Posts
I see no reason why I shouldn't write things and post them here when I do, in fact, want to write things and post them on here. I quit doing it because of some belief I held that everything I wrote and posted must necessarily be related to music in some way.
I get sick of trying to hide ideas or thoughts or things inside of other ideas or thoughts or things. But to "compete" today (fuck that - to make anything creative viable) one has to carve out a niche. Find their place in the sun. Even as we wholly acknowledge and repetitiously state "there is nothing new under" that very same sun.
So I decided that was a lie. Because it is a lie. Everything "under the sun" is new. If I wrote, even a singular word, and it was written before it does not matter. It makes no difference. Since we are systematically killing originality by denying its' very existence using science (our neo-religion since we've now killed God - Scientism!) and data, I will use two truly unscientific and poorly created equations to explain:
In these equations John Murry is represented as "X" and anything he says or does that has been done or said before is represented as "O". Each "X" is cancelled or subtracted from by each "O". The numerical value of each is "1".
The first brilliant equation illustrates humanity's idiotic belief in nothingness, exposes its' nihilistic hatred of life and by default all individual living human beings (hidden as "pragmatism", "reality", "science", "truth", and the "Blessed Assurance Jesus Is NOT Mine" or "atheism" - the "fundamental" statement and not "belief" that there is no God - I hope you got that one...), and its' assertion that we are programmed automatons (comforting belief, no? if it's all in the "genes" and predetermined by "big history" and Hegelian mysticism then nothing we do is ever "right" or "wrong" - nor is it worthwhile, however). The second "proves" that whatever I do I did, what I say I said, and what I create I created. Scientifically.
EQUATION 1:
I write and record a song in 4/4 time (X) using the same chord progression as innumerable other songs (G-D-C) (O), add in an instrumental break (X) similar to others as an "idea" (O), and unconsciously incorporate a melody from a long forgotten song, stuck in my psyche that I never even liked (O), ending with the creation of a recorded song ("The Ballad of The Pajama Kid"):
X + O + X + O + O = -1
EQUATION 2:
Using the same as above I add two X's. One for "I write and record" and one for "recorded song". This can be done because I am not 4/4 time or the progression and the end result was a song that, though "derivative", didn't exist before.
So:
X + X + O + X + O + O + X = 1
May that "1" stand to represent what cannot be explained away using data, jargon, hapless systematic philosophizing, science, or our modern need to do away with everything in order to feel nothing.
May that "1" stand for something truly unimportant and unnecessary.
May that "1" represent a flawed and painfully real John Murry.
Holy shit. Somehow even that incorporated music. The next won't. I can't wait to write it. My place in the sun doesn't exist. It's smoggy today. But smog illuminates this world with far more beauty, anyway.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
First blog in a year, eh? What a gem amongst the rough in my RSS feed this afternoon.
ReplyDeleteJust put up Murryisms as they arrive, no need to qualify them. Gives you more free rein.
Sometimes the problem is other people. Sometimes it seems that to satisfy myself I must ignore them, and to satisfy them I must ignore myself. My epiphanies are their banalities, and vice versa. I've come to realize that much of my cynicism comes from too much concentration on this, trying to beat the game somehow. Trying to create something that everyone will value, or at least certain favored people.
What's new to me is perhaps not new, but if I can ignore the fatigue of culture with a certain thing or idea, then I can sometimes capture a personal sense of wonder and novelty in it. So I think in that way, we can still find some humanity and personality in music or art if we try. Of course, this is requires ever more evasive acrobatics in a culture obsessed with recycling nostalgia endlessly because of an efficiency of communication greater than that of our creativity. And of course, anything of even remote interest to anyone must be assigned a monetary value and plunged into the vortex of exchange that will quickly bleach it translucent, dismember it, duplicate it, and on and on.
Even if there is really is no bastion of individuality that a massive instantaneous communication culture can't abolish, undermine or amputate, we still have to seek out ways constue ourselves as individuals. We still have to find value in ourselves and our endeavors wherever and however we can. As we discussed before, I believe that if the motives for art change (when art no longer has to be economically sustainable) then people will start to create again in a more "authentic" way, instead of just imitating and draining anything authentic that dares to pop up now. And I liked your idea about killing off art the way we think of it now in order to regain our sense of creativity. But as you said, we're not just running through a cycle in some Marxist, Hegelian narrative. No outcome is guaranteed. We're kinda sorta tragically free enough to have to take the credit and the blame.