuart: I don't see the distinction here between "pitched" and "un-pitched" percussion music. It is perhaps Ionisation that is the first major demonstration of the nullity of this division. For example, in Ionisation an un-pitched instrument, the snare drum, becomes a pitch (or region of pitch) early in the work; conversely, pitched instruments like the glockenspiel or piano become noises in the sonic fabric near the end of the piece. Ionisation is a kind of plasma in which tone and noise, not to mention instrumental technique, slide fluidly in a field of increasing voltage between and beyond their respective poles of attraction. I think that this is possible because, as a body of instruments, percussion functions as a kind of remainder to the larger instrumental situation, constituting its void. As such, percussion music is largely a question of mixtures made from bits of this remainder. At their very best, these mixtures will be unforeseeable, appearing to come from out of nowhere, and will be inexpressible in the dominate language of the situation, in which tone and noise are effectively partitioned.

Why is there no "harp cartage fee" equivalent in the percussion world?

Ross Karre: There is. People get paid cartage all of the time in percussion. If they don't, it's usually because they forgot to ask for it or it's well beyond the financial limitations of the gig. I often don't ask, especially this early in my career, because I'm afraid the gig might get offended.

Greg Stuart: Percussionists do not play a single instrument. You could play one, or you could play fifty. The percussionist, instead of being linked to a single instrument the way a harpist is, is linked to a set of techniques. When you hire a percussionist, you are first and foremost hiring these set of techniques. And techniques, unlike a 5-octave marimba, set of chimes or a bass drum, do not require a truck, instrument cart and stage crew to move. It’s unfortunate that this is often overlooked because moving a giant setup can be an unbelievable pain.

Ross Karre: It may not bother me because it may end up that someone like me will get hired again over someone that charges cartage, especially if a series is low on cash. I guess this would be a good reason for unions or at least a standard percussion cartage fee. I'm not into that, though. Not right now anyway. Fairness, in this regard, is overrated.

What realms of percussion technology do you think will or should be developed and/or perfected in coming years?

Greg Stuart: As I work a lot with friction, I'd be very interested in working with someone in the development of a robotic, circular bow.

Matthew Jenkins: Motion capture/tracking, complex controllers, and robots! Score followers and pitch trackers could be useful too.

Ross Karre: None, as an industry. My biggest problem with percussion manufacture is the whole concept of a unified idea for technological progression. For example, I value the fact that each marimba manufacturer has a different resonator system, each vibraphone has a different pedal and motor, each snare drum has a different snare system. The problem comes when composers and educators expect standardization. If composers simply realize that they must cater their pieces to this lack of standardization, we will be much better off. The more standardized these manufacturers make our instruments, the more vaccinated they become; impervious to the creativity that once afflicted them all.

Using broad terms, what sort of percussion music allows you to best express yourself as a musician? Do you think this applies in any way to percussionists as a whole?

Matthew Jenkins: Personally, I love to collaborate with composers. Any composition or project in which the opportunity is there to work with the composer is something that allows me to best express myself. Additionally, I like music that allows me to make choices about structure and sound. Compositions like Thomas Meadowcroft's Plain Moving Landfill or Morton Feldman's King of Denmark are two contrasting examples.

Ross Karre: I love percussion music that poses problems that aren't universally solvable. This provides an outlet for a very personal expression of creativity. I like viewing the relationship between composer and percussionist as similar to the relationship between architect, engineer, and contractor/carpenter. The architect has a concept, the engineer revises the concept so it's safe yet still faithful to the architect's drawing, and the carpenter builds. Percussionists get to be both engineer and carpenter. Our "craft" can range from technique in the performance to creative instrument configurations. I love pieces that challenge that part of me.

Greg Stuart: Like Cage, I'm most interested in the music that I have not yet heard. More specifically, I'm most intrigued by pieces that involve non-virtuosic/technical approaches. Here I'm very interested in the use of friction though bowing and/or the direct contact of one object with another. In addition, I’m quite interested in “un-controlled” striking through the use of small grains (rice, seeds, sand, etc). With these and other kinds of techniques I'm finding that the more the basic “stroke” of percussion playing is diffused, the more shocking the results can become. Percussion is still intimately concerned with “contact” but here I think that the overall reduction in the size of physical action used in these techniques has precipitated a corresponding increase in the timbral variety and temporal flux possible in the medium. It appears that gesture and sound are inversely proportional. As the motions get smaller (and physical “readability” decreases) sonic potential increases dramatically. In addition, as sonic potential increases, the ability to which one can be said to “control” any given sound decreases in yet another inverse relation. Perhaps these observations are best likened to the shift from a classical to a quantum world, in which we move from a deterministic environment to one operating according to probability.

Pop Music Writing #4: Because I'm Awesome

2008-12-07T16:18:00.000-08:00

As a quick exploration of the difference between experiencing a song through song and experiencing a song through music video, I'd like to look at The Dollyrots' awesome song “Because I'm Awesome”, the title track off of their second album, released in 2007. Listen to the song first without watching the video, and then with:

The song, taken as an aural experience (which is how I first experienced it), comes off as the sort of self-flattery anthem common to teen pop; the instruments are hard-edged and in-your-face, and the vocals are delivered with a bratty confidence equally common to the genre. The lyrics to the refrain are straightforward:

I'm a leader/I'm a winner/and I'm cleaner/'cause I'm awesome/I don't need you/'cause I'm neato/and I beat you/'cause I'm awesome

...and the verses are only slightly more specific about the general character of awesomeness that exudes from lead singer and bassist Kelly Ogden.

I'd like to focus specifically on what might be termed the “pre-chorus”. The verses each have Kelly explaining a new facet of her life that verifies her awesomeness, and, as though we needed confirmation, guitarist and fellow songwriter Luis Cabezas offers the following immediately after, at 0:32:

[Luis:] I always tell you how cool you dress...
[Kelly:] It's 'cause I'm FASH-ion-AB-ly SO-cial-IZED!
[Luis:] You're smarter, better, no, the best!
[Kelly (spoken):] Just look at me!

Luis' first line is sung with an understated sense of “Don't forget who told you this when you get rich and famous (and awesome)” to it. Kelly's response is a little more out of the movie “Clueless”, sung with the bubblegummy lilting affect of a 16-year-old preppie girl. This sort of exchange happens twice more during the song. The next, at 1:19, proceeds:

[L:] I always tell you how smart you are...
[K:] It's 'cause my BRAIN is REAL-ly SU-per-SIZED!
[L:] You're an academic super-star!
[K:] Just look at me!

Here, as might be expected, Kelly's affect is even more over-the-top on “super-sized”. The final pre-chorus, at 2:22, consists of:

[L:] I always tell you how great you smell...
[K:] It's 'cause I'm NA-tural-LY de-O-dor-IZED!
[L:] You're stronger, faster, and can spell!
[K:] Just look at me!

In my limited experience playing this song for others, these sections have elicited a wide variety of responses, ranging from goofy approval to utter incredulity. A medical student friend of mine took particular offense to the “brain is really super-sized” line, demanding, “Is she serious?! She knows that has nothing to do with it, right?!” I was taken aback. My original thought was that yes, of course she knows that. How could she not? I then began to wonder how a projection of seriousness should affect our perception of goofiness.

Does the delivery indicate to us whether or not Ogden is delivering these lines intentionally seriously or intentionally goofily? And if it does, does it matter? Each line is delivered with fierce conviction; the affectations in the voice cementing the “valley girl” image, but the certainty of both the vocals and surrounding music eliciting real purpose. So, is “purposeful” goofiness... serious? As the lyrics in the refrain and surrounding verses illustrate, these pre-choruses are not isolated in their seeming textual triviality; does that demonstrate an intent to comment, or simply that Kelly and Luis really are that dumb, and don't even realize it, projecting a blissful and rocking ignorance? What is somewhat clear is that there is very little ambiguity between personality and persona here; it doesn't seem like Kelly is acting like an idiot from a smart person's perspective, it rather appears to be either very purposeful seriousness or very purposeful goofiness. (The difference, to me, between acting dumb while smart and being purposefully goofy is that difference between personality and persona. Acting dumb while smart paints a picture of a different person; being purposefully goofy resolutely illustrates oneself.)
This obviously depends very much on the listener's perspective: not only on what the actual sounds indicate, but on the particular value of goofiness in music, or the particular value of teen-pop in general. I, personally, was of the opinion that the goofiness was intentional, personal, and awesome. The music video, however, only adds to the ambiguity.

The video centers around some sort of American Idol-esque competition, wherein all the substance-less pretty girls are winning for no reason, until Kelly shows up dressed in giant rabbit/gasmask suit and beats up the judges. Again I'd like to focus on the pre-chorus sections discussed above, located at 0:32, 1:21, and 2:22 of the YouTube video shown above. The close-up shots of Ogden responding to the boys' remarks illustrate a very different conviction than what was simply heard. (Apart from the pre-choruses, these shots are also implemented at 0:17, 0:59, and 1:47.)

Ogden's face is very brightly lit, her dancing lightly bouncy, and her eyes restless. She constantly looks to the side and bounces around as she delivers what were aurally very convicted lines. A near-euphroic (but perhaps slightly dazed) smile constantly adorns her face. To me it seems like her character has found herself in the midst of a dream, the sort of dream where you don't actually know what you're supposed to do or say, but you find yourself doing it anyway, through a combination of instinct and mental groping. She doesn't seem at home. The best example of this comes at 2:27; after pointing to her armpit on the word “deodorized!”, Ogden's eyes shoot away from the camera as though looking to the first place she can think of for approval or validation.

What's important to note is that Kelly does not seem uncomfortable or insecure. It reads more as inexperience or, frankly, imbecility. Imbecility without insecurity is perhaps the quintessential trait of the stereotypical valley girl/dumb blonde/ditz/whatever you want to call it. The combination of the aforementioned vocal conviction and the more complex physical/visual affectation opens up the idea of Kelly Ogden playing a different, stupider character in this video. The changing outfits and hairstyles also detract from the image of a unified, resolved personality, as does the idea that a number of different boys are talking to her, rather than the one we hear in the purely audio version of the song.

Interspersed between these shots are shots of Kelly playing the bass with The Dollyrots and singing the same words in a style that seems more akin to what is put across when the song is heard without the video. She stares into the camera, occasionally head banging, always pounding her bass (although her fake-playing is atrocious). Here we have the meta-personality, the one watching over this farce, from whose head the whole idea sprung. Her presence with the band reinforces both the idea that she is performing the music and the idea that she is the songwriter.

In the purely audio version, the unabated conviction creates ambiguity regarding whether the songwriters accomplish their goofiness in a thorough fashion, or whether the goofiness is an unintended side effect of idiocy. However, even with the prescription of a meta-personality and imbecilic (or something) character in the video, the ambiguity is not lost. Although there is a disparity between the apparent comfort levels of meta-Kelly and acting-Kelly, it is still not clear what the source of the goofiness is (intent or ignorance). Are acting-Kelly's characters examples of the moronic stereotype meta-Kelly is trying to point out? Or are they an affirmation of the virtues meta-K extolls as she (fake-)pounds out her bassline?

This depends again on the audience, but it opens up a can of worms that is beyond the scope of this paper (which was really nothing more than an impulse): what determines whether an audience is prepared to a) accept goofiness on any level, b) perceive goofiness on any level, c) accept goofiness if it feels to them like they are in agreement with the author about it presence, or d) read and find pleasure in goofiness, regardless of what the aesthetic origination of that goofiness may be?

PWNING the New Yorker

2008-12-07T15:42:00.000-08:00

"What do you mean, what do I mean, 'You mean to tell me there's a fried egg hanging from a rectangle which is hanging from nothing right behind me?'?"?

Pop Music Writing #3: Introducing Students to Pop Music Scholarship

2008-10-18T16:16:00.000-07:00

In undergraduate popular music classes at UCSD, the reading component often starts right in with academic texts, from Frith to Reynolds to Wasler. Many classes choose to start with more general topics: the formation of culture or genre, the process of producing a pop album, or philosophical questions of the nature of listening or the use of music in society. These are concepts that, when boiled down and explained, actually have a lot of relevance to the way people, even lay-people, interact with popular music in their everyday lives. What this approach doesn't account for is that these same people 1) have likely never thought about music in this way before, b) are just out of high school, and III.) are biology majors unaccustomed to the challenges that philosophical texts and arguments bring.

This is not to say that these works should not be used in these classes. I'm sure nearly every academic musician or musicologist has had at least one work of writing heavily influence his or her musical output. I also do not believe that these undergraduates are, for the most part, incapable of understanding, engaging with, or appreciating these texts. But for us as teachers to understand the difficulties faced by undergraduate non-music majors in processing these texts, we must remember the path we took to this understanding, which in most cases was not as direct or abrupt as the path we are expecting these students to take.

Most academic music professors or instructors went through some form of the following: music lessons as a child, participation in band or orchestra in school, participation in a garage band of some sort in high school, perhaps prep school, a music or liberal arts degree, and graduate school in music or cultural studies. By the end of this usually at least decade-long engagement with music and musical ideas, a speculation on gender roles enforced or obfuscated by Heavy Metal is likely easier to swallow. Perhaps not so much, though, for a first-year grad student, or a sophomore music major, or certainly not a high schooler in a jam band.

To expect an undergrad in one of these aforementioned courses to readily take the ideas in these readings is unrealistic, and perhaps unproductive. A small percentage of collegiate musicians read the sort of texts we're dealing with, and if they do, they're likely to have come to them in graduate school or later in college. If academic music schooling is an eight to 10-year process, where philosophical issues are earnestly dealt with beginning half-way through or so, why do we expect non-musicians taking a 10-week course to engage with these issues from week one?

In my experience, many of these students are wary (to say the least) of the idea of pop music analysis. That meaning comes solely from the artist is a position that most seem to fall back on
without consideration; to read a (seemingly) crotchety academic tell them that their favorite singer is engaging in homo-eroticism can cause a mountain of skepticism, and not without justification. This often leads to the claim that the author is "over-analyzing", a word that makes me bristle, but again, it is easy to see why students react this way.

Reading about music, like writing about music, needs to be taught. Students should begin with texts similar to ones they may be used to; album reviews, fan letters, fanzines, liner notes, blogs, even message board communities. Begin by intellectualizing familiarity: what context is the reviewer placing this band into? Why would a fan say something like that to another fan? What sort of aura are these liner notes trying to create?

