A beautiful song.
All that needs to be said, really.
Sq.
Wednesday, 30 September 2009
Monday, 21 September 2009
The Obvious Music Post.
So, you may or may not have heard about the emerging gang-style war between recording artists over the File-Sharing 'problem'.
On the 'For' side, we have a band of heavyweights including Blur (namely drummer Dave Rowntree), Annie Lennox, Robbie Williams and Radiohead. They have 'Featured Artists Coalition' studded onto the back of their leather jackets, and cruise around town with a megaphone, screaming 'New laws on file-sharing will alienate fans and break down the relationship between artist and consumer'. However, they don't say 'Don't buy our music, filesharing is all good!' - that would be absurd. They just don't want file sharers to be booted off the internet by proposed laws to suspend connections for serial offenders.
On the other side of town, we've got the 'Against' crew; they, as yet, don't have a snappy name like the FAC, but they boast pop giant Lily Allen as the leader of their gang, with prize idiot James Blunt popping out from behind her occasionally, going 'Yeah...' and 'You better watch out, guys'. They believe that file sharing is damaging to the music industry. They believe that it steals opportunity from up-and-coming artists.
Lily Allen owes her career to the internet. She was one of a trolley-full of MySpace prodigies, discounting the famous parentage she almost definitely benefitted from. It is only now that she earns money from record sales that she chooses to turn her back on its influence on the industry.
One story which has been used to illustrate their point is that of Taio Cruz. The massively popular, number one R&B artist's album was leaked three weeks early. As a result, it was nearly pulled by the record company. For me, this shows two things: that his record company, as only the most naive consumer would deny, do not value his material above profit. Now, I am not to say whether Taio Cruz is talented, whether his work is artistically valuable (but let's just say I don't really think it is) - his record company should not have even considered pulling the album, whether it was going to lose money or not. Oh, and the second thing it shows? The music industry is, again, as we all knew, run by the pockets of people who don't know or like music.
Who knows who'll win? All I know is, I am terrified of the effect that the money-driven music industry is visibly having on popular music.
Back at the start of the start of their career, top-notch art rockers Art Brut sang this slicing lyric:
"Honey pie, I don't know when it started
Just stop buying your albums from the supermarkets
They only sell things that have charted
And Art Brut?
Well we've only just started"
Now, it seems, only the supermarket artists are worthy of a spot as recording artists. Don't blame file-sharing. Blame the guys who decide whether a CD gets made or not. Blame the guys who decide to drop an artistically credible and loved band for not shifting enough units. Clamping down on filesharing won't cleanse the industry, if anything it will just propel label execs to look even more towards the potentially higher profits. Which, by the way, the artists only recieve a tiny fraction of.
FAC FTW.
Sq.
On the 'For' side, we have a band of heavyweights including Blur (namely drummer Dave Rowntree), Annie Lennox, Robbie Williams and Radiohead. They have 'Featured Artists Coalition' studded onto the back of their leather jackets, and cruise around town with a megaphone, screaming 'New laws on file-sharing will alienate fans and break down the relationship between artist and consumer'. However, they don't say 'Don't buy our music, filesharing is all good!' - that would be absurd. They just don't want file sharers to be booted off the internet by proposed laws to suspend connections for serial offenders.
On the other side of town, we've got the 'Against' crew; they, as yet, don't have a snappy name like the FAC, but they boast pop giant Lily Allen as the leader of their gang, with prize idiot James Blunt popping out from behind her occasionally, going 'Yeah...' and 'You better watch out, guys'. They believe that file sharing is damaging to the music industry. They believe that it steals opportunity from up-and-coming artists.
Lily Allen owes her career to the internet. She was one of a trolley-full of MySpace prodigies, discounting the famous parentage she almost definitely benefitted from. It is only now that she earns money from record sales that she chooses to turn her back on its influence on the industry.
