Lordy I've had three bowel movements before 9 today. What?
As a rock composer, I can say that I dislike cliché guitar riffs and that I will never use them, but the truth of the matter is that I'd be nowhere without them.
Upon what basis would I have to write any of my own material?
Further, to what does 'cliché' refer? Off the top of my head: 'Something I don't like.' More specifically, 'something musical progression or audio production trick frequently as a device for pumping out mainstream, intelligence-devoid media.'
Whether literature, film, music, or any genre of free expression--all contain this idea of cliché.
You know what I think it really means? It's been done, beaten to death, and it's boring--a rotting corpse, mangled and with the flesh torn off, strewn about on the desert floor with bits of bone and cartilage and disgusting organs everywhere.
And still, musical producers cling to it, as if it still had any life in it, as if any more juice could be squeezed out of that decrepit pulp.
Just listen to whatever bands/solo acts appear frequently in Rolling Stone Magazine--they're a perfect barometer of the largest, lowest-common-denominator public taste. And as it turns out, that stuff is loaded to the gills with cliché.
However, you've gotta use something before it's going to get recognized at all.
And let's face it, rock composers--we're some of the worst copiers of OPP in the music world. We contribute to the deadening of these riff corpses, instead of burying them in a proper grave directly after they die, with dignity.
Doesn't matter if Puff Daddy (hope he hates me using his old moniker) is making little to no effort in sampling someone else's work, adding new lyrics and a new beat, and making a new song out of it--it's no worse than when Liam or Noel Ghallghagherghaggngher or whoever is that wanker guitarist in Oasis steals a Beatles riff to make a new song of his own.
It all involves basically stealing other people's ideas, passing them off as your own, and profiting from it.
Here's the sad part: it happens in every song ever written. Somewhere, that there's a riff in there that's existed somewhere before. Isn't the mind of any human simply a collection of their experiences? It's not like something new is impossible to create, but we couldn't create anything without having examples to go on--forefathers who blazed trails, fearlessly creating as we should.
I'd argue that the first person who wrote the first piece of music ever performed, got the idea for that song from something heard in the natural world--perhaps a pterodactyl cry, or some water hitting rocks. The point is that it all comes from somewhere.
As much as we all search for the new, there's nothing truly new.
So. Here we are, at the end of this part of my argument. Now let me follow with this sentiment: cliché shouldn't be avoided, but embraced--lovingly, lightly, and with reverence.
And I say reverence because, if you're employing it, it doesn't mean you think it's bad enough to avoid using altogether, which means you don't altogether dislike it, which means it has merit.
Unless you produce Justin Bieber or something like that--then, you're a fucking tool (but you're rich--the most unfairness ever). This delves more into that rotting corpse idea--the beating of a dead horse.
However, no matter who we are, we can't avoid copying something from somewhere. If it makes a person happy, then I say make it. Fill the world with a wealth of musical expression--that's one thing that makes our species beautiful.
If we ever get taken over by aliens, or the find a frozen Earth post-sun-burning-out, they're gonna be blown away by how much art we've created and (hopefully) preserved. Surely it will show we are an ambitious, forward-looking species, with a positive attitude toward discovery, no matter what side of the musical or political or religious spectrum we identify with.
Also, I'm bolstered with a non-fear of cliché because it's okay to use pieces of other people's songs, because parody is okay with our Supreme Court.
Take this case between Roy Orbison and 2 Live Crew. 2LC made a song called "Pretty Woman," which borrowed from Orbison's "Oh Pretty Woman." 2LC won, as their version was shown to be a parody of Orbison's. After all, if you take away parody, we wouldn't have The Daily Show and Colbert Report.
This lends itself well to a useage of cliché in music--clichéd stuff has already been written already by someone else before! So use freely of other people's songs.
Just don't do straight covers and try to profit from them without going thru the proper channels--that can get you in trouble.
