I just watched the VH1 Storytellers episode with Tom Waits. Unsurprisingly, his performance manages to end up coming across as being completely structureless and virtually uneditable.
There is no part where he walks out and says hello, no part where he says "this next song" or in any way signals that he is about to, or has played, the last song. The anecdotes between the songs do not really have anything to do with any of the songs, for the most part. It's hard to tell when the songs have begun, and where they will end. It's entertaining.
He's getting by on oddity, ugliness and charm, with a created wistfulness as to the worn out and the thrown away, without choosing to make any reference, conversely, to the new or current being inferior, confusing or unsightly, as is the manner of some.
I thought about how a person can take guitar lessons for 5 or 10 years, and get really good, and what they usually do is end up playing only the most challenging songs, on the very best instruments, for the most discerning audiences. Usually, they leave most people behind, and don't mind doing it. A highly trained guitarist can play anything (with his/her fingers, like a jukebox, at least, if not usually with his/her heart.)
Why then, is there always some guy with idiosyncratic choices as to equipment and music, with (frequently) a very limited range of technique, who does something in a certain way that so fully exploits the possibilities of an extremely limited range of choices, that everyone cries "Creativity! How'd he manage to do so much with so little!?" I guess creativity isn't about being able to do anything you want, just because you can. It's more to do with being poor and inventing the blues, or something like that, on a broken guitar you found somewhere, using three chords, or three strings or something. Many of my friends are a bit like Tom Waits. I'm a bit like that, but they're consistently, completely like that. It's like, given any situation or opportunity, it is no exaggeration to say that, inside, in terms of their own self images, they absolutely can't follow the expected path, or do what it is assumed that a person will.
There is no part where he walks out and says hello, no part where he says "this next song" or in any way signals that he is about to, or has played, the last song. The anecdotes between the songs do not really have anything to do with any of the songs, for the most part. It's hard to tell when the songs have begun, and where they will end. It's entertaining.
He's getting by on oddity, ugliness and charm, with a created wistfulness as to the worn out and the thrown away, without choosing to make any reference, conversely, to the new or current being inferior, confusing or unsightly, as is the manner of some.
I thought about how a person can take guitar lessons for 5 or 10 years, and get really good, and what they usually do is end up playing only the most challenging songs, on the very best instruments, for the most discerning audiences. Usually, they leave most people behind, and don't mind doing it. A highly trained guitarist can play anything (with his/her fingers, like a jukebox, at least, if not usually with his/her heart.)
Why then, is there always some guy with idiosyncratic choices as to equipment and music, with (frequently) a very limited range of technique, who does something in a certain way that so fully exploits the possibilities of an extremely limited range of choices, that everyone cries "Creativity! How'd he manage to do so much with so little!?" I guess creativity isn't about being able to do anything you want, just because you can. It's more to do with being poor and inventing the blues, or something like that, on a broken guitar you found somewhere, using three chords, or three strings or something. Many of my friends are a bit like Tom Waits. I'm a bit like that, but they're consistently, completely like that. It's like, given any situation or opportunity, it is no exaggeration to say that, inside, in terms of their own self images, they absolutely can't follow the expected path, or do what it is assumed that a person will.
Examples? Well, give J an online searchable bible with 35 translations to play with, and he can't help himself but type in things like "transistor radio" or "white supremacy" that he knows won't be in there, until he gets tired of that. He won't type in a single thing that will result in a positive hit. Most people would type in "buttocks" or "murder" or something, and see where the word occurs and in what context. Not J.
Another example: any game where you're supposed to type in your name. Most people would just type in their name, a made up rude name, a nickname, a celebrity name, a name of some sort. Not the people I know. They can't.
I have dress clothes. I seldom wear them, and view them as a costume it is amusing to dress up in on certain occasions.
My friends actually do not have any dress clothes. They do not dress up. If there's a wedding or a funeral, you will see me in dress clothes that in some way reflect my personality. My friends? They will be wearing a fur vest, a black turtleneck and leather pants. (and that's at their own wedding.) And they will ask bizarre things of people. Like potential employers taking them seriously at a $60 000 per year job interview, wearing a Pac-man shirt and torn sneakers. Or with tattoos on their throat and hands. (or being a girl with a buzzcut and eyebrow piercing)
I'm not innocent of this. I got a teaching job with hair down to my shoulders and a beard, hoping I reminded them more of Jesus of Nazareth than Charles Manson. I did have a tie and dress shoes. I've met many, many people like this, most of whom consider themselves artists of some stripe. Artists expect to be accepted and well treated while continuing to do quite odd things on a daily basis. They will decide they want to be referred to with a specific symbol instead of a name. They will demand to be referred to as "The Baron," (or some other form of title or royal designation, or a made up name like "Alice Cooper" "Marilyn Manson" or "Rob Zombie" instead of their birth name) or will ask that their gender never be referred to in any way, including by any pronouns, they will ask that people respect their insistence in not touching anything that is made of plastic, they will refuse to wear shoes anywhere, they will say the word "elevator" instead of "and," or declaim "your feet are melting" in lieu of the words "thank you" and want everyone to accommodate them and treat them normally, despite their not acting normally. One is tempted to "warn" people that they will need to expect this sort of thing from this person, yet one gets the feeling that this robs the "artist" in question of most of the fun of confounding people.