Some of these, most likely reviews and criticism, can provide a jumping-off point to more philosophical texts. Students need to realize the sheer number of issues music can bring up; they need to learn just how many different perspectives on an artist can exist. From there, more academic engagement can commence.

Just as one wouldn't expect a high school pianist to comprehend a transformational analysis of Webern, one shouldn't expect a novice at music study to comprehend an intensive examination of popular music, whether it be analytical, sociological, or otherwise. This kind of appreciation should be taught along with the material in the course, leading to a greater degree of productive comprehension later in the quarter or semester. This way students leave the course not only armed with a greater understanding of the discourse of music, but with a greater capacity to pick up different discourses as they come along, in whatever discipline.

PWNING the New Yorker

2008-10-11T12:42:00.000-07:00

"Are you saying this is good-BAAAAAA-ye?"

Pop Music Writing #2: Umbrella

2008-10-07T11:46:00.000-07:00

When I first set out to analyze Rihanna's 2007 mega-hit "Umbrella (feat. Jay-Z)", produced for her album Good Girl Gone Bad, I thought it was because the song was awesome. Which it is; but what became almost immediately interesting was not what was transcendentally awesome about it (e.g., producer "Tricky" Stewart's GarageBand [literally] beat and powerful chorus-backing synth pads, or Rihanna's perfectly understated vocals), but the realization that I had no idea what the song was about, and the later realization that, after analysis, I still don't know. At first there is an obvious (somewhat refreshing) ambiguity in the person to whom the song is addressed: is it a lover or a friend? A former lover? Maybe even a female friend? What then becomes apparent is that even though the lyr ics are fairly straightforward from Rihanna's point of view, there is also a great deal of uncertainty about the status of her character: is she a strong woman lending a hand because a friend is in need? Is she needy herself? Could she even be overbearing in her offer? I still don't really know, but I'll show you what I've got. For this I will be analyzing parts of the video as well; I think it offers important clues, but that none of the conclusions I (may) come to are necessarily dependent on it.

The song (as well as the album) begins with a male presence. Jay-Z raps:

No clouds in my storms
Let it rain, I hydroplane in the bank
Coming down with the Dow Jones, we Rocafella
We fly higher than weather
And G5's are better, you know me,
an anticipation for precipitation. Stacked chips for a rainy day.
Jay, Rain Man is back with little Miss Sunshine,
Rihanna, where you at?

What you don't see in the written lyrics, but do hear and see in the song is Rihanna's first "eh, eh, eh's". She is revealed in the video sitting apart from Jay-Z, wearing all black with her black hair and a black hat drawn across most of her face, only shown in extremely short, fleeting shots; an intimidating figure. Setting her further apart are the women that surround Jay-Z in the video; dressed in hoodies and sunglasses, calmly nodding, they could almost be minions in Rihanna's army. What's made clear is that Rihanna is separate; as Jay-Z introduces her and her album, she makes her presence known by calling to him, making an entrance, like Bill Clinton at the 2000 Democratic Convention, only cooler. She is a force, and those "eh eh eh's" are piercing. This setup as a picture of strength, both in the video and in the song alone, is crucial. Over the course of the song we will see more and more instances that hint at the vulnerability of Rihanna's character, and the possibility that what she is saying is neither omniscient truth nor even personal conviction, thereby casting doubt onto the depth of her relationship with the addressee.

There is a question about just how representative Jay-Z is of the song's addressee. There's nothing in his rap that suggests need; in fact, what's stressed is his ability to cope no matter what. At this point, he seems to be more of an MC than a potential lover/friend for the singer.

Rihanna's first verse begins immediately after Jay-Z calls for her:

You have my heart
And we'll never be worlds apart
May be in magazines
But you'll still be my star

"You have my heart." This language seems a bit strong for a male friend, but does not necessarily indicate a lover. One often hears girlfriends referring to each other in ways akin to lovers, and it's not impossible that this could refer to a longtime male friend. (N.B., I'm assuming for the purposes of this analysis that Rihanna's character is heterosexual, because I see little to indicate otherwise.) She then refers to celebrity with "May be in magazines; but you'll still be my star." I am still unsure of whether she means that she is in magazines, or that the addressee is. The answer would produce very different readings. "I may be in magazines, but you'll still be my star" indicates that she is in a position of power, but it doesn't mean she has forgotten her commitment or friendship. This tone is more one of reaching out to help. "You may be in magazines, but you'll still be my star" is more vulnerable. The tone here is more of a proclomation of right, or ownership; though you are known to so many, I'll always claim you, or love you, or whatever. It at first seems more likely that she is referring to herself; we know she is a celebrity. But anyone that reads US Weekly knows that relationships between two celebrities are far from uncommon. This missing pronoun is one of many conspicuously absent clues to meaning throughout the song.

(To return briefly to the imagery found in the video: as Rihanna begins to sing, she has given up her stoic pose and is now dancing cautiously; we see her bare back, and she has also lost her ominous hat. These are the first clues to the vulnerability of her character, and they begin to [however slightly] cast doubt on the situation being described. As the video progresses we see Rihanna wearing fewer and fewer clothes [the peak is reached when she is covered with nothing but silver body paint]. While this is undoubtedly an effort at titillation, it also speaks to a progressing vulnerability.)

Next is the chorus, which we all know by now:

When the sun shines we'll shine together
Told you I'll be here forever
Said I'll always be a friend
Took an oath, I'm-a stick it out till the end
Now that it's rainin' more than ever
Know that we'll still have each other
You can stand under my umbrella
You can stand under my umbrella
Ella Ella Eh Eh Eh
(Under my umbrella)
Ella Ella Eh Eh Eh (etc...)

There's a lot to decipher in this seemingly somewhat simple stanza. If you're a male that went to high school, the word "friend" sticks out like a sore thumb; the legend goes that it is not a word a woman uses if she considers you anything more. What's more, the following line is positively dutiful. She's being loyal not necessarily to the addressee, but to an "oath"? It won't necessarily be pleasurable, she'll have to "stick it out" until the end? This doesn't seem like language used towards one you are longing for; it sounds more like she agreed to always be there for en ex, and she is reminding herself of that promise as much as she's reminding him.

Again, though, it's not necessarily a male. This language is less, well, "cold" when put in the context of a female friendship; here an oath is a dually shared promise. Sticking it out is not just a responsibility but the stuff of love. Now that I type that, could the last two sentences apply to a lover as well? Surely. But it hangs on the details of the relationship, purposefully absent, and again contributing to the lied's intrigue.

Throughout the song the chord progression remains the same (or a slight variation thereon). This "strophic" musical form is not uncommon among today's R & B singles; often what separates chorus from verse is merely words and an exaggeration of the general mood, with no difference in melody or harmony (e.g., No Doubt's "Hella Good", Smashing Pumpkins' "1979", Christina Milian's "I Can Be That Woman", Kanye West's "Love Lockdown", to name some I just thought of). This progression is, in the key of D-flat, IV - I - iii - vi - IV (the bolded chords are the downbeat of the measure; "V" is sometimes substituted for "iii", as they share two common notes). The obfuscation of the tonic is readily apparent here, and is added to throughout the work. Phrases begin and end not on the tonic, but on IV. There is not an authentic cadence in the piece; every move to I is the less definitive plagal cadence. Since it is established that the plagal cadence is the norm, an additional one further confuses what chord is really the goal when V is substituted for iii and we have then IV - I - V; a brief circle-of-fourths progression that, at least in the analytic music world, is known for it's ability to self-perpetuate (if it weren't for a chromatic half-step slide at the last minute, the chorus to the Beach Boys' "California Girls" would still be going on). As a final trick, during the "ella ella" section of the chorus, the bass note of the IV-I progression goes from G-flat to A-flat, creating a "6-4" chord on the tonic, the least stable inversion of the triad. These insistent railings against the idea of the piece settling on any sort of final cadence provide opposition to ideas of complacency, consolation, certainty, or even confidence. Indeed, the piece fades out at the end, acknowledging its own problem. Rihanna's character, the performer and presumably also the proprietress of the song, has provided a backdrop that radiates her lack of comfort with whatever situation she may be addressing.

At this point I'd like to go ahead and discount the notion that this song may be "about" a friendly intra-female relationship. If it is indeed intra-female, it is underscored by past or current feelings of hostility or doubt. An unashamedly affirming girlfriend song is not what I believe most people consider this to be anyway, and besides, they don't sell as well.

The chorus is made of two halves: the half previously discussed, and the "ella ella ella" part. Were the title of the song different, this would be a curious word (or half-word) on which to place so much emphasis. The first half of the chorus, musically and lyrically, is by far the most affirmed and confident she has sounded; this second half may well represent the backlash from such a statement. It is introspective and questioning; the word "umbrella" echoes in the protagonist's mind as she considers the weight of what she has just put forth. As mentioned before, the chord progression is altered to offer more uncertainty.

At first the uncertainty is tempered: a steady "eh eh eh", reaffirms the "umbrella", cruising along comfortably if warily on an unwavering D-flat (the tonic). As the second phrase (an accompanying harmony change) comes along, however, the "eh eh eh's" begin to falter, slipping down a half-step to C, and then via C to B-flat, barely making it back up to D-flat before the chorus ends (but as we know, the tonic chord is already long gone; a proper cadence is not reached).

Here the confidence of the first half of the chorus faces doubt and incertitude (thesaurus.com). Is this the result of a desire to move away from the person? A worry that she's been too forward? The myriad ways to interpret this (including even to reject the whole "doubt" hypothesis) keep the ambiguity alive.

The following verse provides more lyrics that could apply to a number of relationships.

These fancy things will never come in between
You're part of my entity, here for infinity

No reluctance is displayed here. She later states that "together we'll mend your heart." This sounds kind of like an art project... worked on with a friend. Or perhaps the "together" is a rekindling of an old relationship, or the start of a new one. During the bridge, which is accompanied by a mellow piano accompaniment, the background gets extremely amped up on the "more" of "I'll be all you need and MORE"; possibly a simple use of an old axiom, but the intensity of the accompaniment on and following the word "more" indicate that the "more" really is more. As in going the extra mile for a friend, or as in "more" than friends? As the song winds down, she repeats "come into me", or perhaps "come here to me", depending on what lyric site you google, or how you read her Barbadian accent. This is a significant difference, however; "come into me" has obvious sexual connotations that may reflect on the meaning of the entire song (as my sister emphatically argued, "the umbrella is her vag!!").

Since a popular consensus on a song's meaning is only ever really a fuzzy collection of what most people think, I put a survey to all of my facebook friends and undergrad students that wanted to take it. The choices for the song's addressee they had to choose from were current lover, potential lover, former lover that she dumped, former lover that dumped her, male friend, female friend, female friend she's had a rocky history with, or none of these. It shook out like this:

Current lover: 8
Potential lover: 6
Former lover she dumped: 1
Former lover dumped her: 1
Male friend: 3
Female friend: 2
Female friend, rocky history: 1
None of these: 7

The sample size is a bit small to analyze any meaningful trends, but the one thing I will mention is that of the four 14-17 year-olds that took the survey, three chose one of the "friend" options. This may not mean as much though, since it's likely that some of the undergrads that took the survey were 17-year-olds.

The respondees (who had not read this analysis) were also allowed to comment on their choice if they wished. Some of the more interesting responses:

So the song is about her and whoever, she's saying I'll always be there when times are shitty She talks about whoever having her heart which I guess could be considered non-romantic but more typically is a romantic metaphor Also because she talks about taking an oath which sounds like she's committed to that one person, I always figured she was singing to her husband

She is talking about herself. Or her soul

I chose "a current lover" over the other choices because of all the "ooh,baby" lyrics interjected throughout the song. I'd guess that most people probably don't call friends "baby." Other than that, I would've said "a friend," because the song seems to be about supporting someone you care about.

I believe this song is about best friends, either male of female. Although there are references that would connote to it being about a lover (i.e. "you have my heart" or "baby"), in my opinion, the focal point of the lyrics takes place in the chorus which is ambiguous about romance or friendship. Also, most of the references about love can be interpreted to be a strong love between best friends since there are no references to sex.

It's someone she's in love with but the love is someone asymetrical - attraction is traded in for human affection. It's about a friendship that has an unspecified core reaching toward love. While the lyrics and the video suggest more than just friendship, but the metaphor of "umbrella" suggests a strong personality (mother-like) that doesn't seem to expect much in return and seems to be in no danger to become dependend or addicted.

the lyrics just seem to be addressing a friend since there isn't much attraction in it. it also says that she'll "always be your friend"

I think Rhianna's character is addressing a person with whom she shares a very intimate bond with--not necessarily a lover (although it could be), but possibly a close friend or family member. Judging from its lyrics, I'd say that she is singing to a person with whom she used to be very close with, but this person and her have been separated life circumstances (jail, war, death, college, growing apart from old friends, etc.). What I mean by this is that Rhianna's character and the person she is singing to have been separated by something that they cannot control, most likely each character is trapped in a different stage of his or her life right now, and they are unable to be close to each other physically (like... not stand face-to-face with each other) at this moment in time. However, despite this lack of one-on-one interaction, she still feels a strong connection/bond with the subject of her song. It's like... the sort of love you feel for people you may have lost contact with, but still care deeply about their well-being. The person she is singing to is probably going through some rough times at the moment, and she is telling them to come stand with her "under her umbrella," a metaphor for her care/protection/warmth/love... kind of like when you use the phrase "she took him under her wing."

Because I read the lyrics and its obvious. [chose 'current lover']

It's pretty obvious. Odd survey. [chose 'current lover']

I include the last two not in an attempt at humor, but to simply argue that they are not wrong; to some it's just "obvious", and that's what the song means.

To me, however, it's simply ambiguous. Without committing to a category, I feel I've concluded that it is a male with whom there is either some romantic history or some complicated romantic potential. Aren't those things the most ambiguous anyway?

Pop Music Writing Series #1: What I Have to Do With Each Other

2008-10-03T17:46:00.000-07:00

Over the course of the next academic year I will be writing a series of short pieces on pop music (hopefully about one per week) in order to develop a writing style and bed of resources for a larger project I will take up in the Winter and/or Spring. I'm doing this on the advice of
the adviser of the project, clarinetist and scholar Anthony Burr. My first attempt will be a sort of introduction to some artistic issues I've thought of personally as a result of my fandom, most recently while walking to school today listening to "Hypocrite" by Skye Sweetnam.

