This is (hopefully fairly correctly selected) posts from "Missing... but what?" -topic, that can be hard to really name. General discussion of nature of art, industrial, transgressions etc. If one is not interested, no need for name calling etc. People who find it interesting - proceed!
Yours,
Mr. moderator
The "missing" thing i've found is not just in Noise, this is Matthew Collings in his book of 1999...
there are other examples...
Matthew Collings – in "This is modern art."
" The type of Modern art that goes back to impressionism is over ... Old Modern Art used to strive not to imitate the exact surfaces of older art precisely because it believed in it. It believed in it enough to want to develop it and advance it, and developing and advancing meant not copying the surface but advancing the idea or purpose that lay beneath the surface..."
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 24, 2020, 10:04:26 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on June 24, 2020, 08:18:08 PM
I'm not sure what the "mechanics of process which is much more complicated" means or are, or if this is relates and if so how to "individual emotional investment."
My English is poor and I use too many so called Polish-English phrases. This is, probably, one of them and you must face with this my imperfection ;) I have meant "Mechanics of process" as something like cause and effect relationships. I consider an art (and music of course) as a part of bigger process which is stimulated at the same time inside and outside of culture. I guess that every human idea (in art, religion, politics and so on - in culture at all) is ruined in so called reality, in ordinary life. Question is, why "idea" is ruined? Why life kills an art? Why the man prefers easy life than pain and transgression? Such questions we can multiply, but always answer will be the same... and the same are reasons why idea and reality aren't on the same level in our material existence.
Noise/industrial as the most extreme trend in music and one of the most radical in the art is a foreign and unwanted object in human life, in a society... in a culture. The natural process is crowding-out of unwanted things/pain from a body/psyche of human, and in the culture. Noise is a pain; noise is an idea of sound which is the closest in our mind, so is the most connected to TRUE. People don't accept True, so they are rejecting this art from their life. This process of crowding-out has another face... This process converts every foreign body/idea into much more accepted shape in human's perception. And I meant just this one "much more complicated mechanics - process" which is determinded by disability of human's mind and primitive needs, and so weak culture which is human's illusion.
What is very important here. Not every enthusiast of noise/industrial is able to resist to cultural crowding-out process or converting into more accepted shape... And this is the most pessimistic in this problem.
Your english is far better than my polish /;-)
I have a problem with conflating noise with industrial, but as for being the "most extreme"... etc there certainly are other examples of this kind - the work of Sam Beckett or Otto Muhl, Nitsch, Schwarzkogler... and others ... but that again is not 'new'- these themes go back to the greek mythical plays...
via de Sade et al..
but whilst i would say there are certainly heavy elements of "unwanted things/pain from a body/psyche of human.." to be found in PE, i see Noise as differing itself from PE in these not being present. The pure abstractness of noise - for me - removes the possibility of any communication other than of noise itself. In that regard i see it as being similar to Abstract Expressionism, where human expression is no longer apparent. But this is another tangent to what is perceived as now missing. Though for me the same 'missing' is found today in contemporary art. Hence my Collings quote. (what has replaced this sincerity is, it is said, is irony)
Quote from: JLIAT on June 25, 2020, 10:53:58 AM
I have a problem with conflating noise with industrial, but as for being the "most extreme"... etc there certainly are other examples of this kind - the work of Sam Beckett or Otto Muhl, Nitsch, Schwarzkogler... and others ... but that again is not 'new'- these themes go back to the greek mythical plays...
via de Sade et al..
but whilst i would say there are certainly heavy elements of "unwanted things/pain from a body/psyche of human.." to be found in PE, i see Noise as differing itself from PE in these not being present. The pure abstractness of noise - for me - removes the possibility of any communication other than of noise itself. In that regard i see it as being similar to Abstract Expressionism, where human expression is no longer apparent. But this is another tangent to what is perceived as now missing. Though for me the same 'missing' is found today in contemporary art. Hence my Collings quote. (what has replaced this sincerity is, it is said, is irony)
I supposed that we came to the point where, again and again, interlocutors must explain fundamental words.
So, first of all:
"greek mythical plays... via de Sade et al.." - isn't the same like NOISE/INDUSTRIAL - noise/industrial is part of a neo-avant-garde trend and this has a family tree with historical Avant-garde so the Art which was based on anti-classical values and esthetics. Sade and the rest, who were innovators, but weren't avantgardists. It is fundamental dissonance between "classic vs. avant-garde" about that people forget in such discussion often.
PE and NOISE INDUSTRIAL has the same base - this is ONLY antimusic, noise sound, and this is real INDUSTRIAL MUSIC, not Throbbing Gristle, CV, SPK and others which popularly are named as "industrial Music" because somebody, one of the leaders of popular band in 1976 used this term as a slogan - when PE and noise industrial hasn't existed yet. The topic demands more description, but people thoughtlessly are using some words/terms.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 01:19:53 PM
I supposed that we came to the point where, again and again, interlocutors must explain fundamental words.
So, first of all:
"greek mythical plays... via de Sade et al.." - isn't the same like NOISE/INDUSTRIAL - noise/industrial is part of a neo-avant-garde trend and this has a family tree with historical Avant-garde so the Art which was based on anti-classical values and esthetics. Sade and the rest, who were innovators, but weren't avantgardists. It is fundamental dissonance between "classic vs. avant-garde" about that people forget in such discussion often.
PE and NOISE INDUSTRIAL has the same base - this is ONLY antimusic, noise sound, and this is real INDUSTRIAL MUSIC, not Throbbing Gristle, CV, SPK and others which popularly are named as "industrial Music" because somebody, one of the leaders of popular band in 1976 used this term as a slogan - when PE and noise industrial hasn't existed yet. The topic demands more description, but people thoughtlessly are using some words/terms.
