> > i believe the common goal of techno is to create music that hasn't been > heard before. > i've heard plenty of artists say the same thing most notably juan atkins and > jeff mills. > is this not enough of a unifying definition and a common goal for ya? : ) >
No, I am not saticfied with that, it would imply that we are pretty boring and lazy. No, there is causation for everything, things just don't happen for the hell of it. There is something to keep in mind, there is a global scene in which embodies techno, the rave scene. There is definate reason behind that scene, it is not existing for the hell of it, there is very real sociological catelysts behind it, and again, there is real reason for the rave scene clentching onto techno like it has... Another thing, artists often disregard more scientific explainations in that science isn't all that artsy, and inderstandably so. But I propose that this is why Jeff Mills and others have complete skirted more scientific explainations, its not art to do so... And so be it, and visa versa, it is my desire to interpret what is happening. BTW, we have gone nearly 15 years with barely any analysis... and analysis is *definately* needed when a movement overtakes the entire globe, almost all authority figures are scared, so on and so forth... you cant just brush it off as a social fluke... darw_n "create, demonstrate, toneshift..." http://www.mp3.com/stations/clevelandunderground http://www.mp3.com/darw_n http://www.sphereproductions.com/topic/Darwin.html http://www.mannequinodd.com