---------

In college I gave some stupid interview to the school paper about how I wanted to combine my interests in composition and baseball. I didn't really want to do any such thing, but that was what they wanted to hear, and I ended up looking like an idiot. Since then, I've resolved to keep what appear to be separate interests separate, and in early 2008 when I developed an interest in both subverting academic classical music and (the word subverting does not apply to this next part) teen-pop, I assumed this was another such scenario. What was burgeoning inside of me art-music-wise was a need to test the limits and restrictions of the discourse surrounding music I loved; what was happening pop-music-wise was a heightening of my fascination with the bright colors and funny talk (zOMG) of teen pop culture and an ability to respect and love what had previously seemed like trivial music by engaging with it for half a second. These interests, to me, appeared comfortably separate.

But they weren't. A similar force was driving both these interests, and it had to do with more than simply adding more music of all genres to my list of what Frank Kogan refers to as "the awesome." The similarity lay in taking a serious and committed interest and participation in a culture of music that was generally considered acceptable only for passing study or novel interest by academia (or any self-defined authority that regards itself as academia does).

Many of the musical circles or interactions with which I involve myself look at aspects of theatricality, humor, silence, or indeterminacy in music as worthwhile, but to be used sparingly and not to be made the basis of a work. People that did devote themselves to such music were either seen, at worst, as those that couldn't hack it in a "serious" musical context, or, at best, those that were making some sort of sacrifice so that other composers could use their ideas, often in combination with ideas that are in direct conflict. The jury piece that I was writing at the time, then, would flaunt these ideas. Very few traditionally gratifying sections. A lot of silence, as much as 40 seconds at a time. Obviously goofy gestures, physically and musically. Simplicity where complexity seemed a given. Sections of improvisation and unpredictability. And overseeing all of this, the idea of producing this semi-serious piece for an opportunity the likes of which I will see few times again.

A devoted interest to teen-pop has a direct parallel. For an academic musician to study teen-pop is one thing. For him to like it, even as a (I hate this phrase) "guilty pleasure", is another. For him to actually buy albums and play them in his car, and know about the personal lives and career trajectories of the stars, and have RESPECT for them (all while "off the clock" academically) is another thing entirely (in fact, it often leads to questions about whether the person in question is some sort of sexual deviant). It is no secret that part of what I find fun about loving teen-pop is getting a reaction out of people when they find out. I don't find this insincere; if I didn't actually love the music, it wouldn't work. What I found in the music was nuance, true emotion, great star power and personalities, great musicianship, and overall great songs. All it took was a sort of leap of faith (although in the case of my history with teen-pop, it was more of a gradual slide of faith).

What came out of (and went into) these parallel cases of music interest was a new and liberating way of assigning value to music. All music, with few (or perhaps no) exceptions, asks you to come along with it a little bit; "Try and place yourself in the world this came from, and then see if it says something to you." I didn't like Lucier's music until I imagined what it was like to come up with it. I didn't like Skye's "Billy S." until I remembered what high school was like. I didn't like Carolyn Chen's music until I reconsidered the purpose of art as a mere exaggeration of life, rather than a necessary abstraction of it. I didn't like Ashlee's "La La" until I imagined she was singing to me; then the palpable insistence in her voice became clear. It has become hard for me to imagine a musical style or genre that will immediately repulse me; let me step into its own context and then see if it sucks. I'm sure I won't be writing this kind of art music, or obsessed with this kind of pop music, for the rest of my life, or maybe even for long; the discovery of the ability to love these new genres has simply opened a treasure trove, which I will explore, for a while.

Band Proposal

2008-07-16T14:19:00.000-07:00

I would like to start a band that plays only what might be considered the "rhythm tracks" to popular music songs. By "rhythm tracks" I mean the music played by what would be called the "rhythm section" in a jazz big band: drums, bass, rhythm guitar and perhaps keyboards. This would include all music that is not melodic or counter-melodic in nature, with the exception of a bass line.

The idea was first inspired by "The Secret Song" by Mr. Bungle, heard as part two of the track "Carry Stress in the Jaw" on most Disco Volante CDs. Large portions of the song consist of a surf rock groove with occasional guitar, organ, and vocal melodies. The mixing, however, is such that the melodies are rarely louder than the accompaniment (with the exception of the sung parts; these were added later in secret when a band member found they had recorded the song without him. If it matters, the song was composed and [originally] recorded without these vocals), and in some cases are mixed lower. This, in combination with the other sections of the song (which themselves rarely have discernable melodies), creates the sense of listening to a lot of different styles of rhythm tracks. (This is also aided by the fact that some of the rhythm tracks and bass lines themselves have, like in a lot of surf rock, a quasi-melodic quality, putting the idea "melody v. accompaniment" in question.)

Simply put, I loved listening to this. It created a sense of indulgence for me; just listening to chords change without having to worry about melodies, a kind of hedonism. And it accomplishes this for me in a very special way that minimalist and post-minimalist music doesn't; it didn't seem to me to be a comment on or experiment with the nature of phase, trance, immersion and/or monotony in the way those musics seem to. It was still a tribute to song form as song form is, and it used a harmonic language that, for me, borders on sublime. So this is reason one why I want to do this, and why I want to focus on surf rock and 60's Top 40 pop, and why I want to start by only playing covers: indulgence in listening to chords change without any other distraction, as well as indulgence in a beat without any distraction.

The next reason I want to do this is that it has a lot do with an artistic and humorous idea I've been experimenting with lately that has to do with presenting or using objects or tools in a way that is completely utilitarian; that is to say, highlighting everything about the purpose or use of the object or tool, while simultaneously accomplishing none of the practical purposes or uses for which the object was invented. Experiments to this end so far have included:

Send text messages with no value, such as "This is a pointless text message.", or "1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0" or " a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z".
Setting a voicemail greeting as "This is a voicemail greeting." I am using the voicemail greeting, but what is accomplished (aesthetics aside) is as though there were no voicemail greeting at all.
A few weeks ago I auctioned off $20 on EBay. It sold for $4.95. This actually raises many more artistic questions than the one I'm currently discussing, and for this to have been a totally successful experiment it would have had to sell for exactly $20. Exchanging "pure worth" (money, in terms of an online auction site) for "pure worth".
I've had the idea for art that takes a very famous painting and simply places two prints of it side by side in the same frame. I haven't decided whether it would be better to have someone draw an exact new one right next to a copy, or just have two copies (i.e., whether there being some sort of process is important). This would probably be impractical, as the two prints would have to be so exactly alike as to avoid the detection of any difference by any human that is viewing it.
Every post on this blog has been labeled "posts".
I am thinking about voting for Barack Obama as a write-in candidate.

And so on. This band would be another extension of that. A band playing a lot of songs that (at least seemingly) have very little to no entertainment value, but not because they are bad or boring in the public's eye (another reason to start with [popular] covers), but rather because we are presenting the more utilitarian parts of the music; we would be leaving out the hook(s).

Is this a contradiction? On the one hand I hope for indulgence, a fulfilling artistic experience. On the other, I aim to, at least on the surface level, put potentially fulfilling experience at bay. The pleasure that I would personally gain from the experience probably derives itself from a combination of the two (or perhaps the indulgence is informed by the more abstract idea), and I would be satisfied that an audience member that enjoys it (or not) does so from either perspective, or a third, or some sort of combination.

LET'S DO IT.

PWNING the New Yorker

2008-06-23T12:00:00.001-07:00

"I entered a giant pencil contest, and I used the winnings to buy a giant pencil sharpener. Get the fuck out of my office."

"There's a small hole in the crotch that I stick my penis in."

German Pop Translations #2: Heut' Ist Mein Tag

2008-06-23T11:25:00.000-07:00

Number two is also Blümchen, and it's "Heut' Ist Mein Tag":

German:

Ich fühl' mich gut
Und mach mein Herz auf
Lass die Sonne rein
Jeder Tag soll ein Geschenk
Und was besond'res sein

Ich steh' auf
Schau' aus dem Fenster
In ein Himmelblau
Vertrieben sind die Nachtgespenster
Und ich weiss genau

Heut' ist mein Tag
Heut' ist mein Tag
Heut' ist mein Tag (x2)
[awesome synth line]

Ich schau' in den Spiegel
Zieh' mir was besond'res an
Es ist nicht zu glauben
Dass man so gut ausseh'n kann

Ich tanz' auf der Strasse
Lach' den Menschen ins Gesicht
Alles denkt, ich bin verrückt
Denn sie wissen nicht

Heut' ist mein Tag
Heut' ist mein Tag
Heut' ist mein Tag (x a billion)
[very serious classical section]

English (literal):

I feel good
And open my heart
Let the sun in
Every day shall be a gift
And something special

I get up
Look out the window
Into the blue sky
The night-spirits have been banished
And I know that

Today is my day
Today is my day
Today is my day
[awesome synth line]

I look in the mirror
Dress myself in something special
It is hard to believe
that someone can look so good

I dance on the street
Laugh in people's faces
Everyone thinks I'm crazy
Because they don't know

Today is my day
Today is my day
Today is my day
[very serious classical section]

English (translation):

Feelin' good
I open my heart
Let the sun in
Every day a gift from heaven
Can't wait to begin

I wake up
Look out my window
In the bright new day
Nighttime spirits
Nowhere to be found
And so I say

This is my day
This is my day
This is my day
[awesome synth line]

At my mirror
I get dressed just like I think I should
It's hard to imagine
That a girl could look so good

In the streets
I laugh in people's faces as I go
They all think I'm freakin' crazy
'Cuz they just don't know

This is my day
This is my day
This is my day
[very serious classical section]

This was a tougher one. I'll probably revise it a little.

German Pop Translations #1: Verrückte Jungs

2008-06-07T12:22:00.001-07:00

I was recently introduced to Blümchen, an awesome German pop star from the early 2000s. This video is one of the best pop videos I think I've ever seen:

Anyway, I decided I wanted to try to do some German pop translations, and she seemed like a good place to start. Here's "Verrückte Jungs":

I like how the "more info" section calls this "Blümchen's fastest single ever".

Anyway, here's the text:

German

Verrückte Jungs, find' ich klasse,
denn alles was sie machen
ist für mich und meine Träume
wie'n Trip ins Paradies.

Verrückte Jungs machen Sachen
die anderen Jungs nicht machen
so total verliebt
und darum find' ich dich so süss!
[Awesome pop riff]

English (literal)

Crazy boys, I find classy
'cause everything they do
is for me and my dreams
like a trip to Paradise.

Crazy boys do things
the other boys don't do
so totally in love
and for that reason I find you so sweet!
[Awesome pop riff]

English (translation)

Crazy boys, how I want 'em
'cuz everything about them
is for my imagination
like a trip to Paradise.

Crazy boys do things to you
that other boys just don't do
just so damn in love
and that's why I am here with you!
[Awesome pop riff]

I'd love comments on any of these.

Hilarious Vandalizationism

2008-06-07T12:13:00.000-07:00

Please DO graffiti in this, or any area!

Haven't posted in over two months, more soon.

Ian Made a Funny Joke Today

2008-04-01T21:13:00.000-07:00

Lei [to Alex]: "What is your favorite Miles Davis album?"

Me: "Bitches of Spain."

---

Also, here's a joke I made up today:

Why did the goat need a band-aid?

It was bleeting!

Influential works list OOOOOOOOOOO!!!

2008-03-29T16:01:00.000-07:00

I had to make this list for class. It was a fun exercise, and now I have to write and artist's statement for said class and this will really help. Remember when this was a humor blog? Back at it, jack rabbit.

Ian Power: A smattering of influential works and composers

So, I'm really more influenced by the way a composer thinks (or seems to think) than by particular works, so I've chosen a bunch of composers that have influenced me and works that I think are representative. A lot of these are not my favorite works by these composers… well now that I look at it most of them are. I've put them into groups based on what part of music they most get me to think about when I'm writing. As I've noted, some works fit into more than one category. Doooooooooooot!

I. Economy of material
Creating situations with limited or very similar materials, such that certain points of the music stand out in an amazing way; the rest of it can also have a very meditative and peaceful (or not) feel.

...a son dernier soupir - Martin Iddon (2006) [also III]
-string trio

Perseo e Andromeda - Salvatore Sciarrino (1990) [also III, V]
-opera; four singers (three characters) and electronics

II. Pacing
Pacing is, like, SO important. I enjoy the way these works develop temporally. Luci mie fits into most of these categories, it just fits into this one the most, that's why it's here, but Vortex is a better example.

Vortex Temporum - Gerard Grisey (1996) [also VI]
-fl., cl., vln., vla., vc., pno.

Luci mie traditrici - Salvatore Sciarrino (1996/98) [also I]
-opera; four singers and orchestra

III. Unconventional material, ambiguous phrasing
I think that Czernowin and Takasugi have incredibly original languages, and they really challenge a listener with their treatments. It can seem unmusical at first, but I really get off on it.

Maim - Chaya Czernowin (2000/06)
-orchestra, solo tubax, solo oboe, solo elec. guitar, solo cembalo, solo viola

Diary of a Lung - Steven Kazuo Takasugi (2007) [also VI]
-samples of pre-recorded sounds

IV. Deriving tension from interesting sources
I like to apply the concept of consonance and dissonance to all parts of performance. So much of the intensity of Ferneyhough's music comes from the effort put forth both by the performer and the listener.

Unity Capsule - Brian Ferneyhough (1973/76) [WARNING: OLD MUSIC also VI]
-solo flute

V. Non-intensity
Sometimes I enjoy very clinical presentation of material [NO REALLY?!?!], and I think Jeff does that really well. Then he slaps you in the face at the end with a gorgeous chord. I like being slapped in the face.

Forty-Two Statcoulombs - Jeffrey Trevino (2006) [also I]
-string quartet

VI. Ritualism and personal viscereality (not a word)
I view our concert situation as a modern version of ritual through music. These works affect me in such a way that that feeling of humanity and ritual comes through tenfold. These are very personal choices for that effect though; I REALLY like glissandos.

Anahit - Giacinto Scelsi (1965) [AAAAHHHH SO SORRY BUT I HAD TO also I]
-solo violin and ensemble

Dam Sheon Hachol - Chaya Czernowin (1992) [also II]
-string sextet

A comprehensive but by no means complete list of people I think could do a better job writing about hockey than the people at ESPN.com

2008-03-14T13:47:00.001-07:00

1. Me
2. Any Canadian
3. Anybody

PWNing the New Yorker

2008-03-03T18:34:00.001-08:00

"WHERE IS THAT FUCKING DOG??"

