One of the most stressful things a person could do is expect that others would hold up to the standards you place upon yourself.

Some people are capable, and not willing. Some are willing and not capable. Others still are neither, and some both. Most certainly, no other person is just like me.

To address the issue of quality is to compare. Art is subjective and value is placed upon it by "the eye of the beholder". (or ear in this case) We do not all value the same things. Some things are valued by more people than others. I can listen to Lamb of God and be moved, emotionally stirred and come away in deep thought. Others may hear only noise. Since I value something that is appreciable to less people does that mean it caries less quality? It would seem that the term quality as it applies to art is not being used properly.

And then sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

I like your words OOTV. It sounds like you are very deep into the choreography and arrangement of music. I listen to Hendrix "Blues" cd now and then. Some of his solos are simply astounding. Since you listed him in your credits to good artists, can you break down some of his music? I'm interested in what in specific it is about his work that is so captivating. Some of his flow is so intense if feels as though he is using the guitar to cry and express his emotion. How does he do this? Did he go to school for it? Is that something that can be taught, or is it something that only a gifted person can do?

advocatingly,
Diablo

Thera:
(1) -there is a large post I just put on the KFSR string that sort of goes into this, I'll try not to replicate too much, as my stuff is long enough as it is...

Okay...

The whole concept of something being done haphazard is a fluke.
Any decent artist (both known or unknown,) had to work on their stuff to begin with (with intent of making something,)
-and then cut it loose when they thought it was 'finished.'
---So there was a sense of 'start, work, tweak, finish,' that was followed.
(As an artist, I don't just walk up to a surface and throw something down on it, and think it's done, or 'more authentic or genuine art,' because I only worked ten minutes on it, or used two colors instead of twenty...)

There is NO such thing as a 'band deliberately 'trying' to be bad,' (nor,) 'not caring about how they sound.'
-Even the meanest most burnt out 'raw and ready,' recordings of the punk era were performed with heart,
---but along with the heart was the attempt of the musician to convey what they were designing to with instruments.

They were all recorded or mixed by somebody in a studio some place who was trying to do a good job. (Please note that: What you are hearing that is 'a rough and crude recording of a rough and crude band,' -was not done by cavemen.... The band may have been cavemen, but the mixer and engineer was deadly serious, and the cavemen bothered to plug in their instruments... so EVERYBODY was trying, even if they said that they weren't.)

Seriously, think of this.

If a person has a band, and a person wants to play somewhere, they are going to play and hope that someone likes them enough to say, '..yeah, play my stage, play my club, lets record you and lets make some money.'
---So they scrounge up funds to (hopefully,) get a decent demo, and then (hope,) that they can record with better and better people.

This whole facade of 'artists who are so badassed that they don't care about anybody or anything,' is a joke.
-Even Miles Davis (who was arguably one of the meanest and fiercest bipeds known to man,) ---was extremely serious about his music and his shows.

I think what's happened (on a deeper level,) is that people recently have bought the packaging and the hype.
-Along with the focus on self, is the ignoring of the past, of others, and of ones predacessors and mentors.
-With this has come the shallow ignorance that (thank God,) some of the kids today are not as wrapped up in, and can look past themselves to evolve with.

Any of the heavy (and respected,) artists, writers, performers, ---who are emulated and hailed as groundbreaking in what they do, ALL are quite clear:
-Learn it straight, learn the fundimentals, master THEM, -and then experiment.
---But do not go messing around with things and creating new stuff, --until you know what you are doing with the basics and really know your tools well.
-Picasso did this.
-(ditto) Louis Armstrong
-(ditto) Ella
-(ditto) Miles Davis
-(ditto) Hendrix
-(ditto) Hunter S. Thompson.

