I appreciate S G Collins' YouTube videos. They have loads of good ideas and questions, and usually have some safe, mature conclusions. Although I like the idea of nuclear power, I like this sense of caution. There is a sensible argument in favor of nuclear energy — but it lives in a straitjacket.
0 Comments
Well, I hope so:As much as I love The Corporation...
I recently listened through the entire "Satanic Panic" episode of The Thinking Atheist. I enjoyed it because it brought back a lot of memories. Although I was pretty young when the Satanic Panic was actually taking place, I saw a lot of the aftermath. By the time I grew aware of it, most of the popular materials were dated and cheesy. The Thinking Atheist recently posted an entire episode based on the era. Of course, these sorts of fears and interests haven't disappeared. It's not exceptionally difficult to find remnants of the "Panic" on the Internet. YouTube has become a wonderful archive of all the ephemeral kitsch that should have disappeared long ago.
Each preacher would focus on something different: some would discuss Marilyn Manson's sensibilities; some would focus on backwards masking; some would focus on the "primitive" backbeat; some would focus on the unholy lives of rock and roll musicians. And there's always the famous Chick Tract where Satan assumes the role of a manager for a rock band and indoctrinates them into Satanism. Every once in awhile, a preacher gets up there and rants against rock and roll. There are websites that have been up since the early days of the Internet that explain the horrors of rock and roll. Like this one. But rock and roll stays rocking and evolves into other wild and crazy genres. They can't win. I mean, there's always something horrible to suggest about every genre of music. Although heavy metal and rock and roll are easy targets, as a teenager, I bought a record of meditative Orthodox chants and my mother expressed concern that we didn't know what they were saying or who they were praising; I've also heard that chanting puts you into a state that opens you to possession by demons and spirits. In other words, if you want it, Satan's gonna' find his way into everything if you let him go there. Besides, wouldn't it be fun to sing a bunch of songs in the tune of old hymns, while uttering utter obscenity and blasphemy? I'd love to do that, but I doubt I'll ever burn my precious time on something so self-indulgent. There's enough bloodlust and praise of human sacrifice in old hymns that I don't need to parody them. In the meantime, let's rock! I'd just like to point out that this week's episode of The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe is particularly good. Their little commentary on the Michiu Kaku interview was pleasant and reasonable, the ethical discussion about veganism was interesting and intelligent, and there seemed to be a lot of good, easy-to-use information. Learn with me! [UPDATE: I had some images here, but removed them for copyright's sake. 2015/12/04] I've seen a lot of material in the news about the tension between a creator's personal life and their creation:
I don't care about any of these people. If they've done these crimes, they should go through whatever process is necessary to convict them. Their celebrity status, no matter how limited, should not excuse them from criticism and abandonment. But what about their work? It seems that—as already mentioned—I should not support and perpetuate criminals' work. I shouldn't give R.Kelly credit for Trapped in the Closet when my support might whitewash his rape convictions; I shouldn't view Woody Allen films when it appears that it might support his messing-up-of-his-family; I shouldn't treat Bill Cosby as an "elder" when he clearly feels the need to exercise unnecessary power over women; I shouldn't support an anti-fraud podcast when the creator has admitted to a form of fraud. But I also think we should be able to separate the art from the artist. It feels slippery slope-ish. It feels like I'm going to have no media to use if I pick out all the bad stuff about everybody. Why should I allow art from people who don't show integrity? Because it's good art. Because I'm ignorant of most people's issues and have no way to know who I should support and who I shouldnt. I admit that I'm a subjective judge of how to separate the art from the artist, but I think it's much better to try to separate them than it is to not separate them. But it still doesn't sit right to just let it all slide. They made some good work; I have no reason to not enjoy the work. Is this a "grey" situation? Certainly. However, we navigate most of our lives through greyness, and what media doesn't cater to that realm? So I think I'll keep thinking I can separate the art from the artist, even if it may be a delusional endeavor. What about myself, however? What parts of my personal life might change the way people look at my music? What could people expose that might threaten my own art? Why should I expect people to enjoy my music in spite of my shortcomings?
Even moreso, as a teacher, could my own music call my professional standing into question? I know I have a couple sensual bits on the upcoming demos and even drop the word "shit" in "This is the Time." It's a little frightening to put my creative music out there when I'm a member of such a closely-watched professional group. |
Musician.
Teacher. Photographer. jeffnords ONLINE:
Bandcamp YouTube: Music+ jeffnords PLACEHOLDERS: (infrequent haunts) Amazon | DailyMotion DeviantArt | Duolingo | Flickr | FVRL | Kik LinkedIn | MeetUp | MySpace | Pinterest | Playstation | Reddit | Snapchat | SoundCloud Spotify | The Internet Archive Tinder | Tumblr | Twitter | Vimeo | VK | WattPad Archives
April 2024
|