"I've got a crazy idea... let's shit all over each other."

Funny Profile Moment

2008-02-29T12:53:00.000-08:00

I'm writing a profile on a grad student here at UCSD, and here is the intro paragraph so far:

In a way, everybody is a singer. Everybody is a singer in the same sense that everybody is a doctor. Anyone can sing a pleasing tune or piece just like anyone can suggest aspirin for a headache or chicken soup for a cold. And it works; you are a successful singer, you are a successful doctor. There are some things in the realm of vocal production and medical diagnosis, however, that require a lot of training and practice to be done to a satisfactory level. Things like, say, a Schubert song or, I don't know, incredibly difficult surgery on your own brain. That is why we, on earth, have doctors, and also why we, at UCSD, have vocal performance grad students. Like Stephanie Aston. Certified brain surgeon.

Steven Schick Told a Funny Story Today

2008-02-28T21:44:00.001-08:00

So this isn't of my own generation, nor is it of my great-grandfather's. Nor is it of my own generation. But today UCSD percussion faculty Steven Schick told a GD hilarious story and I have to relate and to it (my own memory here):

"

So I was in the Denver airport, and if you know anything about that airport, you know that there is a train that takes you between the stations. I was late for a flight, and to catch a departing train I stuck my umbrella between the doors and wedged myself in. There soon followed a tape recording that said "You have been delayed because someone has interfered with the automatic door-closing device." I thought this was strange.

The next time I was in the Denver airport, I got on the train, stuck my umbrella between the door and said loudly, "Why have we been delayed?!"

"

I laughed so loud at that that that that it was embarrassing.

A Paper from December 2007 on Aesthetics

2008-02-11T14:57:00.000-08:00

Ian H. Power

On the Nature of Aesthetic Evaluation

While attending a composer’s workshop in summer 2005, I commented that it didn’t matter to me what the audience thought of a particular piece of mine, as long as they experienced my desired perceptual effect. The instructor at the workshop told me to think about what I said before I “mouthed off” like that again. That event and this paper act as appropriate bookends to the two and a half years of thinking about aesthetics that I have done in between.

What I would like to put forward in this paper is a certain view of the concept of aesthetic value that I believe frees both artist and audience from certain constraints—including, but not limited to, ideas of formalism and intersubjectivity—and elucidates what I believe a central goal of both art and art criticism should be. To do this I will examine three questions—first, art’s function and how it works; second, how the aesthetic values or constructs of a certain group are determined; third, what this says about certain existing aesthetic philosophies or ideas—and conclude with assertions about the most productive ways to use the answers to these questions.

I. “What” art, “why” art, “how” art.

It is safe to say that while humans are each seeking different things from the experience of art, all of them are seeking a sort of aesthetic fulfillment. From the opposite perspective, it is safe to say that most if not all artists are attempting to present a fulfilling experience through their work, even if that experience is one of alienation; the goal of the artist is to provide an experience that humans can either relate to or be provoked by their inability to relate to. This “aesthetic fulfillment”, the reason that artists create and audiences consume, is art’s sole function and the sole reason that art, even as a concept, exists.

What differentiates art from the purely physical properties that comprise it (reflections of light in a painting, vibrating air molecules in music) is that art is a catalyst for human thought and experience. As a result, art in any sense other than a purely physical one has no fixed form; its aesthetic and artistic properties are completely dependent on its audience and with no audience it is reduced completely and utterly to its purely physical state—with no aesthetic ramifications whatsoever. Thus the evaluative potential of art relies completely upon its audience at any given time. (This is an issue to which I will return in section II to describe the nature of objectivity, accuracy and truth in aesthetic evaluation.) There are two major points that stem from this reliance that I will outline here:

First, there is no boundary to the number of experiences humans, or even a human, may derive from a work of art. As the state of human existence changes through time, the “meanings” of artworks morph constantly. A stark example would be a photograph of the World Trade Center taken before September 11, 2001. Nothing about the artist’s intention or the purely physical properties of the work have changed since that event, and yet for the majority of the world’s population it would be impossible to experience that artwork the same way they did in the year 2000. And this is just the most obvious example; there are myriad events in human existence that will change a world-view (and consequently an art-view), and these events occur constantly. Ruth Lorand puts it that “Human experience is relevant to art and there is no way of apprehending, experiencing or evaluating art apart from actual experience…we cannot experience anything without bringing with us whatever we possess, including previous experience, knowledge and expectations.”[1] I particularly enjoy David Novitz’s assertion that Bell’s statement that “to appreciate a work of art we need bring with us nothing from life,”[2] is “sheer perversity.”[3] But I am entering too far into the formalist debate, which I will address later. The point here is to highlight that variety of experience present in human existence that inevitably leads to an enormous variety in art perception, regardless of how educated or “prepared” an audience is for a particular work[4].

Second, because of the aforementioned reliance on an audience, and because of that audience’s desire for aesthetic fulfillment, the boundaries between what is and is not art, in terms of objects that provide any sort of aesthetic experience, are meaningless and not useful in any but practical and organizational situations. Art criticism tends to focus on art created intentionally by humans for evaluative or educational reasons, but aesthetic experiences akin to those provided by art can also be provided as effectively by what Kant called natural objects. The separation between art and natural objects occurs only in terms of creation and exhibition. I find the experience a naturalist may have in the Galapagos and the experience a music lover may have at a performance of Stravinsky's Rite of Spring to be nearly identical in terms of aesthetic fulfillment, and yet one is a carefully crafted piece of "art", while at the other painstaking steps have been taken to prevent human influence.[5] For the purposes of criticism it may be useful to refer to a symphony as "art" and a snowfall as "artful", but in terms of the aesthetic fulfillment sought by humans, there is little to no distinction. At the most basic level, all art is made up purely of natural objects and phenomena. These things combine with the manipulations of our experiences, prejudices and sensibilities to create an aesthetic experience.

It follows that we may think of art as a collection of experiences, conscious or sub-conscious, set off by natural objects in various ways with different humans. As mentioned above, without these experiences art has no fixed form outside of its purely physical properties. This leads of course to the question of the validity of aesthetic evaluation. Hard and fast laws of aesthetic evaluation would be impossible with this vision of art's existence, for how could one nail down requirements to the virtually infinite possibilities of not only meaning, but perception? At the same time, aesthetic evaluation can not be entirely meaningless; there are certain objective physical properties that affect aesthetics in inescapable ways (e.g., excessively loud music will damage your hearing), enough people exist in certain constructs of aesthetic value that some dialogue is certainly productive, and each human obviously has his or her own aesthetic preferences based on his or her aesthetic experiences. Where, then, do we find the reconciliation?

II. A Metaphor for Aesthetic Evaluation: A Flock of Birds

Since the basis for art lies purely on human experience, so must the basis of artistic (and therefore aesthetic) evaluation. I submit the metaphor of a flock of birds cascading in patterns through the sky.[6] The strength of an aesthetic "value" (i.e., belief held commonly enough among a certain group to be seen as difficult to challenge) relies on how many people hold it, and how similar their ideas of this value are. If each flock represents a group of people that share aesthetic[7] experiences (e.g., Americans, classical musicians, contemporary classical musicians, etc.), then each bird represents a human's perception. The more similar those perceptions are, and the more similar a group's individual criteria for aesthetic evaluation, the more dense the image of the flock becomes. With the spaces of an infinite sky representing all possible aesthetic interpretations, evaluations, and values, the flock is constantly shifting, occasionally focusing (getting more dense, "darkening") around certain principles before veering off again. (Obviously the video would need to be slowed greatly to get a more accurate temporal representation, but the idea holds.) This metaphor also includes humans that may be inadequate at articulating their aesthetic preferences; the more influential "birds" may have more of a hand in shaping a flock's tendencies, but every experience contributes to the whole.

Perhaps most importantly, this metaphor provides no ground, tree branches or telephone wires on which the birds can rest.[8] They are always moving through the sky, and must always necessarily be. The human condition cannot allow for a universal or constant set of aesthetic principles for the reasons described in section I. Again, this does not mean that all attempts at aesthetic evaluations are meaningless. An adept artist can manipulate the flock to either seek out or spurn the darkest areas; a persuasive human can attempt to shift the flock to the part of the sky that he or she prefers. But without the flock there can be no darkness, no forming of common aesthetic principles. To extend the metaphor, without the flock the sky is meaningless and without function.

III. Implications for Intersubjectivity and Formalism

Before I use these ideas to formulate a conclusion about their usefulness and implementation, I will use them to react to other aesthetic philosophies that have been the focus of my recent reading.

The idea of intersubjectivity strikes me as ludicrous, as I'm sure the above paragraphs have let on. Fabian Dorsch provides this definition:

First, it entails that whether an object in fact exemplifies a particular aesthetic value or not is not relativised to certain subjects or groups of subjects among humanity, but equal for all actual or possible human beings…And second, intersubjectivism[9] entails that whether aesthetic assessments reflect the aesthetic merit of an object or not is not relativised to certain subjects or groups of subjects among humanity, but equal for all actual or possible human beings.[10]

Dorsch goes on to use the phrases "masterpiece-for-me" and "masterpiece-for-you", indicating that in intersubjectivity they are fallacies; a work is a masterpiece or not, and a human not experiencing it that way is simply ill-prepared for the work. Dorsch uses the term "epistemic appropriateness" to describe a state of readiness to perceive a work, and describes it below:

…it is often required that subjects are fully and correctly aware of all the relevant features or acts concerning the object to be evaluated, which again presupposes that they are sufficiently attentive, sensitive and experienced in these matters; and that their further consideration of these features or facts happens in a rational and impartial way, and with no cognitive fault involved.[11]

This idea of a "level" of epistemic appropriateness carries the connotation of a specificity that is unattainable. After all, who is to say what the "cut-off" point for epistemic appropriateness is? And who could accurately measure such a thing?

Epistemic appropriateness--and indeed the idea of intersubjectivity itself--also assumes very limited possibilities for the interpretation of a work. If a person must be sufficiently and specifically prepared to perceive a work of art, these preparations must point towards very specific goals. It is likely impossible to create these goals in such a way that even a smattering of (even) epistemically prepared humans would come to full agreement on them.

This idea also completely discounts the possible validity of certain people's aesthetic experiences with the work. I do not believe that the work has this much power; the work is defined by all of the experiences of it, and to cast some aside as "ill-informed" is to again point towards a common achievement of the work that would cement its value, meaning and existence in ways that I have previously argued are misleading and meaningless.

My final argument against epistemic appropriateness lies on purely practical grounds: the "fine" arts, especially in American society, are suffering heavily from lack of exposure. The idea of epistemic appropriateness is overly exclusionary when the goal of so many artists is one of unification, and increasingly one of unification across social, class and educational boundaries. "Epistemically unprepared" humans are more apt than the trained artist may think to have genuine, interesting and useful aesthetic experiences with even the most abstract of art forms. What drives them away is chiefly a) unfamiliarity and b) fear of ostracization or reproach at in "incorrect" reaction to the work. These are very obviously only exacerbated by the idea of epistemic appropriateness.

Dorsch offers his take on the use of intersubjectivism:

Intersubjectivism is attractive because it explains in an easy and straightforward way why we take different evaluations to be in conflict, ask ourselves and others involved for reasons for our assessments, enter discussions with them in order to come to agreement, either by trying to convince the others of our opinion, or by revising our own verdict, and so on.[12]

In ways about which I will go into further detail in my conclusion, it is very possible and very useful to do these things while simultaneously rejecting intersubjectivism. Think again of the flock of birds; that is your construct, your basis for discussions and assessments. As long as one proceeds with the knowledge that these constructs are subject to change at any time, a very lucrative interaction can result. In addition, the knowledge that this idea still accounts for faultless disagreement (that is, two diverging and informed opinions, neither of which are objectively "correct") can save the interaction from entering very futile territory indeed.

Formalism is another aesthetic viewpoint that is troubling to me, although in formalism I can find some value; that is to say, I have no problem with a human attempting to view a work through formalist-colored glasses. What I am in disagreement with is the idea that this is the only proper way to perceive a work. Bodhan Dziemidok offers the following:

One may be considered a "formalist" with respect to artistic values if one believes that only the formal aspects of an artwork (in whichever sense enumerated) are constitutive of the value of a work of art. In this view, nonformal elements of the work (representation, thought, emotion, information, morality, etc.) are artistically irrelevant, because the value of a work of art consists exclusively in the manner of presenting and expressing the meanings contained.[13]

To reiterate, there is something to be said for this point of view, especially from the artist's standpoint: because the existence of art rests solely on the experiences of humans that perceive it, the artist must accept that there are some humans that experience the work that he may not be able to properly indoctrinate every audience member with his preferred method towards perception. This should kept at the fore of the mind during all points of the creative process; it is what responsibility as an artist is about. But there are many situations where a formalist perspective is not only impossible, it is undesired. Consider the following examples…

Near the end of the Andante con moto section of Beethoven's fifth symphony comes a truly iconic moment: where the melody in previous iterations had progressed sol-fa-mi, mi-re-do, it now jumps to sol-fa-mi, ti-la-sol over the same chords. This provides an appoggiatura on the sharp eleventh of a D-flat chord. Now, musicians familiar with this sonority know it as a calling card of so-called "schmaltzy" film music; that is, music that lacks depth and appeals to base emotions and sensibilities. For that reason, this moment can carry a similar connotation. But when one considers a) how the music has proceeded thus far in the work, featuring few if any other instances of this relatively dissonant ornamentation, and b) just how far in advance of the music this sonority has become associated with Beethoven is implementing it, it becomes a powerful epiphany indeed. This "contextual listening" is a perfectly acceptable form of perception. Ruth Lorand states:

Not all paintings should express the same atmosphere in order to be beautiful--if all the paintings would express the same thing, they would be boring and thus of low aesthetic value…[14]

What this statement neglects is this "contextual perception". A piece of music or work of art may seem banal if it were written in the 1980s; but place its inception in the 1880s and that perception may change drastically, depending on how the audience member values this sense of innovation. If an audience member prefers to judge a work without knowledge of its history, this more formalist viewpoint is also valuable. But to expect everybody to eradicate their prejudices, whether they want to or not, is unreasonable.