My friends actually do not have any dress clothes. They do not dress up. If there's a wedding or a funeral, you will see me in dress clothes that in some way reflect my personality. My friends? They will be wearing a fur vest, a black turtleneck and leather pants. (and that's at their own wedding.) And they will ask bizarre things of people. Like potential employers taking them seriously at a $60 000 per year job interview, wearing a Pac-man shirt and torn sneakers. Or with tattoos on their throat and hands. (or being a girl with a buzzcut and eyebrow piercing)
I'm not innocent of this. I got a teaching job with hair down to my shoulders and a beard, hoping I reminded them more of Jesus of Nazareth than Charles Manson. I did have a tie and dress shoes. I've met many, many people like this, most of whom consider themselves artists of some stripe. Artists expect to be accepted and well treated while continuing to do quite odd things on a daily basis. They will decide they want to be referred to with a specific symbol instead of a name. They will demand to be referred to as "The Baron," (or some other form of title or royal designation, or a made up name like "Alice Cooper" "Marilyn Manson" or "Rob Zombie" instead of their birth name) or will ask that their gender never be referred to in any way, including by any pronouns, they will ask that people respect their insistence in not touching anything that is made of plastic, they will refuse to wear shoes anywhere, they will say the word "elevator" instead of "and," or declaim "your feet are melting" in lieu of the words "thank you" and want everyone to accommodate them and treat them normally, despite their not acting normally. One is tempted to "warn" people that they will need to expect this sort of thing from this person, yet one gets the feeling that this robs the "artist" in question of most of the fun of confounding people.
I'm a lot like that, but not to the same degree. Growing up, it was all about wearing all black, or not wearing anything with a designer name or company logo on it, or something like that. To this day, I feel odd if I'm not wearing something that is black, even if it is only black shoes. I don't feel quite like myself. All it used to take in my teens was getting a "blank" shirt and subtly making a little parody of a designer logo on the breast of it ("Rolf Loran Polar", with a little guy clubbing a polar bear to death with a polo mallet from astride his shoulders). Or "Reekbok" or something like that.
What does this sort of thing say about us? That the "norm" annoys us, and does not accommodate us (or makes it known that they feel they are doing us a huge favour by "accommodating us" in what seem to us like trivial ways, but to them seem like a huge deal)? That we want to be special, or more interesting than the usual, which we don't like much? Is it all elitism? Is it "anything but the normal?" or "something besides the normal?" Is it about boredom with the usual, feeling alienated from the usual, hating the usual, distrusting the usual and needing to be outside of it, or what?
We notice that living differently seems to threaten people, and this annoys/amuses/fills us with a feeling of being threatening and interesting and special? What is the difference between someone who "has to" do what 'everyone else' is doing, and someone who "can't do" what 'everyone else' is doing, whether they admit that or not? (each would claim they are free to do as they wish, and just "don't want" to do the opposite, but could each move freely around socially and feel like themselves, if they'd switched stances on their relationship with normal?) Are a lot of people keeping societal expectations away from them with walls of absurdism and continual mocking parody of the usual?
What does this sort of thing say about us? That the "norm" annoys us, and does not accommodate us (or makes it known that they feel they are doing us a huge favour by "accommodating us" in what seem to us like trivial ways, but to them seem like a huge deal)? That we want to be special, or more interesting than the usual, which we don't like much? Is it all elitism? Is it "anything but the normal?" or "something besides the normal?" Is it about boredom with the usual, feeling alienated from the usual, hating the usual, distrusting the usual and needing to be outside of it, or what?
We notice that living differently seems to threaten people, and this annoys/amuses/fills us with a feeling of being threatening and interesting and special? What is the difference between someone who "has to" do what 'everyone else' is doing, and someone who "can't do" what 'everyone else' is doing, whether they admit that or not? (each would claim they are free to do as they wish, and just "don't want" to do the opposite, but could each move freely around socially and feel like themselves, if they'd switched stances on their relationship with normal?) Are a lot of people keeping societal expectations away from them with walls of absurdism and continual mocking parody of the usual?
No comments:
Post a Comment