I think we are not going to find agreement here, i'm using the terms 'industrial', Power Electronics', 'Noise', 'Harsh Noise', and 'Harsh Noise Wall' as they are generally defined, in many cases by the artists themselves who you seem to dismiss. (PE .. .coined by William Bennett ...the founding of Industrial Records by members of Throbbing Gristle ... and I think Harsh noise wall by Sam MacKinley) If you check out the history of the Avant-garde you will find de Sarde quite a significant influence, unless again you dont consider what is generally to be defined as avant-garde and anti-classical – by which I take it to be 'the establishment'. I think to avoid confusion between what you call " real INDUSTRIAL MUSIC, not Throbbing Gristle" you would be better using IMO a different label than that defined by TG. Likewise if you take 'Avant-garde' not to include Dada, Neo-Data, Fluxus, ...and "The concept of avant-garde refers primarily to artists, writers, composers and thinkers whose work is opposed to mainstream cultural values " I'm using the wiki page for conveniance... likewise sade - "Whitehouse emerged as earlier industrial acts such as Throbbing Gristle and SPK were pulling back from noise and extreme sounds and embracing relatively more conventional musical genres. In opposition to this trend, Whitehouse wanted to take these earlier groups' sounds and fascination with extreme subject matter even further; as referenced on the sleeve of their first LP, the group wished to "cut pure human states" and produce "the most extreme music ever recorded". In doing so, they drew inspiration from some earlier experimental musicians and artists such as Alvin Lucier, Robert Ashley, and Yoko Ono as well as writers such as Marquis de Sade."
I think it would 1) you need to identify those who you would think avant-garde / PE/Industrial, and 2) coin new terms other than those which already have a general significance.
I apologise in advance for using Wiki – but "thoughtlessly are using some words/terms" is not what i'm doing, merely saving space and referencing other sources.
For instance Hegarty's Noise Music – A History...
Sade p.122 "The 150 Murderous Passions, tries to bring out the closing section of de Sade's 120 Days of Sodom"... etc.
(though I have many issues with the book, ( i'd say IMO it would be essential to anyone interested in the genre.)
Quote from: JLIAT on June 25, 2020, 02:34:40 PM
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 01:19:53 PM
I supposed that we came to the point where, again and again, interlocutors must explain fundamental words.
So, first of all:
"greek mythical plays... via de Sade et al.." - isn't the same like NOISE/INDUSTRIAL - noise/industrial is part of a neo-avant-garde trend and this has a family tree with historical Avant-garde so the Art which was based on anti-classical values and esthetics. Sade and the rest, who were innovators, but weren't avantgardists. It is fundamental dissonance between "classic vs. avant-garde" about that people forget in such discussion often.
PE and NOISE INDUSTRIAL has the same base - this is ONLY antimusic, noise sound, and this is real INDUSTRIAL MUSIC, not Throbbing Gristle, CV, SPK and others which popularly are named as "industrial Music" because somebody, one of the leaders of popular band in 1976 used this term as a slogan - when PE and noise industrial hasn't existed yet. The topic demands more description, but people thoughtlessly are using some words/terms.
I think we are not going to find agreement here, i'm using the terms 'industrial', Power Electronics', 'Noise', 'Harsh Noise', and 'Harsh Noise Wall' as they are generally defined, in many cases by the artists themselves who you seem to dismiss. (PE .. .coined by William Bennett ...the founding of Industrial Records by members of Throbbing Gristle ... and I think Harsh noise wall by Sam MacKinley) If you check out the history of the Avant-garde you will find de Sarde quite a significant influence, unless again you dont consider what is generally to be defined as avant-garde and anti-classical – by which I take it to be 'the establishment'. I think to avoid confusion between what you call " real INDUSTRIAL MUSIC, not Throbbing Gristle" you would be better using IMO a different label than that defined by TG. Likewise if you take 'Avant-garde' not to include Dada, Neo-Data, Fluxus, ...and "The concept of avant-garde refers primarily to artists, writers, composers and thinkers whose work is opposed to mainstream cultural values " I'm using the wiki page for conveniance... likewise sade - "Whitehouse emerged as earlier industrial acts such as Throbbing Gristle and SPK were pulling back from noise and extreme sounds and embracing relatively more conventional musical genres. In opposition to this trend, Whitehouse wanted to take these earlier groups' sounds and fascination with extreme subject matter even further; as referenced on the sleeve of their first LP, the group wished to "cut pure human states" and produce "the most extreme music ever recorded". In doing so, they drew inspiration from some earlier experimental musicians and artists such as Alvin Lucier, Robert Ashley, and Yoko Ono as well as writers such as Marquis de Sade."
I think it would 1) you need to identify those who you would think avant-garde / PE/Industrial, and 2) coin new terms other than those which already have a general significance.
I apologise in advance for using Wiki – but "thoughtlessly are using some words/terms" is not what i'm doing, merely saving space and referencing other sources.
For instance Hegarty's Noise Music – A History...
Sade p.122 "The 150 Murderous Passions, tries to bring out the closing section of de Sade's 120 Days of Sodom"... etc.
(though I have many issues with the book, ( i'd say IMO it would be essential to anyone interested in the genre.)
~
First of all - if someone, for example De Sade has influence on an avant-garde artist, it doesn't make this first artist - avantgardist. I think, it is obvious.
Secondly - if anyone artist, for example Steven Stapleton, speaks that he makes surreal music, it doesn't mean that everyone must use this term. Everyone, who wants to understand the wider context of music must consider more factors than artist's imagination about himself.
Thirdly - I didn't write that " 'Avant-garde' not to include Dada, Neo-Data, Fluxus." - I don't know where from you took this assumption?
Fourthy - about terms. I showed only a need to precise what you, me or anyone else undestands these problematic terms. Problematic, because many people understand, for example "industrial" or "noise", in differant way. If people, who are using these terms in discussion don't explain what they mean, this discussion may be fruitless.
And the last but not least - I explained the basic terms in my "Encyclopaedia of Industrial Music" book... I don't demand you must know it, and you needn't demand I have to know other books or Wiki sites too. I prefer using our knowledge based on logical and rational arguments. So, if you explain me, why , for example, Throbbing Gristle should be more associated to "industrial music" (for example using five postulats of industrial music by Jon Savage), than for example - WHITEHOUSE or The NEW BLOCKADERS, using real esthethic factors, not artist's declaration, then we may continue our discussion. If not, then, in fact we will not find agreement and and rational place to share our opinions.
Quote from: Baglady on June 25, 2020, 04:53:08 PM
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 04:40:10 PM
Quote from: Baglady on June 25, 2020, 04:22:17 PM
Quote from: Strangecross on June 25, 2020, 05:53:56 AM
what's missing is strength of character via artistic endeavors and social fluency.
This.