Another sort of aesthetic value with which formalism fails is the relatively recent phenomenon of "good because it is bad." The most prime examples of this sought-after aesthetic experience are cult films that are valued for their lack of refinement or even coherence, creating an aesthetic experience that can be humorous, campy, indulgent or even artistic lessons on "how not to do…". This idea has come to such a fore that the recent film Snakes on a Plane was marketed to this sort of audience for its original release! The idea of parody of a B-film was overtaken by intentional imitation for the sake of simulated parody.

The validity of this genre lies in its popularity; this is an aesthetic value around which certain flocks are becoming denser. While it is true that many humans seek these works because of their supposed lack of aesthetic value, the works are still providing the aesthetic fulfillment the humans are seeking, even if unintentionally. Aren't they, then, rich in aesthetic value? This paradox itself provides a very interesting basis for aesthetic debate, but it seems that no formalist answers would suffice (apart from declaring the target audience "epistemically unprepared" to realize the work's lack of value). For if the purely aesthetic properties of the work are failures, the formalist would be forced to label the work a failure as well, regardless of the myriad ways it might succeed in spite of them. This is another example of the work being detached from the author and indeed from itself; its value lies purely within the experiences of those perceiving it.

IV. Conclusion

What I propose as a basic guideline for aesthetic evaluation is simply to keep the flock in mind. D. Wiggins states:

In truth, whatever difficulties there are in the possibility of irresoluble substantive disagreement, no position in moral philosophy can render itself simply immune from them. We should not tumble over ourselves to assert that there is irresoluble substantive disagreement. We should simply respect the possibility of such disagreement, I think, and in respecting it register the case for a measure of cognitive underdetermination.[15]

In a less philosophical but no less relevant example, David Foster Wallace puts forth his idea of a "democratic spirit":

A Democratic Spirit is one that combines rigor and humility, i.e., passionate conviction plus a sedulous respect for the convictions of others. As any American knows, this is a difficult spirit to cultivate and maintain, particularly when it comes to issues you feel strongly about. Equally tough is a DS's criterion of 100 percent intellectual integrity -- you have to be willing to look at yourself and at your motives for believing what you believe, and to do it more or less continually.[16]

These ideas have all sorts of application in the aesthetic and artistic world. The artist, aware of the concept of aesthetic value as a flock of birds, has a world of possibilities at his or her hands. They can decide which flock they are attempting to reach, or the scope of the flock, or even on what areas of bird density to focus. They can anticipate in which direction the flock may swerve, or attempt to influence that direction, or perhaps reference a point in the sky the flock had previously inhabited. They could perhaps attempt to manipulate different flocks in different ways, or different flocks in a way that brings them together, along with many other possibilities. The teacher must be aware of the impossibility of complete aesthetic union when training a student; rather, the instruction must focus on narrowing the gap between what the student desires to create and what he or she is able to with the tools possessed.

Instruction and indeed all aesthetic dialogue must center primarily on clarification of ideas, positions and opinions. An attempt to locate in what flock or just where in the flock one's fellow bird lies is essential before debate can take place. At this point discussion can take two paths: people can discuss whether a certain work is actually meeting the aesthetic criteria set up by a particular human's experiences (although the power of art generally leads to criteria being changed rather than the preference for a particular work), or the more contentious issue of what a person's criteria should actually consist of.[17] This is done, by way of debate, by attempting to actually change the experiences of the person in question; for all that is informing the change is the experience of the discussion itself.

As stated above, much of art comes from the motivation of a unified experience; it is perfectly reasonable to expect humans to attempt to "manipulate the flock" by assigning values based on what one believes most humans will or should value, and then attempting to proliferate those values. But if one assumes that what he or she is proliferating are aesthetic values that are fixed in the physical properties of the work itself, he/she will inevitably be led astray; they are arguing for a false reality and robbing themselves of the seemingly endless possibilities of an art world that is constantly changing in all dimensions. This disregard for the relativism of aesthetic evaluation thus actually hampers the ability of the evaluator to make judgments that are relevant across one or many groups of humans—“flocks”.

That art is nothing more than a collection of human experiences is a boon to the possibilities of what art can do. One must not take this point of view to be indicative that the infinite possibilities of art render it meaningless; on the contrary, art is full of meanings that are limitless and constantly changing. The acknowledgment of this informative, encompassing and liberating philosophy is of great advantage to any human concerned with creating, contemplating, debating or even enjoying aesthetic experiences.

[1] Lorand, Ruth. “The Purity of Aesthetic Value.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 50 (1992): p. 13.

[2] Bell, Clive. Art. London: Arrow books, 1961.

[3] Novitz, David. “The Integrity of Aesthetics.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 48 (1990): p. 15.

[4] This notion of "preparation" will be addressed in more detail in section III.

[5] It is true that pieces more commonly known as "art" tend to be more thought-provoking than natural objects because of the human design behind them; an |adept| artist can arrange natural objects to enhance the ability of their physical properties to create a unifying aesthetic appearance. But the fact remains that these natural objects (again some more than others) often have the power to create very powerful aesthetic experiences on their own.

[6] A visualization can easily be found on YouTube; this link provides a particularly apt representation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL8diH-I9EQ .

[7] Share physically, not perceptually, although the perceptions will likely be similar.

[8] Although, regrettably, the video does.

[9] Dorsch uses "intersubjectivity" and "intersubjectivism" interchangeably.

[10] Dorsch, Fabian. "Sentimentalism and the Intersubjectivity of Aesthetic Evaluations." dialectica, (2007): pg. 424.

[11] Dorsch, pg. 422.

[12] Dorsch, pg. 425.

[13] Dziemidok, Bohdan. "Artistic Formalism: Its Achievements and Weaknesses." The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 51 (1993): pg. 186.

[14] Lorand, Ruth. "The Purity of Aesthetic Value." The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 50 (1992): pg. 17.

[15] Wiggins, D. Needs, Values, Truth. Oxford: Blackwell, 1987.

[16] Wallace, David Foster, Consider the Lobster and other essays. New York: Little, Brown, 2005.

[17] It is a drawback that this kind of relativism can lead to unproductive discrepancies and preoccupations. To proceed to debate holding unjustified assumptions, however, is as dangerous, if not more.

Improvisation In Honor of

2008-01-30T21:26:00.000-08:00

whyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

non a summer day

whyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

can't i hear you? :( :(

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Kensington, South Carolina.

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

this is fun :) :)

whoooooooooooooooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhh
HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Emu-sty need cleaning? Every morning? Bei shower?

Feed emu salt-lick.

Lick.

Lick.

Slurp. Three licks, three layers.

.

.

.

VAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA;

.

yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIKKKCHKKKKKCHKKKKKCHCHKKKKKCHKKKKKKCHCHCKKKKCHCHCHCKKKKKKKKKKKKK

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAK
KKKKKKKKKKCHKKKCHKKKKKKCHCHKKKKKKKCHCHCHCHKKKKKKKKKKKKCHKKKKCH

>:(

I Have Created My First German Pun

2008-01-30T21:06:00.000-08:00

Ißt man nur Fleisch???

Real-Time Joke Processing (RTJP)

2008-01-18T18:42:00.000-08:00

Via NNNNNNGMAIL CHAT:

Aaron: i pity the fool
Me: that
Aaron: exactly
Me: knows the betty ford clinic phone number

Ian Made a Funny Joke Yesterday

2008-01-15T15:59:00.000-08:00

Person entering classroom: "Oh, is this 'Just Intonation'?"

Me: "No, it's much more than just intonation!"

Time to Pwn the New Yorker

2008-01-12T21:56:00.000-08:00

So the New Yorker caption contest is totally lame, I send in great captions and they never get picked, and the ones that do get picked are invariably terrible. Anyone that doesn't believe me can just check it out. So I've decided to post the good captions (pronounced "cap-shee-owns") here. The good ones are mine. They good ones are miney. YYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

"You have cancer."

A Comment on "I seem to be a verb,"

2008-01-11T14:11:00.001-08:00

One of my teachers from the Schloss Summer Academy, Ole Lützow-Holm, sent me this comment about the piece (which can be viewed here):

I thought about a couple of things. They are potential perspectives – possible aspects that you may consider if you wish to pursue this type of sound-poetry-related music. First of all I get the idea that the solo is actually a study and a preparation for an ensemble piece. I hear (and see) at least 3 people at the table. In other words: the piece seems to suggest a kind of polyphony which is hard to create on your own. This has to do not only with sonic or acoustic density, but also with the psychological reverberation of the scene – even though the original poem is spoken by a solitary voice. Which leads me to the essential question about location: Where are we? Where does the piece happen? Is it an interior place (a lonely, contemplating mind) or does it propose a site in the World with a panoramic view? Or perhaps a mediation between the both? Anyhow, it's not all clear where you want me to be, apart from in a work of sound poetry. That applies to the narrative structure as well. To what extent am I invited to attend a ritual? How strong is the notion of the piece as an aesthetic object meant to be? Partly I believe the questions could be negotiated technically by the insistent research into alternative ways of combining, blending and bonding vocal and "instrumental" material (here they seem a little detached – like an old fashioned stereo) and also by considering how to employ amplification more extensively in the direction of microphony.

So, radically taking into account and stretching the concept of textual polyphony, of space and depth (both virtual and real), of drama and ritual – and perhaps of a more pronounced reference to (and communicating/playing with) the genre itself – are ways to extend your work beyond expected standards of sound art and sound poetry.

Ian Made Three Funny Jokes at a Folk Music Concert Today

2007-12-22T22:37:00.000-08:00

MC: "Your children grow in ways you would never envision."

Me: "Three arms!"

----

Singer: "I wrote this song while sitting on my porch, which faces East, in the morning."

Me: "In the evening it faces west!"

----

Dad: "That restaurant has good food, my son used to wait there."

Me: "Yeah, but I eventually got a table."

The Best.

2007-12-11T18:57:00.001-08:00

The best is, free,

The best things in life are like.

Ian Made a Funny Joke Today

2007-12-10T01:08:00.000-08:00

Charlie: "There's a precedent for it."

Ian: "He's not my precedent."

Karlheinz Stockhausen has died.

2007-12-07T12:05:00.000-08:00

Today is a sad day in the world of music, as we have lost one of the great musicians of history. Karlheinz Stockhausen died Wednesday at the age of 79. Story links can be found here. A very nice memorial booklet created by his partners can be found here. (PDF Format)

WDR, the German radio station that Stockhausen worked at since 1963, provided this video obituary. The approximate translation (by Joachim Goßmann) is provided below.

As a composer, Karlheinz Stockhausen did not stop at working with sounds, pitches and tone-durations, he found the directions and speeds of sounds equally important; and he always experimented with the latest techniques and technologies - the reactions of his audience were often quite intense. Stockhausen was born in 1928 Müldrath, Germany. He studied music
education, piano and composition in Cologne and Paris. In 1963 he assumed control of the Studio for Electronic Music at the Westdeutscher Rundfunk and from 1971-1977 he taught as Professor at the Musikhochschule Köln. From 1977 he worked on LICHT, a cycle of music theater works. He experimented with musical rows and formulas, with electronic sounds and
concert spaces. In his monumental 7-part work LICHT, on which he worked for 26 years and that has a duration of 30 hours, he dealt with cosmic elements and the development of mankind.

"...but that is the chance for every human, that he has the entire universe at his disposal, and that there is no end and everyone lives forever."

Assistant Instructions for New Piece, First Draft

2007-12-05T22:30:00.000-08:00

OPTIONAL ASSISTANTS:

A possible realization of this piece includes parts for two people that can also act as page-turners. It is the job of these assistants to manipulate the tuning pegs of their assigned instrument over the course of the piece, following the instructions given below. These specific manipulations should not be worked out or discussed with the string players ahead of time. HOWEVER, it is very important that the assistants work with the string players in advance in order to gain familiarity with the instrument and the tuning pegs (and the proper ways to use them) to avoid damaging the instrument. The instructions are in chronological order. It is acceptable that a certain combination of decisions may lead to one string being too loose to be playable, but never more than one. A string should not be tuned so tight that it becomes in danger of snapping or damaging the setup.

Assistant A:
1) At some point during the silence/bridge playing on pages seven and eight, tune strings III and/or IV either very slightly up or very slightly down.
2) At two to four other points on pages eight, nine and 10, tune any string slightly up or down.
3) During the fermata on page 12, tune one or more of the strings not being played (I, II, III) down a quarter-turn and then back to its position before this instruction.
4) At several points during pages 13, 14 and 15, tune any string(s) up or down any distance, within any limits imposed by the above paragraph. It is preferable, but not necessary, that the strings are sounding when they are being tuned. Two strings may be tuned at once if desired.
5) At some point on the bottom half of page 15, tune any one string down so far that it hangs loosely. (Again, more than one string should never be tuned this loosely. If one is already markedly looser than the others, make that the one that is tuned all the way down.)
6) During seconds 31-37 on page 16, tune strings II and III in opposite directions as they are being sounded.
7) During seconds 3-7 on page 17, tune strings III and IV in opposite directions as they are being sounded.
8) If string II or III is the one that has been rendered unplayable, tune it back up to near its starting point immediately after performing instruction 7).

Assistant B:
1) At some point in the first three seconds of player B's first gesture on page eight, tune string III or IV very slightly up or down.
2) At two to four other points on pages eight, nine and 10, tune any string slightly up or down.
3) During the fermata on page 12, tune one or more of the strings not being played (I, II, IV) down a quarter-turn and then back to its position before this instruction.
4) At several points during pages 13, 14 and 15, tune any string(s) up or down any distance, within any limits imposed by the above paragraph. It is preferable, but not necessary, that the strings are sounding when they are being tuned. Two strings may be tuned at once if desired.
5) At some point on the bottom half of page 15, tune any one string down so far that it hangs loosely. (Again, more than one string should never be tuned this loosely. If one is already markedly looser than the others, make that the one that is tuned all the way down.)
6) During seconds 31-37 on page 16, tune strings II and III in opposite directions as they are being sounded.
7) During seconds 3-7 on page 17, tune strings I and II in opposite directions as they are being sounded.
8) If string I is the one that has been rendered unplayable, tune it back up to near its starting point immediately after performing instruction 7).

[Page numbers and all that subject to change. Again open to suggestions for clarity/tone/grammar/and all that/etc./et al.)

