bigchiefbc wrote: OK, but if you don't care if people like it or not, then why bother performing it live in front of people, or releasing it on a CD or on the internet. The only reason to do those things is that you want an audience to hear it.
Your right, I love gracing an audience with my supreme talent and their approval and adoration is my salvation. It took your persistence to make me realize that and I thank you.
Oh come on, I'm not trying to be a dick here. I'm just trying to parse this out logically.
I know, it just seemed as if we had gotten to the point of repeating ourselves. I didn't want this to escalate to all caps.
Achtane wrote:FUZZ ALL DAY MAN FUZZ IS GOD ALL OTHER EFFECTS ARE SHIT
Caesar wrote:Dude, can you get the fuck out of my b/s/t thread with your bullshit.
PumpkinPieces wrote: This isn't America, this is I Love Fuzz.
Mudfuzz wrote:Remember when we were all just a bunch of weirdos that liked fucked up shit and not just a bunch of nerds buying bling to impress each other online?
bigchiefbc wrote: OK, but if you don't care if people like it or not, then why bother performing it live in front of people, or releasing it on a CD or on the internet. The only reason to do those things is that you want an audience to hear it.
Your right, I love gracing an audience with my supreme talent and their approval and adoration is my salvation. It took your persistence to make me realize that and I thank you.
Oh come on, I'm not trying to be a dick here. I'm just trying to parse this out logically.
I know, it just seemed as if we had gotten to the point of repeating ourselves. I didn't want this to escalate to all caps.
Gearmond wrote:the very nature of music/art is that it requires a creator and an audience. for all intents and purposes, one cannot be the other.
if you argue "fuck the critics, i make music for myself" that is a logically fallacious argument with the above premise, seeing as it is regarded as true for pretty much any philosopher on the matter, and has been for quite some time, and has yet to come to any significant opposition. a painting no one has seen but the creator is a painting, but it is not art. likewise with music.
I make music that I like to make, but I'd like to have enough people who enjoy it to feel like it matters.
From what I can tell your post is attempting to define who is and who is not an artist based on whether or not they present their work to an audience. I think that is irrelevant in this thread.
It is quite possible to perform music for yourself in front of others.
Saying " "fuck the critics, i make music for myself" doesn't mean "I'm going to write and perform music that I like and everyone else will dislike". I think just by chance, if you perform music that you wrote by yourself and for yourself in front of and audience, a percentage of that audience will appreciate it. Where the "fuck the critics, i make music for myself" part comes in is whether or not you care about the percentage of the audience that didn't enjoy it and if you change your music accordingly. Maybe a better way to say it is " It's OK if not everyone likes my music, I made it for myself with like minded people in mind".
Also, I don't think every one plays music or paints for the satisfaction of others. A lot of art forms are used for relaxation among other things.
i think you're assuming that i'm saying "make art for other people" which is not what i'm saying. i'm saying the fundamental requirement for art is that an audience must view it as such. and its perfectly relevant because thats exactly what the poll asked.
art doesn't need to be made for other people to see, but other people must see it and acknowledge it as such before its art. and the fact that you needed to add the "with like minded people in mind" clinches it. :P
if they do it for relaxation, its just relaxation, meditation, ritual, etc. until they have an audience.
Gearmond wrote:the very nature of music/art is that it requires a creator and an audience. for all intents and purposes, one cannot be the other.
if you argue "fuck the critics, i make music for myself" that is a logically fallacious argument with the above premise, seeing as it is regarded as true for pretty much any philosopher on the matter, and has been for quite some time, and has yet to come to any significant opposition. a painting no one has seen but the creator is a painting, but it is not art. likewise with music.
I make music that I like to make, but I'd like to have enough people who enjoy it to feel like it matters.
From what I can tell your post is attempting to define who is and who is not an artist based on whether or not they present their work to an audience. I think that is irrelevant in this thread.
It is quite possible to perform music for yourself in front of others.
Saying " "fuck the critics, i make music for myself" doesn't mean "I'm going to write and perform music that I like and everyone else will dislike". I think just by chance, if you perform music that you wrote by yourself and for yourself in front of and audience, a percentage of that audience will appreciate it. Where the "fuck the critics, i make music for myself" part comes in is whether or not you care about the percentage of the audience that didn't enjoy it and if you change your music accordingly. Maybe a better way to say it is " It's OK if not everyone likes my music, I made it for myself with like minded people in mind".
Also, I don't think every one plays music or paints for the satisfaction of others. A lot of art forms are used for relaxation among other things.
i think you're assuming that i'm saying "make art for other people" which is not what i'm saying. i'm saying the fundamental requirement for art is that an audience must view it as such. and its perfectly relevant because thats exactly what the poll asked.
art doesn't need to be made for other people to see, but other people must see it and acknowledge it as such before its art. and the fact that you needed to add the "with like minded people in mind" clinches it. :P
if they do it for relaxation, its just relaxation, meditation, ritual, etc. until they have an audience.
MiddleEarthCrisis wrote:Your right, I love gracing an audience with my supreme talent and their approval and adoration is my salvation. It took your persistence to make me realize that and I thank you.
Achtane wrote:FUZZ ALL DAY MAN FUZZ IS GOD ALL OTHER EFFECTS ARE SHIT
Caesar wrote:Dude, can you get the fuck out of my b/s/t thread with your bullshit.
PumpkinPieces wrote: This isn't America, this is I Love Fuzz.
Mudfuzz wrote:Remember when we were all just a bunch of weirdos that liked fucked up shit and not just a bunch of nerds buying bling to impress each other online?
i suppose that i'm doing it more for me than for the great wide world outside. if nothing else, i'm trying to satisfy my own standards of "correct" in terms of parts, arrangements, etc. etc. rather than working to a perceived genre or market standard; i'm probably as picky or more than those criteria anyway.
but do i want other people to hear it, and ideally like it? well, certainly. otherwise i could just lie around in bed and make this shit up in my mind and save all the effort, expense, and time involved in buying instruments, learning to play them, and all that other annoying stuff that takes up time i could spend sleeping and eating Cocoa Puffs. if one writes a song which one feels communicates something effectively, one wishes someone else to hear it assuming that the communication is considered valid. otherwise it's just a wank, isn't it?
In girum imus nocte et consumimur igni
FIFTY YEARS OF SCARING THE CHILDREN 1970-2020--and i'm not done yet
A good deal of the shows ive played have been shut down before the 2nd song was over because id start a fight or wipe my ass with the flag or spit on someones face or because "its just noise"
D.o.S. wrote:Yeah I have a Godsmack shirt
jwar wrote:Not to be a dick or anything but My Bloody Valentine sucks ass.
My whole life is a shitpost. One. Big. Shit. Post.
SPACERITUAL wrote:A good deal of the shows ive played have been shut down before the 2nd song was over because id start a fight or wipe my ass with the flag or spit on someones face or because "its just noise"
mathias wrote:one more spot for band left in ILFest.. May I recommend the group "SPACERITUAL and theAvondon have a fight on stage with swords"? viewtopic.php?f=150&t=16714&start=135#p248307
I'll even wire the swords to contact mics so we can run them through fuzz and delays..
If we didn't live on opposite ends of the south.....
FORD/GRIGGS DUET FOR DAMBLTOAN OP. 1 LIVE IN MILWAUKEE
D.o.S. wrote:Yeah I have a Godsmack shirt
jwar wrote:Not to be a dick or anything but My Bloody Valentine sucks ass.
My whole life is a shitpost. One. Big. Shit. Post.