And more in-depth discussion and proper writing. Feels kinda sad when someone has worked hard for months or even years on an album, and the only comments the album gets are "This shit slaps", "Scorcher!", "Flame emoji" or whatever in some instagram post or on a forum board. Sure there are some rather well written reviews and (almost) articles here on this board for example, but it's mostly just spontaneous comments. There are a handful of zines, and some of them are great. But they need to be more in numbers, and they need to differ from eachother with different takes, angles, content, aesthetics (blacknwhite semi-abstract xerox art is nice, but for fucks sake...)... That's what I'm missing; more diverse writing that elevates noise just a little bit above something you indulge in to pass two hours after supper before bedtime.
I could write - do it youself! ;) Use free - blog-sites and other places... I know not everyone has got possibilities to write, not everyone can create music etc., but, if there is such possibility, why not to try? Besides, I suppose that there isn't so big need reading anything. Most of so called noise/industrial enthusiasts don't care about that.
I am working on a printed thing after a decade of just writing reviews and thoughts in my notebooks. But while that is rewarding even without an audience (yet), I need others to write more so I have something to read. For me it has always been good writing that have kept me interested and curious in the genres I'm into. Something to bounce my own thoughts and views against.
Maybe other writers are waiting for the first step by someone else? Internet makes chance for every idea, for every way of writing. For example, why don't try to persuade three or five writers and don't write three or five reviews the same record, without consultation before that?
In reply to your 5 points...
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 03:03:00 PM
First of all -
1) It seems the term 'Avant-garde' as applied to the arts was adopted from the military around 1910, and as I said if you checkout those associated with the term de Sade is significant. Whether he can be considered avant-garde is if one wants to apply the term retrospectively. Such that Sade might be not the first but certainly fits "The concept of avant-garde refers primarily to artists, writers, composers and thinkers whose work is opposed to mainstream cultural values" likewise Baudelaire et al. 2) Your second point seems not to be relevant, If Stapleton coined the term "Power Electronics" and it involved pushing " these earlier groups' sounds and fascination with extreme subject matter even further" I see no good reason for saying that is just what PE is in relation to industrial. The term and PE 'music' here applies to the nature of the music he wished to produce. 3) I made no assumption of your use of Avant-garde, I said "If" and by this I referred to what I understood you claimed, that TG was not industrial, though they coined the term, likewise PE and Whitehouse. 4) I've explained fairly precisely what these terms mean in relation to their historical context. But I see a danger in using historical terms such as these in a contemporary setting. Especially if they depart from the original ideas. 5) I'm sorry I missed your Encyclopaedia, and so your "basic terms" are. What are they? I should say here that at the time and since i've no particular interest in Industrial or PE, as for me rather than being anything Avant Garde I could see it doing not much more radical than Dada / Fluxus or DIAS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_in_Art_Symposium.. or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viennese_Actionism with which I was familiar- what excited me was the difference between such performance art and the denial of creativity or critique in noise, esp. on first hearing Merzbow. Much the same for Vomir. So i'm also unfamiliar with Savages 5 postulates, but i'll try to explain why Throbbing Gristle should be more associated to "industrial music" than for example - WHITEHOUSE or The NEW BLOCKADERS," Firstly I think his opening remakes might give an idea of "more" ... "these were best exemplified by Throbbing Gristle in London, and Cabaret Voltaire in Sheffield ...These two, in particular, used the space offered to them to develop the ideas which I, in my purism, would prefer to call, for the sake of argument, "industrial." So the fact TG coined the term & Sage thinks they best exemplified should have some weight. That Whitehouse sort to push the industrial envelope into more non-musicality and so coined the term and the genre Power Electronics should account for why TG are better examples of Industrial. As for TNB – I think they very much see themselves as do others as Noise, not Industrial. (see ttp://www.thenewblockaders.org.uk/ and http://www.thenewblockaders.org.uk/tnbarticles.html ) But here i'd see Merzbow as being more radical. i.e. having less of an agenda. So that is why i'd see TG as better representative of Industrial than Whitehouse or TNB. As to the 5 postulates, 2 seems to rule out TNB anti anti..and again is supported by a direct reference to TG and in P1 there is an indirect reference to TG, "The choice to record for their own, or independent labels "... P3 says use of synthesises and anti music, but TNB I think used junk, and were / are famously anti anti... I think " In this, Throbbing Gristle's Second Annual Report (1977) with its reliance on synthesizers and non-musical sounds, was prototypical. " also kind of makes TG a bench mark for industrial, at least for Savage or anyone using his 5 postulates... yourself? And TG certainly from the get go did P4! And again TG are cited as examples of P5.
Finally much of more recent 21stC "industrial" music would fail Savge's 5 postulates.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 25, 2020, 05:11:55 PM
In reply to your 5 points...
