Advertising and Web Hosting on Woodwind.Org!

Klarinet Archive - Posting 000509.txt from 2001/07

From: "Tony Wakefield" <tony-wakefield@-----.net>
Subj: Re: [kl] Another musician honoured!
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 06:43:16 -0400

Emily,
You`ve written some good stuff here. I didn`t realise that warnings are now
put onto CD`s. That is good. Perhaps we are indeed seeing a new initiative.
I do wonder if this is enough tho`. I would think not.

I`m pleased that the debate has entered the schools. It perhaps should also
enter a few more music moguls minds also.

You say that "non-music" introduces the not so interested to more
intellectual forms of pop etc. I can see that. That is the case with a lot
of interests. What I`m concerned about, is what happens in the next round of
pop development. What happens <after> "non-music" has had it`s day? I don`t
dare think about it.

Finally, for a little more, please see my reply to Roger Garrett`s
magnificent onslaught :<)

Best,

Tony W.

----- Original Message -----
From: "emily worthington" <emily.worthington@-----.com>
Subject: Re: [kl] Another musician honoured!

> Tony wrote:
> > I think we all have some responsibility (as musicians ourselves) to
enter
> > the debate on what music and musicians we like or dislike, and to not
only
> > let each other know these preferences, but to widen our voice to include
> > what we want, or more to the point, what we don`t want from the "Music
> > Business".
>
> I agree with you here, at least from an artistic point of view. And
> certainly everyone is entitled to voice their moral opinion. But I draw
the
> line at moral censorship. From the point of view of the 'youth of today',
I
> have to take issue with your apparent advocation of it. Censorship implies
> that people are incapable of making their own decisions. Teenagers don't
> take drugs or have sex because Eminem sings about them, they do it of
their
> own volition, for a variety of personal reasons. I'm assuming that this
was
> your reason for objecting, and that you aren't just saying that drugs and
> sex should be taboo subjects.
>
> The reason teenagers take do these things for is usually a combination of
> peer pressure and lack of parental guidance. These things will always be
> there in society, and banning certain songs sin't going to change that.
> Exposure to these things is the baptism of fire by which confused
teenagers
> become strong people. But if you blame song lyrics and films for the drugs
> culture or teenage motherhood, you encourage them to shirk respinsibility
> for their choices.
>
> As for pre-teens, any censorship is (as Frank said) the responsibility of
> the parent; though in my experience, children are subjected to as much
> swearing in the playground as they ever will be in songs. Almost all the
> four-letter words I know were learnt from my peers between the ages of 9
and
> 13. And I doubt that they learnt them from popular culture, either; more
> likely they got them from their parents.This doesn't mean I use them
often,
> of course. Just because a child knows how to swear doesn't mean that they
> will; if their parents and teachers make it clear that some language is
> innappropriate for most situations, to a certain extent it is up to the
> child. I do think, however, that swearing is artistically unnecessary in
> songs most of the time. But then a badly written song usually gives itself
> away by more than just use of expletives.
>
> Film censorshipis a different matter. I wholeheartedly agree with
protecting
> children from possibly disturbing experiences; I wouldn't have wanted to
see
> 'A Clockwork Orange' when I was younger (in fact I still don't want to see
> it now, having read the book). The combination of visual and audio
> bombardment one is subjected to in a cinema (particularly with the advent
of
> surround-sound effects) means that once in there, you are effectively
> trapped and unable to escape the content of the film. Songs don't have
this
> power. They aren't vivid experiences; or at least they rely on the
> interpretation of the listener to become such. To a child, lyrics are
simply
> words. If they attatch enough meaning to them to be disturbed by them,
> chances are the ideas were in their head already.
>
> >I leave the serious concert promoters alone in this instance as I
> > would like (as we have been discussing the Beatles) to talk about the
> > popular music business and the music media.They, I`m sure you`ll agree,
> are
> > thrusting ever more "non music" in the direction of not only our youth,
> but
> > the under 10`s also.
>
> Hmm....
> I recently had an interesting discussion with my A level music teacher
about
> the way that students who are otherwise uncontrollable (often to the brink
> of expulsion) tackle music performance with diligence. Her GCSE groups
often
> include the most unruly pupils, yet the enthusiasm they show for
performance
> and composition turns them into, if not model students, then certainly
> managable pupils who are often a pleasure to teach. My point is that they
> don't come to the subject through a love of 'superior' music, be it
> classical or jazz or rock. They are engaged by the popular music culture
> which is a massive part of their lives. These students, who would
otherwise
> never stand up on a stage or venture near the music rooms, will stand up
in
> school concerts and sing 'my heart will go on' or a song by Mariah Carey
> (yuck! :-)) or Andrew Lloyd Weber. It is 'non-music' that draws them _to_
> music and exposes them to broader kinds of music that they would otherwise
> never experience. Would you really want to deny them this?
>
> >There has to be an "end of the road" / or the "final
> > straw" someday to some pretty disgusting and offensive song lyrics and
> > music, and to warrant putting into effect something like government
health
> > warnings (as on cigarette packets) on C.D`s and live pop performances
etc.
>
> CDs with explicit lyrics already carry a warning sticker, not as
censorship
> or because the 'final straw' has ben reached, but simply for the
information
> of those buying them. This seems only fair because often the radio tracks
> are edited to omit explicit material which occurs in the CD version so
> parents cannot know that a CD is unsuitable by listening to songs on the
> radio.
>
> I'm finding this thread more and more interesting! Keep up the good work
> guys!
> Em.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org