> I have to wonder... are people here serious that a musician's art is > entirely independant of the artist?
Well, assuming I know what you mean, I would say yes, that's why I think our music is a historical moment. Seriously, can you listen to Marco Carolo's "danger" and identify, let alone relate, to his true emotion and reasoning behind that work? About the only descriptive terms you can use in looking at such stripped down works is driving, delicate, dark or light, And thats actually pushing it in my opinion. Take this Danger track I previously mentioned, I tend to feel uplifted by it, but others feel angered by it. Also because of it's repetition and raw construct, I tend to hear toneshifts that fluctuate in only minor/major shifts, while someone else may hear an entirely different and complex pattern. So not only is stripped Techno pivotal in that it gives the audience the same importance, if not more, than the artist who created the peice, but it also becomes a unique song/track to each individual. We don't need to know the aspirations behind the track, in fact if we knew the motivation of Marco, we would then be forever corrupted in listening to it, we would forever be bogging ourselves down with trying to "see" and "understand" his pain/joy behind it, and we are often way wrong in doing that. I remember being at a opening for a painter here in Cleveland, and he laughed at the people trying to figure out what he felt, he told me it simply looked pleasing, yes there is emotion, but it was _his_ emotion, not the viewers... > > Music made for people by people. why not simply cut that to "music made for people" darw_n "create, demonstrate, toneshift..." http://www.mp3.com/darw_n http://www.sphereproductions.com/topic/Darwin.html http://www.mannequinodd.com