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 03:03:00 PM
First of all -
1) It seems the term 'Avant-garde' as applied to the arts was adopted from the military around 1910, and as I said if you checkout those associated with the term de Sade is significant. Whether he can be considered avant-garde is if one wants to apply the term retrospectively. Such that Sade might be not the first but certainly fits "The concept of avant-garde refers primarily to artists, writers, composers and thinkers whose work is opposed to mainstream cultural values" likewise Baudelaire et al. 2) Your second point seems not to be relevant, If Stapleton coined the term "Power Electronics" and it involved pushing " these earlier groups' sounds and fascination with extreme subject matter even further" I see no good reason for saying that is just what PE is in relation to industrial. The term and PE 'music' here applies to the nature of the music he wished to produce. 3) I made no assumption of your use of Avant-garde, I said "If" and by this I referred to what I understood you claimed, that TG was not industrial, though they coined the term, likewise PE and Whitehouse. 4) I've explained fairly precisely what these terms mean in relation to their historical context. But I see a danger in using historical terms such as these in a contemporary setting. Especially if they depart from the original ideas. 5) I'm sorry I missed your Encyclopaedia, and so your "basic terms" are. What are they? I should say here that at the time and since i've no particular interest in Industrial or PE, as for me rather than being anything Avant Garde I could see it doing not much more radical than Dada / Fluxus or DIAS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destruction_in_Art_Symposium.. or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viennese_Actionism with which I was familiar- what excited me was the difference between such performance art and the denial of creativity or critique in noise, esp. on first hearing Merzbow. Much the same for Vomir. So i'm also unfamiliar with Savages 5 postulates, but i'll try to explain why Throbbing Gristle should be more associated to "industrial music" than for example - WHITEHOUSE or The NEW BLOCKADERS," Firstly I think his opening remakes might give an idea of "more" ... "these were best exemplified by Throbbing Gristle in London, and Cabaret Voltaire in Sheffield ...These two, in particular, used the space offered to them to develop the ideas which I, in my purism, would prefer to call, for the sake of argument, "industrial." So the fact TG coined the term & Sage thinks they best exemplified should have some weight. That Whitehouse sort to push the industrial envelope into more non-musicality and so coined the term and the genre Power Electronics should account for why TG are better examples of Industrial. As for TNB – I think they very much see themselves as do others as Noise, not Industrial. (see ttp://www.thenewblockaders.org.uk/ and http://www.thenewblockaders.org.uk/tnbarticles.html ) But here i'd see Merzbow as being more radical. i.e. having less of an agenda. So that is why i'd see TG as better representative of Industrial than Whitehouse or TNB. As to the 5 postulates, 2 seems to rule out TNB anti anti..and again is supported by a direct reference to TG and in P1 there is an indirect reference to TG, "The choice to record for their own, or independent labels "... P3 says use of synthesises and anti music, but TNB I think used junk, and were / are famously anti anti... I think " In this, Throbbing Gristle's Second Annual Report (1977) with its reliance on synthesizers and non-musical sounds, was prototypical. " also kind of makes TG a bench mark for industrial, at least for Savage or anyone using his 5 postulates... yourself? And TG certainly from the get go did P4! And again TG are cited as examples of P5.
Finally much of more recent 21stC "industrial" music would fail Savge's 5 postulates.
"It seems the term 'Avant-garde' as applied to the arts was adopted from the military around 1910, and as I said if you checkout those associated with the term de Sade is significant. Whether he can be considered avant-garde is if one wants to apply the term retrospectively. Such that Sade might be not the first but certainly fits "The concept of avant-garde refers primarily to artists, writers, composers and thinkers whose work is opposed to mainstream cultural values" likewise Baudelaire et al. "
Avantgarde is term and phenomena mainly in the ART and in the context of the Art we should consider this phenomena. Its importance for culture is the second question, which isn't problem for us here. So, established Avantgarde was based on esthetical fundaments, and different canon of beauty, not "cultural values". For example - Russian or Polish futurists weren't against culture values, but everyone of avantgardists was against classic canon of beauty. So, de SADE and his art/literature was based on classic paradigm of literature. Even his topics, which was shocked in his time, agree, was create in context of standard human freedom. Shocking topics don't make him avantgardist... I didn't find anywhere who saw him as such writer. It would be nonsense. His influence on some Avantgardists can not change this opinion.
"Your second point seems not to be relevant, If Stapleton coined the term "Power Electronics" and it involved pushing " these earlier groups' sounds and fascination with extreme subject matter even further" I see no good reason for saying that is just what PE is in relation to industrial.".
You are throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I didn't mention Stapleton in case of his "power electronics", only in case of his declaration about "surrealist music" which he creates. at least he thought so, and need to question such artist's declaration because we must take bigger context than artist's imagination about himself. I haven't objection about term "power electronics". I don't want to name it as "industrial music", only show you that power electronics has more common to "industrial music" than Throbbing Gristle, CV and SPK which are incarnation an avant-garde of rock music. In other words I could see Power Electronics (and noise industrial, experimental postindustrial, ambient industrial) as sub-genre of Industrial Music.
" I should say here that at the time and since i've no particular interest in Industrial or PE, as for me rather than being anything Avant Garde I could see it doing not much more radical than Dada / Fluxus or DIAS"
First of all, I mentioned that "industrial music" (so power electronics and noise industrial) is trend of neo-avantgarde. Besides, it mustn't be "radical" to name it "neo-avantgarde". We are discussing about MUSIC (its esthetics) not about her out-of-musical radicalism.
"So the fact TG coined the term & Sage thinks they best exemplified should have some weight."
Not true. It was accident with coined the term. It was advertising slogan "Industrial music for industrial people" for a new label Industrial Records. Cazazza and Orridge didn't think about new genre in music. It was taken by journalists. About "industrial music" wrote already P. Schaeffer and P. Henry in the end of the 50. who described such their concrete musique.
Jon Savage even didn't mention about rock music in his postulates which were base for many people who want to see TG, SPK or CV as "industrial". These three projects are based on rock music, its avantgarde idiom, so I don't see any reason linking mentioned groups to industrial music. Industrial music must be based ONLY on ANTI-MUSIC, without any pseudo musical factors like regular rhythms or melodies, so only on NOISE, whatever it may come, from synths, broken devices, no musical objects, or traditional instruments which are used against musical formulas. This is the Industrial Music, not rockish avatgardish of punk-psychedlic-hippies who used some "antimusical" parts in their rock music formula.
"Avantgarde is term and phenomena mainly in the ART and in the context of the Art we should consider this phenomena. Its importance for culture is the second question, which isn't problem for us here."
I think you need to provide some support for this, it seems I was wrong re 1910, 1825 – Origin of the term "is usually credited to the influential thinker Henri de Saint-Simon, one of the forerunners of socialism. He believed in the social power of the arts and saw artists, alongside scientists and industrialists, as the leaders of a new society." ..." for most of the 20th century—and the 19th as well—the term avant-garde was widely used to define attempts to forge new dimensions to our aesthetic and political definitions of reality. " You seem to deny this. OK have your own definition. My other "increased emphasis on aesthetic issues has continued to the present. Avant-garde today generally refers to groups of intellectuals, writers, and artists, including architects, who voice ideas and experiment with artistic approaches that challenge current cultural values." Again includes many for whom de Sade was significant. And you see their granting him such importance not changing your opinion, which of course you are welcome to.
