Quote:
Originally Posted by Piss Me Off
Well you're always going to have trouble with questioning artist's intent in song writing. You could accuse any mainstream act for writing music for the wrong reasons simply because they're making money.
But again, bands motives aren't a massive factor with me. I'm pretty sure a few of my favourite acts are money-hungry bastards but i enjoy the music so i don't care.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr dave
it all depends on how the individual defines music and art.
once an individual has reached the the point of being able to define those two elements independently of external validation the idea of an idealogical debate as to the underlying motivations of other people's music becomes rather banal. you will either like something or not - period. unless you personally know the musician's being discussed NOTHING is being debated beyond hearsay and personal opinion, which is ultimately little more than an ego stroking competition.
it typically seems that while an individual is still attempting to reach the above point in their personal development the typical 'band X is better than band Y because of this ideal' argument generally serves to cover up other insecurities about their views on music, art, and society and their lack of ability to define it for themselves in a way they can truly believe in.
|
As for Mr. Dave's last point there, i've been trying unsuccessfully to say that for years.
But speaking of "what people will think of you", to both of you i'd suggest that its at least subconciously what you're doing with this question. Too often on these forums we get ripped apart with the argument "well that isn't true because [example A] is an exception to that" and then we go about discussing much of nothing.
But I'm not asking to discuss any given bands reasons for writing, think more abstractly. If a band who stole every move in the book from someone else, would they be writing music,
in your opinion for the right reasons.
Ignore what they think, or that its ambigous, or subjective, or irrelevent.
I'm asking
you. Can someone with no original ideas be considered just as right
in your opinion, as an originator.
This will likely ruin it all but lets say for example (and please don't drag these acts into the discussion), could a Black Crows be as artisticlly correct as a David Bowie?