Now the only reason to hate cliché and avoid it is to pretend that you're better than your superiors (forefathers). Not so. No composer is above copying, from the macro- to micro-levels.
As a rock composer, I can say that I dislike cliché guitar riffs and that I will never use them, but the truth of the matter is that I'd be nowhere without them.
Upon what basis would I have to write any of my own material?
Further, to what does 'cliché' refer? Off the top of my head: 'Something I don't like.' More specifically, 'something musical progression or audio production trick frequently as a device for pumping out mainstream, intelligence-devoid media.'
Whether literature, film, music, or any genre of free expression--all contain this idea of cliché.
You know what I think it really means? It's been done, beaten to death, and it's boring--a rotting corpse, mangled and with the flesh torn off, strewn about on the desert floor with bits of bone and cartilage and disgusting organs everywhere.
And still, musical producers cling to it, as if it still had any life in it, as if any more juice could be squeezed out of that decrepit pulp.
However, you've gotta use something before it's going to get recognized at all.
And let's face it, rock composers--we're some of the worst copiers of OPP in the music world. We contribute to the deadening of these riff corpses, instead of burying them in a proper grave directly after they die, with dignity.
Doesn't matter if Puff Daddy (hope he hates me using his old moniker) is making little to no effort in sampling someone else's work, adding new lyrics and a new beat, and making a new song out of it--it's no worse than when Liam or Noel Ghallghagherghaggngher or whoever is that wanker guitarist in Oasis steals a Beatles riff to make a new song of his own.
It all involves basically stealing other people's ideas, passing them off as your own, and profiting from it.
Here's the sad part: it happens in every song ever written. Somewhere, that there's a riff in there that's existed somewhere before. Isn't the mind of any human simply a collection of their experiences? It's not like something new is impossible to create, but we couldn't create anything without having examples to go on--forefathers who blazed trails, fearlessly creating as we should.
I'd argue that the first person who wrote the first piece of music ever performed, got the idea for that song from something heard in the natural world--perhaps a pterodactyl cry, or some water hitting rocks. The point is that it all comes from somewhere.
As much as we all search for the new, there's nothing truly new.
So. Here we are, at the end of this part of my argument. Now let me follow with this sentiment: cliché shouldn't be avoided, but embraced--lovingly, lightly, and with reverence.
And I say reverence because, if you're employing it, it doesn't mean you think it's bad enough to avoid using altogether, which means you don't altogether dislike it, which means it has merit.
Unless you produce Justin Bieber or something like that--then, you're a fucking tool (but you're rich--the most unfairness ever). This delves more into that rotting corpse idea--the beating of a dead horse.
However, no matter who we are, we can't avoid copying something from somewhere. If it makes a person happy, then I say make it. Fill the world with a wealth of musical expression--that's one thing that makes our species beautiful.
If we ever get taken over by aliens, or the find a frozen Earth post-sun-burning-out, they're gonna be blown away by how much art we've created and (hopefully) preserved. Surely it will show we are an ambitious, forward-looking species, with a positive attitude toward discovery, no matter what side of the musical or political or religious spectrum we identify with.
Also, I'm bolstered with a non-fear of cliché because it's okay to use pieces of other people's songs, because parody is okay with our Supreme Court.
Take this case between Roy Orbison and 2 Live Crew. 2LC made a song called "Pretty Woman," which borrowed from Orbison's "Oh Pretty Woman." 2LC won, as their version was shown to be a parody of Orbison's. After all, if you take away parody, we wouldn't have The Daily Show and Colbert Report.
This lends itself well to a useage of cliché in music--clichéd stuff has already been written already by someone else before! So use freely of other people's songs.
Just don't do straight covers and try to profit from them without going thru the proper channels--that can get you in trouble.
Now the only reason to hate cliché and avoid it is to pretend that you're better than your superiors (forefathers). Not so. No composer is above copying, from the macro- to micro-levels.
No comments:
Post a Comment