Performance Note, First Draft

2007-12-05T22:28:00.001-08:00

There are certain passages in this piece—marked with brackets—that are intentionally unplayable. The performer should realize these passages by either a) performing the gesture with the necessary level of imperfection or b) inventing a creative/abstract execution that represents what appears to be the desired effect. Because the narrative of the piece at this point focuses on a theme of frustration ( i.e., the frustration that certain contours cannot be presented due to the limitations of the instrument), it is important that the solution evoke this idea through imperfection and/or abstraction, rather than merely simplifying the gesture to a point of playability.

[Currently being revised. Give suggestions.]

I Just Realized How F-ing Stupid This Contraction Is It's Dumb

2007-11-29T15:39:00.001-08:00

Literally. I walked into the Bookstore thinking about the phrase "Don't do that." I'm for serious, just think and ruminate about and over that. How stupid and dumb is that? "DO not DO that." The Germans have it right, with Teutonic authority. "Mach das nicht." "Do that not." And "Don't do that" is actually the MOST efficient use of this stupid and utterly redundant, useless and redundant contraction. (Was that too obvious? Too apparent?) Think about "Don't go there." (Not in terms of, like, the [REMOVED]ism, think of the phrase literally, not figuratively, like "Don't go to that place.") "Don't go there." "DO not GO there." In effect, you (yes, you, specifically) are placing the phrase "PERFORM THE ACTION OF" right in the middle of an otherwise totally useful and information theory-satisfying sentence. "Geh da nicht." "Go there not." It works! I just tried to see what the French was on Babel Fish, but I don't speak French and I don't trust the retranslation BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THE FRENCH ARE JUST AS STUPID AND DUMB AND SILLY AND REDUNDANTDANTDANTDANTDANT AS WE ARE. I didn't MEAN to reference Mr. Bungle there, but come on.

Performance Available for Viewing on the Tube

2007-11-21T11:50:00.000-08:00

Here's me performing my adaptation of R. Buckminster Fuller's text at UCSD on November 15th, 2007. Text:

I live on Earth at present,
and I don't know what I am.
I know that I am not a category.
I am not a thing -- a noun.
I seem to be a verb,
an evolutionary process --
an integral function of the universe.

Video:

Ian Made a Funny Joke Today

2007-11-18T23:21:00.001-08:00

This will hopefully become a regular feature. I'll start off with two, but future installments will only have one, maybe.

Sunday, November 18th:

TV ANNOUNCER: "Dan, how do you envision the Chargers' locker room at the half?"

IAN: "Well, I see players sitting around, maybe a table in the middle, trainers, hangers...."

Wednesday, November 7th:

ELIOT: [phone starts ringing] "Oh shit, is that me?"

IAN: "No, it's your phone, I think."

Why Is Music So Often Performed By Trained Musicians? (WIMSOPBTM)

2007-11-18T18:51:00.000-08:00

I just (JUST) attended a concert that had a piece by my friend and colleague and very interesting and talented artist Carolyn Chen. It led me to pose the following questions about music, which I will explore and articulate here.

1) What are the reasons that when composers look for people to play their pieces, they seek people with extensive technical training on the particular instruments the pieces are written for?

I asked (myself [that]) because Carolyn's piece (Ground, written for Han Han Cho) featured a person playing a double bass in a way that had very little to do with technical training on a bass, and yet the sounds produced were fantastic and interesting. Okay, I have to put a lid on this hummus before I continue to eat until my stomach bursts through my skin, like I'd imagine a horse's would if it (the horse, but by corollary the horse's stomach, I suppose) was eating out of a burlap-ish bag that was strapped around its mouth with those clasp things and that was full of delicious (perhaps oat-flavored-) hummus. I wondered just how much composers restrict themselves by seeking out players with a (boat-, shit-) load of training. So I brainstormed some answers to the above question:

Much of music is written in a way that would be difficult for non-trained performers (hereafter N-TPs, as opposed to TPs, hee hee toilet papers) to perform in an accurate or pleasing manner.
Most traditional western instruments are very expensive and of varying rarity, and those trained on them are far more likely to have access to them, and good quality ones AT that.
TPs (schuckle) have an intimate knowledge of their instrument and are able to discern just what may be done to an instrument without breaking it or rendering it less effective for future use.
Said intimate knowledge also better enables TPs (schgiggle-schuckle) to make informed and maybe even "artistic" decisions about how to most effectively perform the prescribed gestures.

I think that's a pretty comprehensive overview of why TPs (schnark-schnark-schnark-schnark) are sought after for musical performance most of the time. Reason #one (1) is pretty inclusive and includes issues like facility, endurance and the ability to read a majority of notated western music. Reason #two (2), I think, can be cirumvented~~locuted~~*scribed relatively easily, depending on one's situation, especially if one is in some sort of academic or professional "in-" crowd. #three (3), I think, is overrated in its importance and is also information that is readily attained, but that's an issue for another time, or not. And if you don't care about #one (1), I don't know why you'd care about #four (4), just find yourself people whose's tastes you trusts.

Anyway, I'm going to keep this list in the back of my mind when writing music. Opportunity for performance could be so vastly embiggened with proper manipulation of it (i.e. both). Obviously, for most of my music I will still be seeking TPs (sch-booble-WAAA- HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA), but careful consideration of this could open a large door, or something.

*Turns out, not a word! Only nouned/adjectivated.

An Open-Ended Question

2007-11-18T16:43:00.000-08:00

What would you think if

Gone Wrong (Or, "An ordinary story in the context of an extraordinary occurence during a fictional somewhat-interesting sort of joke-making.)

2007-11-14T17:27:00.000-08:00

A grad student living in Rochester, N.Y. sees a poster for "Cello Lessons: Qualified Teacher Now Accepting Students". After several days of walking past this poster and ruminating on how funny it would be to see a poster for an "unqualified" teacher, he decides to create one (poster, that is tasteful, of course, because he is, after all, ruminating]). The poster, he decides, will have all sorts of humor in it, and end with fake contact information also designed to elicit a chuckle. The phone number, he decides, will spell something funny. Knowing, he decides, all of the exchanges in Rochester, he chooses "663" (Greece), which three digits can spell, among other things, "one". The only logical subsequent to this word is, he decides, of course, in the name of the toilet/bedroom humor genre, "ball", or, in telephone parlance "2,2,5,5".

The grad student referred to in most to all of the previous paragraph ponders that if one were to indeed call the number inquiring about lessons with a grossly un[der]qualified teacher, it would be further humorous if the number actually existed, and a real live person were to answer. The grad student, being a smart grad student, decided to test this theory, perhaps accompanied by a buddy.

He (the grad student) formulates a plan: 1) He will call the number. 2) He will ask for someone at random to make it seem like a wrong number (say, "Bill" [by the time the grad student even has to think of what to say, he will know whether or not the number exists; the wrong number thing is simply an easy out]).

But what if there is a Bill that lives there, or if Bill is on the phone?

Then he will include a last name, like, say, "Thomas".

But what if the person that either answered the phone or has now come to the phone at the request of a Bill is actually named "Bill Thomas"?

Then he will specify further, saying he refers to the Bill Thomas who is a medical doctor that began a nursing home movement referred to as the Eden Alternative^®, and who the grad student happens to know lives in Ithaca, N.Y.

----

INT. DAY
SMALL BEDROOM

A grad student picks up the phone on his desk. He dials. He waits as it begins to ring.

VOICE ON OTHER END OF PHONE
(clears throat)
Hello?

GRAD STUDENT
(already acknowledging victory)
Hi, may I speak will Bill please?

VOICE
Just a second.

The grad student is moderately surprised, but waits.

BILL
Hello?

GRAD STUDENT
Bill Thomas, how are ya?!

BILL
I'm doing all right... who is this?

The grad student's surprised-hood is no longer amusedly.

GRAD STUDENT
(hesitant)
Um, I was just calling about the Eden Alternative^®.

BILL
Oh, all right, what can I do for you? Who
again did you say this was?

The grad student hangs up the phone extremely quickly, almost as if it were a reflex. His tortured expression ruminates over the extreme UNLIKELIHOOD of what has just transpired.

----

"...and there, in the shattered glass box of the presumed, lay a blanched soul, left with nothing but the smallest of gaps between oblivion and eternity...."

Cello Lessons!!!!!!!!

2007-11-13T16:19:00.000-08:00

Here's the poster!

Improvisation in Honor of Steve Brown

2007-11-12T16:07:00.000-08:00

Custard mustard. I (8) custard, that was flavo[u]red wie mustard. "If," said custard, applied to face (de la chaleur [a chamber ensemble piece by Beat Furrer (that is pretty good, composed in 1999999999999999999999999999999999999999999991 [wherein, in this sort of date-a set, a condition involving two consecutive numbers immmmmmediately creates an indefinite number of consecutive numbers])]), and was accccccccccepted, would face become acccccccustomed? accustomed¹ to custard?

So, it manifests itself ("it" being that last paragraph, or at least the first and 14th and 16th words and "itself" referring to "it"), or rather finds its origin in a story told about a story told by an ex-prof of mine, who never played football for Rowan University (website: rowanfootballgivesmewood.com). That story is found here:

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Pretty funny, as you can see.

¹In this case 2=2. A relative anomaly that reflects relative routine!

A Paper from Last Year on Pop Music

2007-11-06T18:47:00.000-08:00

Hello, this is a paper I wrote last year (for fun?!?!) about a pop cover and its experiential properties. Hope you enjoy! I will attempt to upload the tracks it discusses soon, but until then look around for both Cat Stevens' and Skye Sweetnam's versions of "Wild World".

--

COVERING A BASIS
Tactics of Experiential Manipulation in Skye Sweetnam's Cover of "Wild World"

In popular music culture, performing original songs will gain you a certain extra level of artistic credibility, for better or worse. This same expectation is not placed upon classical music ensembles, most of which exclusively perform works not written by members of the ensemble. However, even though less such exclusivity exists among pop ensembles, the popular music idiom does permit many more possibilities in terms of re-interpreting a non-original work. A pop group may actually be more equipped to re-create a song to its full artistic potential than a classical ensemble, because further experimentation – what would be considered over-deviation in classical music – is almost what is expected of a good cover. To put it another way: fewer parameters of music must be changed in the classical tradition before the work is considered an arrangement or even a new piece. Many more parameters may be altered in the pop tradition for a song still to be considered a uniquely inspired performance of an existing work. Pop groups have more liberty to provide an answer to the question, "Why should I listen to this version instead of the original?"

In spite of this expanded freedom, it is rare that one comes across a pop cover that truly understands this opportunity and capitalizes on it. Most covers will simply change the style of a song; a more radical interpretation will re-write some harmonies, or even lyrics. But beyond these simple devices there is a whole world of possibilities to be exploited when deciding how to re-interpret a work. One of those possibilities is the idea of taking advantage of an audience's familiarity with a previous version – and an audience's expected reactions to that version – and using these associations to craft a cover that uses its self-referentiality to create an entirely new aesthetic experience with much of the same material. While the style- and harmony-related tactics mentioned above attempt to re-tool a song for a fresh audience, this alternative method attempts to play to the sympathies of a similar audience to that of the original, but more directly and viscerally. An innovative example of this second method is Skye Sweetnam's cover of the Cat Stevens song "Wild World", released in 2003 as a B-side on the single Billy S.

The interpretation Sweetnam offers of Stevens' 1970 hit can almost be viewed as an effectual "pop art" rendering of the original. An audience's sense of the original song's nuances is heightened through the intensification of musical parameters surrounding those nuances; what is revolutionary about Sweetnam's "Wild World" is which of those parameters she intensifies and in what ways. Sweetnam's elucidation of the experiential extremes of the original song creates a special intensity to audience members accustomed to the original, thus triggering a very familiar reaction to what these audience members had heretofore assumed was a communally-crafted experience with "Wild World" ( i.e. an experience crafted due to common societal reactions to and appraisals of the song's materials, and not a result of the music itself). Because of this illumination, Sweetnam's cover effectively serves as a rather advanced experiential analysis of the original. On top of this, Sweetnam adds her own advanced tactics (or rather, the advanced tactics of the modern pop genres) of intensifying experiential time to further augment her version's appeal on a level less associated with past experiences, in combination with an appeal to the "subjective set" (to be defined momentarily) of factors of musical cohesion.

A few definitions of terms are in order: Karlheinz Stockhausen defines "experiential time" in his seminal 1955 article, "Structure and Experiential Time":

By experiential time we mean the following: when we hear a piece of music, processes of alteration follow each other at varying speeds; we have now more time to grasp alterations, now less…. In all perception we have to do only with variable alterations that have a particular structure; these various time-structures we experience qualitatively through various concepts (parameters). A repetition has the smallest degree of alteration, a wholly surprising event the greatest.[1]

Experiential time is the concept of how a given piece of music increases or decreases its grasp of an audience's attention, either over the duration of the work or at a more local level. These local levels of experiential time are primarily what this paper will be concerned with.

Another influential thesis provides us with terms for this analysis: James Tenney's META (+) HODOS. Tenney presents an overview, adopted from Gestalt theory, of factors that may be manipulated to affect how local units ( i.e. moments, motifs, or ideas) of music cohere or segregate. These include proximity, similarity, intensity, repetition, objective set and subjective set. Tenney defines the latter two terms with the following passage:

Objective set will refer to expectations or anticipations arising during a musical experience which are produced by prior events occurring within the same piece, while subjective set would refer to expectations or anticipations which are the result of experiences previous to those that are occasioned by the particular piece of music now being considered.[2]

To rephrase: "Objective set" refers to expectations generated by one's experience with the current performance of the piece itself; "subjective set" refers to expectations generated by an audience's experiences, musical or otherwise, prior to hearing the piece. It is, obviously, "subjective set" that we will be most concerned with here. The following analysis assumes that the audience discussed has enough experience with Stevens' original version to make the described subconscious connections.[3]

Perhaps the most basic differences between the two versions of "Wild World" are also personified by the basic differences between the over-arching styles of the two artists: the laid-back, peace-movement-influenced crooning of Stevens against the [girl]power-driven vocals and beats of Sweetnam. It is in examining this disparity that the most fundamental liberties in Sweetnam's version become apparent: first, the accelerated tempo and intensified key, and second, the way the pulse is constructed, both rhythmically and texturally (the question of the construction of the pulse has severe experiential connotations).