Even Sting, Elvis Costello, Joe Jackson, the boys of Led Zeppelin, (etc.) ---All studied seriously at one time or another, -and worked from serious foundations and influences.
(I remember Robt. Plant talking about how ripped off the present generation is because He got to work with earlier masters in stuff, -and now the kids only look back as far as 'him,' sometimes, -and how this was far too shallow.)
-Even twits who will insist that the jazz greats who learned in gospel choirs are completely disregarding the fact, that twenty straight years of serious choir singing IS intense training and practice ---and in a place where, if you mess up, you not only screw up a worship service, but incur the wrath of your fellow choir members -and God... (no pressure to be good there, oh no..)
-If Armstrong could have not played well, he'd have starved, so even though he perfected his style in a bordello, he was STILL perfecting.

There is a general mindset (that, okay, okay, who knows maybe it IS universal... -but I've heard it said around here enough to know it's here...)
-Which is hopefully, about to be slaughtered,
-where serious study, striving for excellence, and becoming very good at what one does
-is 'not worth the struggle.'
(It's actually just being lazy.)

Thank God this is ending.
Enough people STILL believe that if something is worth spending the time to do, it's worth getting better at.
(That is the actual core drive of a creator... there has to be growth and progression...)

'Refining and engineering is a part of that process.'
Example:
-There is a small wirey guitar player who is storming up and down the jersey coast, and playing to great sell out sets in bars also in Manhattan.
-He has unreal talent and heart... but he doesn't sing so great.
-What do you do??? you record him, he gets bigger, he takes a few singing lessons, and he gets saddled up with Phil Spector who helps him build a 'wall of sound,' for several very important albums.
-Voila: Bruce Springsteen.

-There WAS talent there to start, -but there was also an understanding that there had to be improvements and changes made ---to better present the artist.
-Though I happen to love Springsteen in all phases of his work, (I'm from Jersey, I grew up in the same areas and listening to him as his career came up,)
-if it were not for such stuff as 'Born to Run,' or 'the River,' (again, handled by Specter)
---such stark and haunting works as 'Nebraska,' (now over twenty years old,) would have never have been made...

Even bands that supposedly didn't know what they were doing -and were 'just playing and trapped on Vinyl like some wild animal, (like the Ramones, or Velvet Underground,) were, in fact, growing and getting better with each show, --(or in V.U.'s case, -deliberately crafted and presented rough, but there were serious musicians behind it... and TONS of marketing (IE: Andy Warhol)

It is possible for someone to loose their 'innocence,' and simple joy of playing. (Which is another issue but no less important.)
-A lot of classical players I know are simply stuck in the mud without a written score on the music desk... (and they say that the jazz players are the real musicians, because they can improv.)
-But a lot of jazz players look at the formal classical types, -and say that (the classicals) are the real musicians because of the weight of the work, -and that sometimes (the jazz types,) aren't schooled or can only play by ear.
-that debate will never end, and it's sad when someone becomes caged by their training.

-But wouldn't it be EXCELLENT if the arguement was over:
-who had the better schooling?
-and how many hours and works needed to be seriously studied, ---rather than 'if?'

I personally think that somebody who is playing music, sets, and playing to the public, (and submitting singles to a radio station or DJ,) and then says,
'...I don't care if anyone listens to my stuff, I'm just keeping it real.'
Is just posing.
If they didn't care, they'd sit in their living room and simply play for their dog.

Where the problem comes in is (in anything... I don't care what it is,) someone buys the hype and falls for the facade. 'You don't have to be good, you just have to feel what you're doing.'
-What a joke.
If you're going to do anything, (and get anything done,)
-you need to study,
-you need to apply yourself and care about what you are doing,
-you need to be able to take honest critique on the work, and you need to know what is good and what is not.
-And you need to respect your media and your audience,
----else you will not grow, nor make a living at it.

It's part of a deeper problem.

What is simply terrifying, that I hear (here in Fresno,) that I've heard no where else in the country, is how education is
'not necessary.'
-Are you kidding???

-Anywhere else, even back east a kid who thinks he's 'going to make it out of the projects by playing 'pro-ball,' -is seen as doomed. (why?)
---because we all know how few really make it in that field, how it's based upon the odds of your body not being crippled too young, -and having good management skills that will take you past aged 35.
-We understand someone having a dream, --but if we care about them, we also explain the reality of the situation too.
-Without an education you are toast.