Re Stapleton, my mistake, it was of course Whitehouse and William Bennett who coined the term Power Electronics, I was confused by your reference to Stapleton and Surrealism? He maybe thought his music surreal, but it seems irrelevant to the development of the sub genre PE from Industrial, to which Throbbing Gristle as Savage points out was seminal and originator of Industrial Music. If you now reject Savages criteria and his examples and what is generally accepted, again you are welcome. (I see no evidence of TG being ' an avant-garde of rock music' deriving from COUM – Fine Art movements, Fluxus. They seem continually to be identified with the origins of industrial. As savage writes)
As for neo-avantgarde, both industrial and PE are no longer 'at the front' of music, aesthetically. As for industrial music for industrial people, there is the term, and its used by Jon Savage in his text where TG exemplify what he means by 'industrial'. TG though did not develop from rock music but from COUM.
You are free to think and write " Industrial music must be based ONLY on ANTI-MUSIC, so only on NOISE" but the historical facts are contrary to that idea. Just to be clear, do you think the five postulates of industrial music by Jon Savage are valid criteria for establishing what is industrial. If you do not, why mention them? For they do establish TG as Industrial. And "using real esthethic factors" - it is only with noise that 'esthethic factors' become irrelevant, though that doesn't preclude noise from being music, that the inappropriateness of aesthetic factors – found in Industrial and PE are no longer valid are part of differentiating Noise from PE and Industrial.
" Industrial music must be based ONLY on ANTI-MUSIC, without any pseudo musical factors "
Which is at odds with the general idea of industrial music. So you would call Vomir industrial, I would not.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 25, 2020, 07:36:56 PM
I think you need to provide some support for this, it seems I was wrong re 1910, 1825 – Origin of the term "is usually credited to the influential thinker Henri de Saint-Simon, one of the forerunners of socialism. He believed in the social power of the arts and saw artists, alongside scientists and industrialists, as the leaders of a new society." ..." for most of the 20th century—and the 19th as well—the term avant-garde was widely used to define attempts to forge new dimensions to our aesthetic and political definitions of reality. " You seem to deny this. OK have your own definition. My other "increased emphasis on aesthetic issues has continued to the present. Avant-garde today generally refers to groups of intellectuals, writers, and artists, including architects, who voice ideas and experiment with artistic approaches that challenge current cultural values." Again includes many for whom de Sade was significant. And you see their granting him such importance not changing your opinion, which of course you are welcome to.
Re Stapleton, my mistake, it was of course Whitehouse and William Bennett who coined the term Power Electronics, I was confused by your reference to Stapleton and Surrealism? He maybe thought his music surreal, but it seems irrelevant to the development of the sub genre PE from Industrial, to which Throbbing Gristle as Savage points out was seminal and originator of Industrial Music. If you now reject Savages criteria and his examples and what is generally accepted, again you are welcome. (I see no evidence of TG being ' an avant-garde of rock music' deriving from COUM – Fine Art movements, Fluxus. They seem continually to be identified with the origins of industrial. As savage writes)
As for neo-avantgarde, both industrial and PE are no longer 'at the front' of music, aesthetically. As for industrial music for industrial people, there is the term, and its used by Jon Savage in his text where TG exemplify what he means by 'industrial'. TG though did not develop from rock music but from COUM.
You are free to think and write " Industrial music must be based ONLY on ANTI-MUSIC, so only on NOISE" but the historical facts are contrary to that idea. Just to be clear, do you think the five postulates of industrial music by Jon Savage are valid criteria for establishing what is industrial. If you do not, why mention them? For they do establish TG as Industrial. And "using real esthethic factors" - it is only with noise that 'esthethic factors' become irrelevant, though that doesn't preclude noise from being music, that the inappropriateness of aesthetic factors – found in Industrial and PE are no longer valid are part of differentiating Noise from PE and Industrial.
" Industrial music must be based ONLY on ANTI-MUSIC, without any pseudo musical factors "
Which is at odds with the general idea of industrial music. So you would call Vomir industrial, I would not.
"I think you need to provide some support for this, it seems I was wrong re 1910, 1825 – Origin of the term "is usually credited to the influential thinker Henri de Saint-Simon, one of the forerunners of socialism. He believed in the social power of the arts and saw artists, alongside scientists and industrialists, as the leaders of a new society." ..." for most of the 20th century—and the 19th as well—the term avant-garde was widely used to define attempts to forge new dimensions to our aesthetic and political definitions of reality.
Do you wat to put Henri de Saint-Simon as an avantgardist in the art or an avantgardist in politics or economics? I don't understand you. Again, and again, do you consider AVANT-GARDE as trend in art or in culture/phlosophy here? I would like to remind you that we are discussing here about music, so about the art, not about precursors in politics or in the science.
"If you now reject Savages criteria and his examples and what is generally accepted, again you are welcome. (I see no evidence of TG being ' an avant-garde of rock music' deriving from COUM – Fine Art movements, Fluxus. They seem continually to be identified with the origins of industrial. As savage writes)"
I don't reject Savages criteria, quite the contrary, his criteria perfectly are describing what should be INDUSTRIAL MUSIC. He wrote clearly - INDUSTRIAL MUSIC should be based on anti-music... only. I didn't read there that he mentioned about anti-music can be or should be mixed up with other styles of genres in music. And did you? Don't you see evidence of TG being rockish? we only have to listen their recordings. Of course, some of them are more experimental than others, but there is still rock expression, psychedelic atmosphere, krautrockish influences - listen to KLUSTER recordings! Besides, GPO mentioned many times that he wanted to adopt in TG experimental/avantgardish ideas in more popular formulas. Take books about history of rock music in every of them (at least I know such) TG is classified as rock band witch avantgarde touch. TG was established from COUM, indeed. Did I write somethgng different? I wrote about an estehetic base for TG music.
"both industrial and PE are no longer 'at the front' of music, aesthetically"
And what? What is the music in your opinion?
"Which is at odds with the general idea of industrial music."
and what is general idea of industrial music?
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 08:01:24 PM
Do you wat to put Henri de Saint-Simon as an avantgardist in the art or an avantgardist in politics? I don't understand you. Again, and again, do you consider AVANT-GARDE as trend in art or in culture here? I would like to remind you that we are discussing here about music, so about the art, not about precursors in politics or in the science.
I've given three definitions of avant garde, a trend in culture and it seems politics. What we are discussing here are specific genres in music. Do I consider Industrial music Avant Garde, not particularly, as you point out music concrete, Stockhausen, Cage were in the avant garde of music.