In addressing the former consideration, we find that Sweetnam's cover proceeds at about 1.12 times the tempo of the original. The audience is thrust immediately into a faster rate of absorption than it expects from the Stevens "Wild World"; Sweetnam has intensified one parameter of the music so as to give the illusion that time is passing more quickly than in the original. This is confirmed if we assume that since it is (in terms of basic material) the same song, the same amount of information will be transmitted (as we will later discover, Sweetnam actually transmits a fair amount more information). Stockhausen explains this concept:

The greater the temporal density of unexpected alteration – the information content – the more time we need to grasp events, and the less time we have for reflection, the quicker time passes; the lower the effective density of alteration…, the less time the senses need to react, so that greater intervals of experiential time lie between the processes, and the slower time passes.[4][5]

An equal amount of information being experienced in a shortened time-frame will, by this definition, lead to the effective acceleration of time. This effect is strengthened by the anticipation of the expected amount of information (as well as what is expected to be the tempo) in the subjective set.

The subject of key is also in play, albeit with a much smaller effect. Stevens' original version is performed in the key of A minor, while Sweetnam presents the song four semitones higher, in C-sharp minor. The general intensity of pitch increases to the upward direction, and the change of a major third found here is a substantial intensification of the key. Its effect on an audience and on the subjective set, however, is less substantial. It affects those with excellent pitch memory that can notice the difference between the keys upon hearing Sweetnam's cover, and it also affects those who may be listening to the two versions consecutively. This effect, however, is lost within seconds as one reorients to the key of the current version. The first few bars of the cover do provide a contrast that intensifies the material for the audience, but this contrast is not nearly as significant nor as enduring as the tempo modification, for while one may also become oriented to the tempo, this does not slow the experiential pace of information until much later in the song, far later than the point at which the effect of the new key has been lost.[6]

It is in the construction of the pulse that we find Sweetnam more acutely toying with Stockhausen's "density of alteration". In the original version, the pulse finds virtually no significant accentuation; there is simply Stevens' guitar strumming at a somewhat uniform intensity level throughout the verse. While the percussive strumming sounds do occur in places that accentuate the beat, the accentuation is quite low-key, reflecting the overall style of the song. If one were to imagine a graph of the intensity of the accompaniment over time, we would see few "peaks" in the Stevens version; it would be more of a straight line. What Sweetnam offers is a re-interpretation of the pulse and beat structure that simultaneously achieves two seemingly disparate aims. The accompaniment in each bar is based upon driving towards beats two and four (a familiar convention of the rock genre) through an increase of the audience's sense of anticipation of those beats.[7] But what is simultaneously being executed if we look deeper into the texture is a sixteenth-note subdivision of the pulse, which constantly drives the attention of the listener forward. The effect gained by this dichotomy is similar to that of a passenger on a moving motorboat viewing evenly spaced events along the land; the passenger's focus is drawn to each individual event, but the boat's course keeps him from dwelling and constantly drives him towards his next point of interest.

More specifically: The most obvious factors that draw attention to beats two and four are: 1) the actual accents on those beats created by the handclaps and bass drum, and 2) the "reverse cymbal" effect whose intensity constantly rises towards each respective beat in terms of both dynamic (volume) and sound-complexity (since it is a reversal of an actual cymbal hit, the further along in the sound it goes, the further it leads towards the most reverberations in the sound). This cymbal effect deserves most of the credit for the audience's heightened sense of anticipation. The aforementioned sixteenth-note meter is created by a combination of the guitar strumming (in, obviously, a much more regular pattern than in the original Stevens) and the occasional repeated bass note in the same rhythm. Of the eight sixteenth-notes required for two beats, seven are actually articulated: the first five leading to and landing on beat two, and the final two before beat three, which are only articulated by a pitchless strumming of the guitar. Though only one sixteenth-note is omitted, the effect is considerable: a discontinuation of the ongoing subdivision at that precise moment draws attention back to the last significant event, in this case beat two or four. While seven out of the eight notes are enough to make the listener cognizant of the continuing subdivision ( i.e. enough to "keep the boat moving"), the one small omission directs attention backwards significantly (enough to "focus on shore"). Also significantly adding to this effect is the sudden dropout of the surrounding instrumental texture for three to four sixteenth notes.

This is the first clear example of Sweetnam using her cover as an analysis. Where Stevens's accompaniment diminishes the effect of the pulse, Sweetnam's amplifies it, providing the audience up front with a reaction they may have had subconsciously to the original. Her transparent presentation of the effect of the pulse excites a listener that remembers it as a personal intuitive perception from a past experience with the old version. The lack of an articulated subdivision immediately after beats two and four, this "dropping off a cliff" feeling the listener has for a split second, also harkens to (and is consciously reminiscent of) another section of the song: the refrain, which provides Sweetnam with her greatest opportunity to capitalize on the subjective set. The refrain of "Wild World" is (as it is with most pop songs) the most well-known, most quoted section of the original song. Stevens crafts it effectively: a simple, catchy opening line and melody (on "Oo, baby, baby it's a wild world"), followed by the first independent melodic instrumental line of the song – the descending guitar figure, the most driving force yet encountered, which leads heavily towards the downbeat of the following bar. That downbeat, however, is not as emphasized as beat two, creating an excellent sense of anticipation (as described earlier) for the duration of beat one. Sweetnam's cognizance of the significant nature of these ideas (in comparison with the rest of the song) is readily apparent in her experiential re-interpretation of them.

When one is privately recalling a favorite, enjoyed, or even loathed song through singing it to oneself, the instrumental and vocal parts are(at least audibly) replaced by a monophonic line; certain lesser factors are omitted as a result of necessity, preference, or memory (or lack thereof). Sweetnam's treatment of the refrain exploits this idea in order to provide her audience with a more personal rendition by emphasizing these most "remembered" aspects of the work; she highlights the parts the listener is most likely to remember (and therefore sing to him/herself) and presents them in full orchestration. She begins, on one level, with the general heightening of energy of the refrain, much as Stevens does in his version. Where Stevens adds a drum set and a slightly more involved guitar part, Sweetnam offers a general increase in volume, a more driving percussion section (the sixteenth-note meter is now unbroken in the drum set, and on a more reverberation-able cymbal) and a double-tracked, harmonized vocal part.[8]

I would argue that two most significant and famous ideas (or, as Tenney would call them, "clangs"[9]) in the original refrain are the aforementioned descending guitar line and the emphasized beat two that immediately follows. Sweetnam places a special emphasis on these factors that is not found (to this degree) in the original Stevens version. The descending guitar line is vocalized by Sweetnam with "na na nas", and harmonized in thirds. This is similar to the previously mentioned double-tracked vocals on the lyrics throughout the refrain. The actual vocalization of the guitar line relates it immediately to the subjective set of an acquainted audience (the use of a familiar onomatopoeia aids this cause), while the added harmonization (in essence an orchestration of a direct appeal to the subjective set) ratchets the parametric intensity of the figure to a very exciting point. The aspect of experientialism is considerably enhanced through these two techniques: a direct appeal to the subjective set, and an intensification that propels that appeal.

It is in re-interpreting the second of the previously mentioned significant ideas of the refrain, the emphasized beat two after the guitar line, that Sweetnam crafts her most skillful empirical exposition. On the first refrain of the original, and in the first phrase of each following refrain, Stevens places a bass note on beat one of the measure in question, giving the guitar line from the previous bar a tangible and audible destination. On the second phrase in later instances of the refrain, Stevens removes this note, further emphasizing beat two by adding a level of anticipation that directs attention towards the next substantial musical event (it does not direct attention backwards, as Sweetnam's earlier discussed omission of one subdivision note in the verse, since the guitar line has more of a leading quality and is not locally powerful enough to command attention from such an omission). This may very well be the single most distinctive aspect about "Wild World", no matter which version is discussed. Sweetnam takes this de-emphasized beat to the next level, placing it on every instance of the refrain, and putting more emphasis on beat two by adding a guitar pickup figure slightly beforehand, along with a very audible drawn breath to prepare for the following lyrics. This appeals to the subjective set in a different way; not so much capitalizing on an audience's familiarity with the song, but capitalizing on the general association of drawn breath with anticipation. She is again taking a musical idea that Stevens at first hinted at and later emphasized subtly, and altering it so as to become the main focus of attention, not only at its instance in the refrain, but as a sort of Grundgestalt[10] throughout the cover (its magnification in the breakdown [bridge] section will be discussed later on).

In her re-interpretation of the descending guitar line and the de-emphasized beat that follows, Sweetnam is again musically providing experiential analysis of the original work. Her combined subjective presentation and parametric intensification of the guitar line exploit her audience's experiential history with the work, as does her emphasis of the previously comparatively understated de-emphasized beat. A low-level experiential analysis of Sweetnam's cover would in effect mirror a deeper-level analysis of the original. To simplify, Sweetnam takes the subtle things from Stevens' version and turns them into blatant things in her own, but her selection of which factors to emphasize and in just what way to accomplish that emphasis shows a sophisticated understanding of musicological factors of listening.

It is, however, in this superb appeal to the subjective set that Sweetnam falters somewhat in her handling of the objective set. Stevens crafts a progressive presentation of this de-emphasized beat idea: In the first refrain there is no de-emphasized beat, in the second refrain (second phrase) he removes the bass note and leaves only a soft cymbal strike on the downbeat, and in the third and fourth refrains he removes the cymbal, and the only articulated force that drives to the second beat is his guttural "and I" before the band comes in again. As he provides less and less articulation of beat one, more and more anticipation of beat two is palpable. Sweetnam, however, does not vary in any refrain or any phrase how she handles this de-emphasized beat. As a result, the element of surprise and anticipation (and consequently the degree of alteration) decreases with each passing refrain. While Sweetnam expertly re-interpreted this idea, she could have done much more to cultivate it within the context of her version in order to engross a listener even further. The aspect of experientialism, aided by further development, could have achieved a series of new, more exciting levels.

Other, lesser ways in which Sweetnam appeals to the subjective set include the following: firstly, her vocal style, with its (far) greater degree of pitch fluctuation and vocal inflection than Stevens', creates an increase in energy that pervades the entire song. It is true that this is more indicative of Sweetnam's genre than of a conscious decision, but the effect remains nonetheless.

Secondly, the melodic aspect of the IV-V progression in the minor key of the verse that ends the refrain is doubled at the octave. Stevens merely places more weight on the bass notes; Sweetnam's accentuation of this figure has more presence to an audience, and adds drive to what is already an encapsulating gesture.

Thirdly, there is the issue of the ending of Sweetnam's version. Stevens ends with the final words in the refrain ("child, girl") and lets the decay of the last instrumental notes fade, offering a sense of closure in the diminishing sound. Sweetnam's ends much more abruptly; after "child, girl" (of which "girl" is only sung by the harmony track) there is nothing. It can be argued that this is not an appeal to the subjective set, but I would go farther and argue that it is simply an ineffective one, and an ineffective ending altogether. While one may say that it provides a bookend to a song that began as abruptly, I believe that while the beginning is sudden, it still contains a strong introductory element (and lasts a full measure). Sweetnam's cover ends no differently than any of the refrains in her version, and leaves the audience with an almost total lack of closure, especially considering the lack of fulfillment of the phrase. This is another area where more development of materials found in the objective set would have better served the purpose Sweetnam desired, no matter what that purpose was.

Fourthly, Sweetnam fashions another excellent inducement of the subjective set by using phrase ambiguities in select areas of the cover. After the eight drum hits that begin the piece, the structure follows that of Stevens'. Sweetnam replaces Stevens' opening "la la las" with "fa la las" , using the sense of force created by the articulation of an "F" sound to drive the phrase forward. Stevens begins with two phrases of this idea, ending each on the downbeat of a bar. In Sweetnam's interpretation, she enacts the same structure, while simultaneously beginning a second identical phrase offset by a beat so that it ends on beat two of the final measure, one beat after the first phrase. Not only does this ambiguity shake the expectation of a listener and therefore increase the sense of anticipation, it also foreshadows the emphasis of beat two that will become so important in later sections of the song.

The entire introductory section is also comprised of material that foreshadows the breakdown/bridge that follows the second verse. What is particularly interesting about this breakdown is that it puts to use both the subjective and objective sets toward a common goal. The breakdown uses the aforementioned phrase ambiguity in much the same way that the introduction does, only in this instance it does not wait for the second phrase to introduce the offset portion; the ambiguity is ubiquitous and more integral to the structure. It also expands the idea of a de-emphasized beat, dropping accompanimental figures on beats two, three and four in the first two bars, essentially magnifying the de-emphasized beat idea. This, at first, appears to be purely a utilization of the objective set, taking a prevalent idea from the song's refrain (and, to a lesser extent, introduction) and expanding upon it in a developmental section. Considering, however, that the very idea of this de-emphasized beat is highly dependent on and totally avails itself of the subjective set, this factor cannot be ignored in discussing the effectiveness of this section of the work. On a surface level, it is the objective set that makes the breakdown so successful, but the factors used objectively are wholly influenced by previous decisions that appeal to an audience's prior prejudices.

This extraordinary approach to covering songs merits further discussion. Sweetnam has used tactics that, if pursued in more detail by other artists, could offer an entirely new way of thinking about re-interpreting songs with which the general public is familiar, and about re-shaping a listener's reaction not only to his or her favorite music, but to his or her self. This can be, as Sweetnam has demonstrated, accomplished through careful thought or analysis of just what about the energies of an original song gratifies an audience, and crafting of the local energies of a cover to compellingly draw attention to those subtle fluctuations (or, in an interesting twist, attempt to break down or work against the experiential cycles of the original!). Compared to the original, Sweetnam's "Wild World" is the next level; a sort of "rate of rate of change" graph of Stevens' experiential patterns. Were Sweetnam to have pushed her empirical scrutiny to an even higher degree, the effect on an audience could be stunning, although the actual music, becoming more and more stretched by these sophisticated parametric alterations, might become so disparate from the original as to limit the number of listeners that would actually take the time to comprehend these new levels. To reconcile this consideration would be a balance that only a truly thoughtful and experienced musician could achieve, but such an accomplishment could provide a very clear window into the future of popular music.

NOTES:
[1]Stockhausen, Karlheinz. "Structure and Experiential Time." Die Reihe 2 (1955): 64-74.

[2] Tenney, James. "META (+) HODOS: A Phenomenology of Twentieth-Century Musical Materials and an Approach to the Study of Form." New Orleans: Inter-American Institute for Musical Research, 1964.