One story which has been used to illustrate their point is that of Taio Cruz. The massively popular, number one R&B artist's album was leaked three weeks early. As a result, it was nearly pulled by the record company. For me, this shows two things: that his record company, as only the most naive consumer would deny, do not value his material above profit. Now, I am not to say whether Taio Cruz is talented, whether his work is artistically valuable (but let's just say I don't really think it is) - his record company should not have even considered pulling the album, whether it was going to lose money or not. Oh, and the second thing it shows? The music industry is, again, as we all knew, run by the pockets of people who don't know or like music.
Who knows who'll win? All I know is, I am terrified of the effect that the money-driven music industry is visibly having on popular music.
Back at the start of the start of their career, top-notch art rockers Art Brut sang this slicing lyric:
"Honey pie, I don't know when it started
Just stop buying your albums from the supermarkets
They only sell things that have charted
And Art Brut?
Well we've only just started"
Now, it seems, only the supermarket artists are worthy of a spot as recording artists. Don't blame file-sharing. Blame the guys who decide whether a CD gets made or not. Blame the guys who decide to drop an artistically credible and loved band for not shifting enough units. Clamping down on filesharing won't cleanse the industry, if anything it will just propel label execs to look even more towards the potentially higher profits. Which, by the way, the artists only recieve a tiny fraction of.
FAC FTW.
Sq.
Thursday, 17 September 2009
Poster boys and 90's toys.
It feels strange that I am re-awakening my love for Thunderbirds and Gerry Anderson productions.
The fact that they were made in the 60's, made a comeback around 1999 to the early 2000's, and were even remade into a dire modern film with 'real people' surely shows their enduring appeal. My brother was obsessed with all things Gerry Anderson, right down to Fireball XL5 and Joe 90 around 2000 and I, living in the same house as him, ended up watching a lot of the programmes and playing with a lot of the toys (don't tell anyone, I would have been 10 and 11 at the time - far too old to be zooming Thunderbird 2 around Tracy Island).
My favourite was, at the time, probably Stingray, or Captain Scarlet. However, now I'm a bit older, the black and white retro sophistication of Fireball XL5 appeals a bit more, while the others do still stand as great kids' TV. The always menacing villains, from the classic 'Hood' to the futuristic, almost visionary Mysterons (see below for the Portishead song of the same name) and the peripheral characters such as Lady Penelope and Parker, as well as the Captains of all colours in 'Scarlet', made these expertly made, marionette-driven programmes seem all the more real and exciting. It wasn't the same as Disney Pixar, it was personal and the characters of the makers shone through. Who cares if the mouths don't move properly? Who cares if they make the most of hand shots, because they use real hands? Who cares if sometimes you can see the strings?
Life's not perfect, these programmes just reflected that. Until the end, that is, when of course the day would always be saved by our heroes. But who'd watch next week if we all died at the end?
Sq.
The fact that they were made in the 60's, made a comeback around 1999 to the early 2000's, and were even remade into a dire modern film with 'real people' surely shows their enduring appeal. My brother was obsessed with all things Gerry Anderson, right down to Fireball XL5 and Joe 90 around 2000 and I, living in the same house as him, ended up watching a lot of the programmes and playing with a lot of the toys (don't tell anyone, I would have been 10 and 11 at the time - far too old to be zooming Thunderbird 2 around Tracy Island).
My favourite was, at the time, probably Stingray, or Captain Scarlet. However, now I'm a bit older, the black and white retro sophistication of Fireball XL5 appeals a bit more, while the others do still stand as great kids' TV. The always menacing villains, from the classic 'Hood' to the futuristic, almost visionary Mysterons (see below for the Portishead song of the same name) and the peripheral characters such as Lady Penelope and Parker, as well as the Captains of all colours in 'Scarlet', made these expertly made, marionette-driven programmes seem all the more real and exciting. It wasn't the same as Disney Pixar, it was personal and the characters of the makers shone through. Who cares if the mouths don't move properly? Who cares if they make the most of hand shots, because they use real hands? Who cares if sometimes you can see the strings?
Life's not perfect, these programmes just reflected that. Until the end, that is, when of course the day would always be saved by our heroes. But who'd watch next week if we all died at the end?
Sq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)