I can't tell you how many times I 've heard people actually tell me how they (either didn't,) or just finished High School, ---and never thought college was important. (!?)
-(OR) that they really only needed a 'two year' degree...

Nowhwere east of the Missisippi will that get you a living wage, and forget about having a family or decent house with that mindset.
I don't think if flies south and north of here either.

At the very least you need tradeschooling, (if you are a tradesperson,)
-and that is still serious study.

In fact, in most fields of employment, you need not only Bachelors level training, but Masters level classes (sometimes that you have to pay for yourself,) just to keep your accreditation and and licensure.
-Even Teachers, (much loved, and respected, rightfully so, and not paid nearly enough,) --Actually have Masters Degrees, -or the equivallent thereof.

It blows my mind, that this is by far the cheapest state I've ever seen when it comes to education, -yet the drop out rate among HS students, -and lack of serious study on college levels is dumbfounding.

I think it was Chris Rock who had a line about how people 'won't read a book because they are 'keepin' it real.' -when in fact they were just keepin' real stupid.
-This applies to the arts and performing arts as well.

-By allowing our young, (and ourselves,) to believe that education and better training, serious application, and improvement of all that we do is 'not necessary,'
-we are assuring their failure and doom.

-That means not being able to do jobs that mean basic survival,
-That means more people (eventually,) out of work, or in menial jobs that bring them to public assistance and less productive lives... (all in an area where public assistance is seen with disdain.)

I don't really care for nor about the 'me first,' hype that has infected the school system of 'self esteem and self promotion.'
--What I'm seeing that is scary is a league of people who are all stoked on the fact that they exist,
---but don't know how to do much of anything extremely well,
-nor see the need for learning such.
-Artists are not excluded from this, -and musicians are artists.
If someoene has a gift, they also need to care to really take their gifts and grow in them.

-I hardly ever hear of 'doing it right because (not just,) someone is paying you, but because you are taking the time and effort to do it at all.'

Somehow people have to see over the rim of the hills, and realize that (not only,) is there a huge world out there where they are going to have to be extremely at what they do, (no matter what it is,) -just to succeed,

(I hear: 'my daddy or my grandaddy did just great, and he didn't have any formal education past HighSchool, -and Grandaddy went to work at the end of the sixth grade..'

-I think folks would be surprised how many Daddy's and GrandDaddys' (GrandMomma's too,) would be planting a size 10 in the backside of any younger generations to stay educated,
-because they knew that it was what they needed to make the most of any opportunity,
-and they would have gone to school if they could have.
(They just couldn't.)
There's not a single ancestor that any of us have that would not look us square in the eye and whisper or thunder, '...stay your ass in school.'
These were people who understood that you had to read the present, prepare for the future, and grow and act wisely...)

(PS -a lot of the 'greats,' in music were from that earlier era... -see the connection?)

-Past that fun fact?

-Lotsa folks are going to move here from SF and LA... -and they're going to have money and educations, -and they're not going to want to commute...
-Guess who's jobs they are now going to be eligible for, (by virtue of their level of study and education?)
It's not just music... It's life.

It can no longer be:
'Not bad from Fresno.'
It has to be: '...that's good, that's damn good, and it will sell anywhere, period.'

What is not growing is dead.
and
I SEE DEAD PEOPLE...
-but the problem is, they don't know that they're still alive, and they're going to be alive for a long time...

-Here's to making the most of what talents (EVERYBODY) has.

(....Although, admittedly the origional version of 'Pretty in Pink,' (which was made to sound harsher,) is far better than the one used in the Film, ---and over production did ruin 'the Hooters.' -but that's just too many cooks spoiling a good soup.)

Isn't it a question of art versus product? In the music argument at least, but maybe art in general. Creating music that isn't supposed to sell, or at least is not concerned with selling a million copies, etc. has always seemed more genuine to me.