[3] I realize the apparent cultural disparity between the genre of music I am analyzing and the intensely academic theories I am using to analyze it. I believe that a) it is perfectly logical and fruitful to apply Stockhausen's and Tenney's theories on music to the popular genre, and b) that these ideas are not too obscure for a pop audience generally unfamiliar with musical academia to grasp. While it is certainly true that, in general, pop artists are not concerned (at least consciously) with the tactics I am describing, the same could certainly be said for many of the composers analyzed by such theorists as Stockhausen and Tenney. A musical outcome does not necessarily reflect the artist's intention, and vice versa. Regardless, theorists dealing with audience perception must be primarily concerned with the outcome.

[4]See note [1].

[5]A slightly different but no less compelling discussion of these issues can be found in Gerard Grisey's article "Tempus ex Machina". (Grisey, Gerard. "Tempus ex Machina: A composer's reflections on musical time." Contemporary Music Review 2 (1987): 239-275.)

[6] Here might be well placed a mention of the literal opening bars of the song: eight accented snare and bass drum eighth-notes followed immediately and abruptly by the "actual" introduction. This acts, marvelously, as a simultaneous obfuscator and de-obfuscator of the principles above: a de-obfuscator in that it presents, in its most basic form, the tempo of the song, "priming" the audience for what should be expected, and an obfuscator in that it is such an obscure, startling introduction when compared to the Stevens version that any "priming" effect it may have had is assuredly lost to its peculiarity; it may even leave the listener less prepared to accept the new tempo than had it been omitted.

[7]Along with heightened anticipation comes both a level of expectation and a level of anticipation of whether that expectation will be fulfilled, along with (to a smaller extent) both levels of this second anticipation, along with both levels of this third anticipation, and so forth. This layering of anticipations has an accelerating effect on experiential time; time seems to go faster.

[8] It is significant that the refrain is the only part of the song (excluding the climactic final verse) that is harmonized; as the part of the original piece most likely be mimicked by the audience, its parametric intensity is increased in the vocal part (with a more involved harmony) in order to further evoke that aspect of experientialism.

[9] See note [2], p. 13.

[10] Grundgestalt: "Fundamental concept underlying a musical work, the features of which influence and determine specific ideas within the work itself."
(Epstein, David. Beyond Orpheus: Studies in Musical Structure. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1979.)

Improvisation in honor of Martin Iddon

2007-11-03T19:10:00.000-07:00

properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably properly probably pro[[[ly pro[[[ly pro[[[ly pro[[[ly pro[[[ly pro[[[ly [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ babperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabperbabper
prolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyprolyproly
pppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp
yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
PROP-PER PROP-PER PROP-BER
PROB-BAB PROB-BAB PROB-BAB PROB-BAB
PROP-PER PROP-PER PROP-PER
PROB-BAB PROB-PAB PROB-BAB
PROPBER PROPBER PROBER PROBAPLY PROPBABER PROBPERB PROBEAPER PROBELYR PEROEAPROLERY

RPYLBRPYBRPLBYRPYBLRPYBRPYLBRPYLPRYLBPRYLBPRYBLRPYBPRLYPRYLPRYLPRYLBPRBLYPRBLYPRLYBPRBYLPRYLBPRBYLPRLBYPRLBYPRLBYPRLBYPRLBYPRLBYPRLBYPRLBYRBLYPRYLBPRYBLRPBYLPRBYLPRYLRPYBLPRYLBPRYBLRLYBPRYLBPRLYBPRLYBPRYLBRPYLRPYLBRPBLYRPYBPRLYBPRLBYPRLBYRPLYPBRLPYRLBYPLRBYPRLYBPRLBYPRLYBRPLYBRPLYBRPLYBRPYLBRPLYBRPLYBPRLYBRPLYBRPYBRPLYBRPLYBRPYLBRPYLBRPYLBRLPYLBRPYLBRPYBRPYLBRPLBYPRLYBRLPYBPRLBYPLR

P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B P B
______________________________________________________________________________
p

p

p

p

p

p

p

p

pro

bpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbppbpbb

ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly
ly

:)

Pause for a Public Plea

2007-10-28T17:59:00.000-07:00

The visible classism, racism and sexism that have helped define human existence/society for pretty much ever is on a gradual decline, perhaps. We can may be able to all agree that in most arenas, as well as outside of them in the general area of human populations, it's better than it was(?). The evidence might be bright as a sort of hazy, smog-filled Los Angeles late afternoon. If nothing else, while institutional class-rac-sex-ism (hereafter CRSism) still runs rampant, the overt hatred that once was totally conspicuous is [just how glacially] slowly being squashed out, in some parts of the world, or not. But once in a while a misguided mass-public-directed case comes along that just flies in the face of all that (what would seem to be) progress with sneering audacity, decadent patriarchical indulgence and complete social disregard. The latest Heineken commercial is one of these cases.

(N.B., I refuse to embed this commercial, and it pains me to even have to link to it and possibly abet its viewing by MORE of the public. If you haven't seen it, though, it might be hard to follow my description.)

Sexism is everywhere, EVVVERRRRYYYYWWHHEEERRREEEEE, not only on television but in literally every incarnation of media. Most of the time it takes on much subtler forms, like the outfit on a weather woman, the characterization of a ditzy vampire victim or the very existence of cheerleading (at least in its current state). Some may argue that this kind of sexism is much more dangerous: Its understated (sort of) nature being more apt to seep into the subconscious, quietly informing ideas, decisions and discriminations of an unsuspecting, well-meaning dude (or dudette!), whereas overt sexism is easier to identify and dismiss. This author tends to disagree; America is a culture of indulgence, and though this sort of "institutional" sexism is at an unacceptable level, the tendency of Americans to put up weak-if-any resistance to the temptations of convenience and satiation is too great not to expect. And sexist ideas are about either convenience, satiation and power OR the convenience and satiation of those IN power.

I don't know if this Heineken commercial has a name or anything, but it manages to touch on nearly every aspect of female objectification in American society:

Woman as automaton: a being that does not think for itself but acts according to a prescribed "program", symbolizing a woman acting according to socially prescribed behaviors/stereotypes.
Woman as sexual object: the woman in the commercial is scantily clad for no utilitarian reason; only to scintillate.
Woman as servant: this robot's only function appears to be to dispense and serve beer, indicating that women only have limited "functions" and should adhere to them. She also performs these functions with a fluid, effortless cadence, further reinforcing the ridiculous "instinctual" stereotypes.
Woman as blissfully ignorant/content: her facial expression never changes, indicating an inability or lack of desire to experience different emotions. Also, her face is fixed in a subdued smile, indicating total contentment with her function.
Women as common and ubiquitous: towards the end of the commercial, the robot pops open, "spawning" two new robots. This casts women as dime-a-dozen vassals, the preciousness of whose lives should be not be highly regarded.
Women as anti-individualistic: the two new robots are identical to her in appearance and manner of movement, reflecting the idea that women are interchangeable so long as they perform their prescribed functions.

And this is all in just 30 seconds.

Some may take issue with my analysis of the commercial, claiming that these associations are the product of hypersensitivity, are overblown and in reality harmless. Some may claim that while a woman is being objectified physically in order to create a desire for a product, the forms of derision that I describe above are not likely to be recognized by most audiences, or if they are, the audiences will ignore or look past them.

To the first criticism I would respond that Americans are bombarded with images like these every day, for much of the day, and that the gender wage gap is still a very real and dire situation in the United States. I strongly believe in a correlation between the two, and would challenge the reader for a separate hypothesis that does not fall back on the outdated ideas of genetic inferiority. And the gender wage gap is only one example of women's subordinate status in American society, albeit the most tangible. Few informed individuals would deny the existence of many others.

In response to the second criticism I would refer to my earlier statement on the tendency toward indulgence of American viewers, and also to the more recent statement about the sheer saturation of media with these kinds of images and ideas. The ubiquity of the images creates (or perhaps is symptomatic of) a societal acceptance, and those that see this societal acceptance are far more likely to engage in that indulgent thinking. One only needs to glance at the user comments found below any of the video's instances on YouTube.

Another common criticism to the ideas I present here is the assumption that if a man were being treated with such objectification I would not be so moved to critical commentary, which would imply some sort of ethical double-standard. To cast men in such a manner, however, would not correspond with obvious stereotypes that are detrimental to society; I am not asserting that this commercial is creating a stigmatization of women, I am saying that it is reinforcing many that already exist. To attempt the same scenario with a male subject would not have nearly the same effect, consciously or subconsciously.

The crux of what I'm saying is this: Americans should not let this kind of crap continue. This commercial is only the most egregious example; there are countless others with more subdued CRSism (I told you I'd use it again): this commercial relies so heavily on stereotypical black speech and humor that it equates to a modern minstrel show (and that's not even the one from the same franchise that makes fun of how Asians talk, which I couldn't find).

Many are skeptical of small-scale protests, but I for one am not going to be drinking Heineken for a long time. Being vigilante in the arenas of CRSism takes a lot of effort, a lot of introspection, and a complete rejection of the temptations to fall back on convenience, satiation and power. (See the Wallace paragraph in post #1 about a Democratic Spirit.) All forms of media transmission, even commercials, are making some sort of statement about society, even if it's very small. One must be extremely mindful of these messages, which are assuredly endorsed by whomever is purveying them, when making daily decisions regarding consumption, politics, speech, humor and much more.

A Quick Explanatory Post About A Current Project For Two Strings

2007-10-26T16:43:00.000-07:00

-In the early stages of post-pre-composition, catalogue (for future reference, of course) what timbres, dynamics, articulations and strings are associated with particular contours of glissandi(s). When these associations become “accepted normalizations”, begin to break them up (becoming further and further removed (in conjunction with other disassemblies (listed below (!)))). For (an) example, see^, below.

-(A disassembly that is in conjunction with the earlier(() Make a general move from glissandi that are loosely optimized practically and aurally for strings (i.e. that “lie well”) to those that are slightly more complex practically and aurally for strings (i.e. that do not “lie well” so much practically or aurally).

-Towards the beginning of the piece, present approximately c.~30’’-long ideas_slash_gestures separated by demarcations of some sort (a series of gestures starkly different from the “presentations” but eerily [read: prodigiously (regarded works of literature)] similar to each other). This very |sectional form| should draw attention to the current “optimization” spoken of in the ^above stanza, in that the ideas are being presented almost as “exercises” (optimization + somewhat phlegmatic* presentation). This abbrev. form will also eventually undergo a dismantlement, leading to the presentation of the more complex gestures in a less inhibited context.

-After certain significant gestures, “echo” the gesture, but swapping the instrument parts. Swapping the instrument parts, “echo” the gesture, after certain significant gestures. Rather than execute the piece turning a deaf ear to the instrumentational indeterminacy, like an ostrich, call attention musically to the similarities and differences within the string family in their presentation of identical material.

C^. “Gliss 1” (1”-39”, part A): Covers nearly whole string; on highest string; no breaks (continued up/down) but a few “bumps”; louder at the bottom, quieter at the top.

“Gliss 2” (27”-, part B): All up, all the time; a bit louder; pressure bowing at the beginning.

* 1. not easily excited to action or display of emotion; apathetic; sluggish. As in: “A common cold left Ian apathetic, sluggish, and phlegmatic.”

The First Blog Post

2007-10-24T16:21:00.000-07:00

Hello, America. Or, as Frank Zappa (durch Ray Collins) put it at the beginning of seminal second album (of the Mothers [of Invention, although in the interest of Zappa's original intention in naming his band, the words "of Invention" will be put in brackets, along with several others (words, that is)]) Absolutely Free, "Hello, America."

What, you may ask, is this blog? What, I may answer, I may ask myself the same thing. The idea for this blog sprang from a description I made of a piece of music I am currently writing, which is to say (i.e., that is), writing at the time of this writing, or for you literalists in here, 2007 A.D., 24 October, 4:26 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, La Jolla, California. That will be my first (second) blog post.

It was by that description inspired because I wrote it creatively and liked what came out, and will try to do it again. My past blogs, both and not under pseudonyms, have failed, usually due to lack of updating. I'll try not to let that happen again.

Some of my biographical informations have already become apparent: I live in La Jolla, California, which is a northern suburb of San Diego. Those of you that are temporally/historically savvy will realize that during the writing of this writing, at the time and date specified above, large parts of San Diego county (the county this) are on fire. Not me though. I attend school at the University of California, San Diego (hereafter UCSD), studying for the literal (or at least objective, in the eyes of very, very small and esoteric parts of society) mastery of Music Composition. A lot of what I talk about will be music. Other things I like to talk about/touch on are history, current events, both, sports, nature, and issues, as well as language(s). My name is Ian and I was born in Rochester, NY in 1984, graduated from Irondequoit HS in 2002 and Ithaca College in 2006. Here's my MySpace page.

Speaking of language, I am very interested in language(s), at this point particularly English und German, although who knows for the future (or in the future, as the tense may be). I like playing games with all those languages, which is mostly what the blog will due. My foray into this analysis of sound is inspired by Monty Python (to whom the title of this blog is a tribute), Bob Pierzak, the boys over at firejoemorgan.com and David Foster Wallace. I have read little of Wallace's, but there is an essay on usage that was particularly driving, and I will reproduce my favorite part of it here:

Issues of tradition vs. egalitarianism in US English are at root political issues and can be effectively addressed only in what this article hereby terms a "Democratic Spirit." A Democratic Spirit is one that combines rigor and humility, i.e., passionate conviction plus a sedulous respect for the convictions of others. As any American knows, this is a difficult spirit to cultivate and maintain, particularly when it comes to issues you feel strongly about. Equally tough is a DS's criterion of 100 percent intellectual integrity -- you have to be willing to look honestly at yourself and at your motives for believing what you believe, and to do it more or less continually.

I almost titled the blog "A Democratic Spirit", but wished to avoid the certain political associations entailed. This is the kind of argumentative method I hope to emulate in my future years. Another way of putting it is playing what my music cognition professor (a man very respected in his field, and who thus will not have his name reprinted here) calls "The Believing Game" (also a potential name for this blog), which is the antonym to "The Doubting Game" in argumentative discourse. Maybe I'll expand more up-all-on that later.

I guess you could call this a humor/language/music/analysis blog. Most of the posts will elaborate upon or (e)invoke the style displayed in this post, but on occasionally, I will be reproducing actual analyses I've done for school or other publications that take on a more rigorously academic tone. Speaking of usage, I'm a usage/grammar/syntax nut, so if I fuck anything up, TELL ME, and I'll either change it or not. If it's pretty obvious it was probably on purpose, as you can see.

So, onward.