writing about music is like dancing about architecture?
seriously though. it can very difficult writing about instrumental music
unless readers have a common point of reference. onomatopoeia is a good
way of handling things, i think, because it's the only form of writing -
or words - that conjure sound in the mind's ear of the reader. music
writing has to invent words for sounds that are beyond the standard
lexicon of language. onomatopoeia - to a certain extent - knows no one
specific language, just like music itself. CLICK. KABOOM. BZZT. TSST.
BLIP.
magazines - like grooves, for instance - are incredibly formulaic. and
way too self-conscious - and 'cool' - to actually articulate any kind of
passion or excitement. in their desire to be objective and journalistic,
they leave no room for what music actually means and how fucking
mindblowing it can actually be. there is no sense of joy. only hard cold
facts, mostly centred around everything other than the music, i.e. where
the artist was born, who they played with, who they're dating, what
their influences are, the names of tracks, the gear they use...
writing about music should be musical. it should be poetic. it should
use rhyme and metre. and alliteration. and others forms of musical
writing. i even do my academic writing this way much to the chagrin of
the so-called academics. writing about microsound, for instance, should
be without capitals. the medium should mirror the message. check out
this site for some good music writing:
http://www.wavelengthtoronto.com/
it's not microsound, but it never fails to bring a smile to my face.
kodwo eshun is another good example. just as we try to make new sounds
up, he makes up new words to address those sounds. there really isn't
any other way to go about it. english, or any other language for that
matter, simply isn't sophisticated enough to articulate what is
essentially a sound experience. listening to music and reading words are
incredibly different imaginative experiences, in the same way that a
script is not a film nor is it theatre. music is sensual. reading is
intellectual. granted, they tread into each other's territories
occasionally, but they are entirely different modes of communication. i
rarely read reviews. everytime i pick up grooves it makes me so mad. but
yet i still buy it. i applaud their efforts but it's pretty conservative
in terms of the format.
i think a more narrative approach is necessary. just as tracks are tiny
narratives. or sound landscapes. the writing should mirror the aesthetic
of the artist. nobody. uses. punctuation. creatively. tiny little words
for a tiny little music. even single
letters...ooplooplooplooplooplooplooploopl...
the question is: is writing about music simply informative (which it
usually tries to be) or can it be creative? can it be an art unto
itself?
g.
Adam Young wrote:
Has anyone else noticed how terribly articles and press materials and
things are written? Reviews, press, just about everything.. I'm no
professional myself but i've seen some pretty ridiculous stuff out
there. The number one thing I see is convoluted run-ons full of 88%
adjectives, among other things.
Anybody care to wager a guess why it's all so embarrassingly poor?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org