"When we shifted from Coum Transmissions to TG, we were also stating that we wanted to go into popular culture, away from the art gallery context, and show that the same technique that had been made to operate in that system could work. We wanted to test it out in the real world, or nearer to the real world, at a more street level – with young kids who had no education in art perception, who didn't come along and either empathised or didn't; either liked the noise or didn't. A little mini-Dada movement, eh?"
P-Orridge, 1983.
So maybe popular avant-garde...? And you can see TG had no rock origins.
But as the idea of an avant-garde has the idea of a direction and as the limit of this has now been reached both in the likes of 4'33" and HNW there cannot anymore be an Avant-garde.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 08:01:24 PM
I don't reject Savages criteria, quite the contrary, his criteria perfectly are describing what should be INDUSTRIAL MUSIC. He wrote clearly - INDUSTRIAL MUSIC should be based on anti-music... only.
"3) USE OF SYNTHESIZERS AND ANTI-MUSIC. This is self-explanatory. Although music was the means to an end, rather than the end in itself, there was still the necessity of matching form to format. In this, Throbbing Gristle's Second Annual Report (1977) with its reliance on synthesizers and non-musical sounds, was prototypical. "
As for anti-music only – no.
"EXTRA-MUSICAL ELEMENTS. Much of this comes under "Access To Information," but there is more besides. Introduction of literary elements in a thorough--as opposed to typical pop dilettantism--manner: the full debt was made clear only long after "Industrial" had passed, in the Final Academy held in London in October, 1982. "
So you see extra musical elements, and that he claims by 1982 Industrial had passed. You cant accept Savage's criteria where " Second Annual Report (1977) ...was prototypical" etc. and then say TG was not industrial without contradiction.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 08:01:24 PM
I didn't read there that he mentioned about anti-music and other genres in music. And did you? Don't you see evidence of TG being rockish? we only have to listen their recordings. Of course, some of them are more experimental than others, but there is still rock expression, psychedelic atmosphere, krautrockish influences - listen to KLUSTER recordings! Besides, GPO mentioned many times that he wanted to adopt in TG experimental/avantgardish ideas in more popular formulas. Take books about history of rock music in every of them TG is classified as rock band witch avantgarde touch.
Biba Kopf sees TG as industrial - was leading feature writer on Melody Maker and NME in the late '70s and '80s currently the Editor-in-Chief of The Wire. From Hegarty, p 106 "The term 'industrial Music' is mostly thought to have come from Throbbing Gristle's label Industrial Records..". Wiki - "Prominent industrial musicians include Throbbing Gristle..." Discogs 840 = industrial Art Rock = 12... Last FM "Industrial music is a style of experimental music that draws on transgressive and provocative themes. The term was coined in the mid-1970s with the founding of Industrial Records by the band Throbbing Gristle" Britannica - "coined by British post punk experimentalist Throbbing Gristle... udicovermusic "Industrial" may be convenient shorthand for the genre's hard-synth sound, however, the term refers to the Industrial Records imprint created in the mid-70s by Throbbing Gristle, its avant-garde forbearers." All music "The first group of industrial bands -- England's Throbbing Gristle and Cabaret Voltaire, and Germany's Einsturzende Neubauten" ... and of course Savage defines industrial by continual reference to TG.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 08:01:24 PM
"both industrial and PE are no longer 'at the front' of music, aesthetically"
And what? What is the music in your opinion?
There is no front.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 08:01:24 PM
and what is general idea of industrial music?
I'll go with the above quotes, other texts notably Hegarty and this -
http://music.hyperreal.org/epsilon/info/industrial_principles.html
esp. " "Industrial" had passed, in the Final Academy held in London in October, 1982"
Quote from: JLIAT on June 25, 2020, 08:56:01 PM
So maybe popular avant-garde...? And you can see TG had no rock origins.
And maybe you must understand that GPO, as every young man, without music schools and fascinated rock psychedelic music, could adopt "avantgarde" only by such tools which he can use? So popular music, which he knew? So rock? For me it is obvious, it is obvious when I am listening to TG music also.
"Do I consider Industrial music Avant Garde, not particularly, as you point out music concrete, Stockhausen, Cage were in the avant garde of music."
I don't understand this sentence. Do you know what is difference between Avantgarde and neo-avantgarde? I consider industrial music which has his artistic bloodline mainly in the neo-avantgarde, not in avant-garde.
"As for anti-music only – no."
Yes, it is. I am writing about MUSIC not extra musical elements, like performance art, video art, body art or literature. I am writing about essence of music art, how this music was build up from a sound. Multimedia was only a method of using music and other kind of art. When you are listening music from record, you hear music - not see visual aspects, ok?
"There is no front."
I don't understand this.
And, the most important case. Savage's five parameters concerns on "Industrial Culture", only one of them concerns on the "industrial music", this one number 3: USE OF SYNTHESIZERS AND ANTI-MUSIC, where it speaks there only about music which shouldn't be aim in itself. This is only strategy using of sound/music, nothing more about music which should be created in form of an "anti-music", so on base of noise, nothing more.
Quote from: Japsi on June 26, 2020, 01:51:44 AM
1. I couldn't give a tuppeny fart whether TG are industrial or not.
Then what is missing is any regard to truth. Ergo my Trump / Taliban reference.
Quote from: Japsi on June 26, 2020, 01:51:44 AM
2. I made no reference to the demise of any forums.
Well given 1 i could say i dont give a fart for what you say, but i do. You say " lies with the, seemingly deliberate, contrarianism I see in JLIAT's posts; not just here, but elsewhere." then you do give a fart, and the issue is what is missing. So "deliberate, contrarianism " to what? That TG was not industrial? That the origins of a genre are unimportant to you. Fine, but why then post that i'm being " seemingly deliberate, contrarianism " when its generally considered true?
Quote from: Japsi on June 26, 2020, 01:51:44 AM
3. If I'm 'attacking' anything, it's your style of communication.
Sure i get this. So you dont care about the facts of the matter just how the lies or truth is presented. Here is again maybe what is missing. When a genre just becomes about style. When anything becomes about style and not content. Then something is missing.
Quote from: Theodore on June 26, 2020, 05:35:16 AM
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 12:36:23 AM
Quote from: Japsi on June 26, 2020, 12:14:13 AM
You derailed a useful discussion, plain and simple,
Please show how it was useful.
