I am a minimalist by nurture with regards to my physical space-(I like my art cluttered, my space sparse), as my family moved eight times before I was fifteen and each new place was totally rebuilt as we lived in it. I shared a room with my sister more than I did not as walls were stripped down and rebuilt around us. I remember the spackle dust most, not quite unlike animal hair; it tends to get onto and in everything no matter the preventative measures taken. Not having a lot of room for things you learned to keep tidy or lose all hope of finding something which would wind up buried in growing piles of clutter. When my then girlfriend had first spent a few nights at my Spartan apartment and viewed my tightly folded and distinctly organized clothes she was convinced for months that I had either spent time in the military -(no, I did not) or might be a bit psychotic-(jury is still out) . My Wife met me at a time during which I only wore black, every item of my wardrobe was black leave for one dark red 50’s shark skin sport jacket. Wearing black had several advantages. It was hipster de rigueur for lower Manhattan, anything I wore would be back stage appropriate and everything could go in the same load of wash. When my then girlfriend –soon to be wife-and I decided to move in and ‘take the next step’ she needed a moving truck while I moved all I possessed in the back of a small van in one trip. Now I live with two kids under 5, my wife, 2 cats and a thousand toys – (I am convinced that the latter multiply overnight in some sick toy mating ritual\orgy) – and a secret part of me yearn’d for minimalist order of prior.
As I have been thinking about this I came across an article on Gizmodo about a set of ‘one line’ furniture by Aykut Erol. Perhaps as I have been tinkering with concepts of space and environmental influence (see ‘My God it’s full of Stars’ and ‘I Sing the Building Electric’) and my growing comfort with overstuffed plush-ness of Victorian drawing rooms, I had an immediate, and unexpected, repulsion to the images. The first two images suit me just fine and echo the Pompideu or the Blue Man Group Tubulum. The third picture just does me in as I instantly associate it with Edward Kienholz’s ‘ The State Hospital’ and get a real uneasy feeling at how similar the color and lighting are. Both are most certainly places I’d rather not be.
I also like my Radio (Terrestrial, Satellite or Streaming) to be bare bones and simple. Gob it up with excess chatter, nonsense bumpers or too many ads and I will not listen – or at least I will find ways to note the non music cycles and avoid the station at those times. I have no issue with stations generating revenue but make it something I have the option of pulling up. Make it flashy, intriguing, and compelling but do not interrupt my access to content. Now the RIAA is equating General radio broadcasts as “a form of piracy”. Essentially the RIAA is attempting to push legislation to enforce radio stations to pay royalties on every song played. The RIAA already wants streaming stations to pay fees based on a per song \ per user structure. In the end this just means stations will pay for the added fees by playing less music and inserting more ads. Will any of these collected fees ever go to any of the artists RIAA claims to be ‘protecting?’
To be clear here I have never been a supporter of the Napsters of the Inter-tubes. My strong opinion is that if the artist wants to sell the music based on per item fee structure, then obtaining it any other way is stealing, period. You can disagree with the concept but it is how this artist has decided to do business. If you have strong feelings about this do not buy their ‘product’ and do not go to their shows, the market will dictate. If you like the music enough then you must respect the wishes of the artist, otherwise have nothing to do with them. More artists are breaking –(or attempting to ) from their labels, how can major labels survive when mainstream artists like Josh Stone proclaim piracy to be ‘great'.
NPR has been running a great series on the arts and Internet in China. The second article in the series of three is a real eye opener for me. The article entitled ‘Internet helps liberate, Create Music in China’ discusses the duality of the internet’s ability to expose millions –(or be exposed yourself) to music in a society where piracy is rampant to the point of cultural. China may be the test model for where the west will be in 5 years. Chinese artists are struggling to make a living from their music where selling content is already considered worthless. An early answer is to provide file sharing as a collective by offering the tools and content, pooling resources and drawing users to each artist’s live events. The article also has a link to the independent collective site and tools mentioned in the article. The Site is in Chinese but is fairly intuitive to negotiate – (although many of the links pop up new browser session which can be a bit of a clutter).
I just have to ask, who says pirates are a bad thing? Think of the environment people!
No comments:
Post a Comment