It was useful cause it was interesting for me to read peoples 'simple' opinions on this matter based on their feelings. Read collapsedhole's post for example. Something that is personal, something that i can relate to, something that i enjoy to read. Yours, i cant even read ! Dont know if you write the biggest 'truths' in there, i cant follow all this blah blah, i dont care and i dont think anyone asked for a philosophical analysis ! Neither for a 'solution' , as you probably mean by 'useful' ! We asked for personal opinions ... not bibliography. - And that's not even the problem. Problem is you go on and on and on ... You dont stop man !
Bringing Trump and Taliban here. Makes sense. It's you who had brought holocaust and seeing everywhere racists in the covid thread, isnt it ?
Come on ! Let others speak. You dont have to answer everything. Dont educate me more please.
Am I stopping anyone from speaking? I'm certainly not trying to educate anyone. If people want to think Throbbing Gristle were not seminal in the origins industrial music fine. As for philosophical analysis, i've done no such thing, though the "P" word has now been used, and the criticism of an (for me and impu) interesting exchange seems bordering on anti-intellectualism.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 09:15:48 PM
And maybe you must understand that GPO, as every young man, without music schools and fascinated rock psychedelic music, could adopt "avantgarde" only by such tools which he can use? So popular music, which he knew? So rock? For me it is obvious, it is obvious when I am listening to TG music also.
But GPO was not "as every young man" prior to setting up TG he was involved in the Art world, was supported by the arts council, was part of the contemporary scene at the ICA in London, was radical to the extent of making newspaper headlines and getting questions asked in the UK parliament - from the infamous prostitution show! Before TG he was very significant in the artworld.. -Even visited Falmouth School of Art as part of Fluxus - i was there in my final year ;-)
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 09:15:48 PM
"There is no front."
I don't understand this.
Avant Garde - "from French, "advance guard" or "vanguard", literally "fore-guard" The troops at the front of an army. In art - then spearheading an advance. The idea of progress and making new stuff in music / art. A key feature of Modernism. As was building on the past and making progress.
Whereas post-modernity... typified by no clear front, aim or objectives. More 'whatever it means to you is what it means' everything is just style. Examples - see this thread.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 06:59:57 AM
Here is again maybe what is missing. When a genre just becomes about style. When anything becomes about style and not content. Then something is missing.
I could share this opinion. Maybe our "fucking discussion" about basic terms was necessary to back to the main topic? These basic terms I could expand to what is "artist/composer"? What is his role in society? What is art/music and how it do define in context of legacy of the Avant-garde nowadays? Where is here a publisher, writer and receiver? Of course, everyone may say that it is useless "fucking" pseudo-intelectual, academic "wankfest". Most of people (who declares liking "industrial/noise) doesn't care what is bloodline of music/art which they love. Yeah, this is one of the most important of "MISSING...". People don't want to question existing reality, they don't want to question knowledge which was set up in the past and still feds intellectual laziness of people. These people (enthusiasts on industrial/noise), which most of them feel unique in this fucked reality, actually accept this old culture and science order. In such situation everything will be missing... and always old people will remind these old, beautiful times in fucking nostalgic way, and younger - will envy them because these young people have no idea how their reality to change. But, how they can know it, if they don't know where from this reality comes?
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 07:24:22 AM
But GPO was not "as every young man" prior to setting up TG he was involved in the Art world, was supported by the arts council, was part of the contemporary scene at the ICA in London, was radical to the extent of making newspaper headlines and getting questions asked in the UK parliament - from the infamous prostitution show! Before TG he was very significant in the artworld.. -Even visited Falmouth School of Art as part of Fluxus - i was there in my final year ;-)
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 25, 2020, 09:15:48 PM
"There is no front."
I don't understand this.
Avant Garde - "from French, "advance guard" or "vanguard", literally "fore-guard" The troops at the front of an army. In art - then spearheading an advance. The idea of progress and making new stuff in music / art. A key feature of Modernism. As was building on the past and making progress.
Whereas post-modernity... typified by no clear front, aim or objectives. More 'whatever it means to you is what it means' everything is just style. Examples - see this thread.
"But GPO was not "as every young man""
Yes, he was. He felt as an artist/musician but he wasn't able to play on instruments (if we consider his musical skill). So, what could he use tool to convert avantgarde ideas in popular way? What kind of music? Only rock music - he has always been a psychedelic rockman.
"Avant Garde - "from French, "advance guard"
And so? In Avant-Garde, as trend in modern art, being in the front isn't the most important. The most important is BREAKING OLD/CLASSIC CANONS OF BEAUTY. And don't remind here de Sade who broke canons... Yes, he broke canons, but only relating to customs/moral, not in the Art. His works has not broken anything in the literature art.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 07:46:07 AM
"But GPO was not "as every young man""
Yes, he was. He felt as an artist/musician but he wasn't able to play on instruments (if we consider his musical skill). So, what could he use tool to convert avantgarde ideas in popular way? What kind of music? Only rock music - he has always been a psychedelic rockman.
We have kind of gone over this before, but to play psychedelic rock we are talking pink floyd pre Darkside, and they certainly could play and certainly did have musical skill. The negation of skill was far more punk, the three chords now form a band... idea, And the Britannica article gives TG as post punk industrial. (As do most sources including Savage!) But if your idea that noise = industrial, then as i said Vomir is industrial, which of course he is not.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 07:46:07 AM
"Avant Garde - "from French, "advance guard"
And so? In Avant-Garde, as trend in modern art, being in the front isn't the most important. The most important is BREAKING OLD/CLASSIC CANONS OF BEAUTY. And don't remind here de Sade who broke canons... Yes, he broke canons, but only relating to customs/moral, not in the Art. His works has not broken anything in the literature art.
I'm sorry but that's not how it was. Breaking the old classic cannons was the by product of developing the modernist programme. Truth is beauty, less is more... etc. As was being shocking, that too a by product, 'The Shock of the new'.
There is a very good example which shows "The most important is BREAKING OLD/CLASSIC CANONS OF BEAUTY." was wrong. Back in the late 19thC we had impressionism which pushed painting into an engagement with light- the truth of the visual without recourse to the hierarchy of subject, in effect breaking the old classic cannons by the way. And the pre-raphaelites, who did want to break the then given norms by return to a period prior to the contemporary. In terms of the development of Art, the impressionist movement led on via Cézanne to Cubism etc.
In modernity (i must put IMO here i suppose) the idea was each successive wave built on what went before. Such it was similar to science. As Newton said, standing on the shoulders of giants. That Einstein's theories more closely modelled reality was not so much a break as a development.
If breaking the cannons was the most important then development would be simple and easy, as was punk. And in a way punk was a kind of retrograde step back to a simpler pop of rock and roll, skiffle music.
So lets say the current cannon - in your terms is noise, then to break this would be simple, start playing tunes. Nice tunes.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 09:03:49 AM
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 07:46:07 AM
"But GPO was not "as every young man""
Yes, he was. He felt as an artist/musician but he wasn't able to play on instruments (if we consider his musical skill). So, what could he use tool to convert avantgarde ideas in popular way? What kind of music? Only rock music - he has always been a psychedelic rockman.
We have kind of gone over this before, but to play psychedelic rock we are talking pink floyd pre Darkside, and they certainly could play and certainly did have musical skill. The negation of skill was far more punk, the three chords now form a band... idea, And the Britannica article gives TG as post punk industrial. (As do most sources including Savage!) But if your idea that noise = industrial, then as i said Vomir is industrial, which of course he is not.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 07:46:07 AM
"Avant Garde - "from French, "advance guard"
And so? In Avant-Garde, as trend in modern art, being in the front isn't the most important. The most important is BREAKING OLD/CLASSIC CANONS OF BEAUTY. And don't remind here de Sade who broke canons... Yes, he broke canons, but only relating to customs/moral, not in the Art. His works has not broken anything in the literature art.
I'm sorry but that's not how it was. Breaking the old classic cannons was the by product of developing the modernist programme. Truth is beauty, less is more... etc. As was being shocking, that too a by product, 'The Shock of the new'.
There is a very good example which shows "The most important is BREAKING OLD/CLASSIC CANONS OF BEAUTY." was wrong. Back in the late 19thC we had impressionism which pushed painting into an engagement with light- the truth of the visual without recourse to the hierarchy of subject, in effect breaking the old classic cannons by the way. And the pre-raphaelites, who did want to break the then given norms by return to a period prior to the contemporary. In terms of the development of Art, the impressionist movement led on via Cézanne to Cubism etc.
In modernity (i must put IMO here i suppose) the idea was each successive wave built on what went before. Such it was similar to science. As Newton said, standing on the shoulders of giants. That Einstein's theories more closely modelled reality was not so much a break as a development.
If breaking the cannons was the most important then development would be simple and easy, as was punk. And in a way punk was a kind of retrograde step back to a simpler pop of rock and roll, skiffle music.
So lets say the current cannon - in your terms is noise, then to break this would be simple, start playing tunes. Nice tunes.
"And the Britannica article gives TG as post punk industrial. "
Yes, and it is true which can confirm what I wrote and wanted to say many times here. It shows that "post punk", so rockish style determines what TG done. In my nomenclature this is "avant-rock". "Industrial" is only label which clarifes context of this "post punk" - in my nomeclature this is "industrial avant-rock". However which we can use name here, both terms shows what is the main and real bloodline of TG music. This is rock music, not industrial music which hasn't any conncection to rock music.
"then as i said Vomir is industrial, which of course he is not."
Of course - he is industrial. His music is based only on the anti-music which was described by Savage as the only sound/musical factor which determines the "industrial music". Vomir can be considered as an artist from the outside of "industrial culture", but not from "industrial music" - having regard to Savage's criteria still.
"In terms of the development of Art, the impressionist movement led on via Cézanne to Cubism etc. "
Yes, impressionist is called as very important for the Avan-garde movement but it isn't "avant". Impressionists focused on light which a little destroyed mimetic side of art, but it was still located in classic formulas of beauty. Art historians aren't agreed. Some of them see Impressionism as avant-garde, others - not. I am in the second group.
"If breaking the cannons was the most important then development would be simple and easy, as was punk. And in a way punk was a kind of retrograde step back to a simpler pop of rock and roll, skiffle music.
So lets say the current cannon - in your terms is noise, then to break this would be simple, start playing tunes. Nice tunes."
These your words proofed that you don't understand the essence of Avantgarde. You don't understand, what is mean "classic beauty" in the art. You don't understand what does it mean BEAUTY in the art. Sorry, but we meet in the place, where we are staying before lack of basic knowledge, one of us, about aesthetics in the Art. Sorry, but I don't feel like explaining such things for you here. This basic knowledge, which is well known for everybody who wants to know art history/aesthetics, you may find in every book dedicated to this case. It isn't disputed.
Can i first apologise to Theodore, Japsi, W.K. et al. who might take umbrage with my reply, maybe my style, that i go on.. though only really recently in this thread on this board or that they find intellectual discourse about genre categories annoying. But I actually think this exchange with mpulsyStetoskopu is interesting. And I've no intention of creating any boundaries, if this perceived again i'm sorry, especially as i dont think there are any longer boundaries, which is a problem, which is missing. Or do i wish there to be boundaries even if i thought them possible. My story is how did we get here, and so Chto delat'? ?? Zero Marx is right, welcome to reality ;-)
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
"And the Britannica article gives TG as post punk industrial. "
Yes, and it is true which can confirm what I wrote and wanted to say many times here. It shows that "post punk", so rockish style determines what TG done. In my nomenclature this is "avant-rock". "Industrial" is only label which clarifes context of this "post punk" - in my nomeclature this is "industrial avant-rock".
Then there is no problem – you are using "industrial avant-rock" to describe what all the quotes I gave including Savage as "industrial". And of course you are free to do so, but it can, obviously as here cause confusion. It might do more? Fail to trace the development of Industrial via PE to Noise, Harsh Noise and finally HNW.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
However which we can use name here, both terms shows what is the main and real bloodline of TG music. This is rock music, not industrial music which hasn't any conncection to rock music.
The main musical bloodline, obviously TG were very much influenced by Fluxus and performance art, and there are endless debates about musical bloodlines. But sure they used a kind of rock band format. It was in GPO's terms a way of popularizing his art. And to note you rule out much of what is generally considered Industrial, PE and noise. The rock band format. Most if not all, including most Japnoise.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
"then as i said Vomir is industrial, which of course he is not."
Of course - he is industrial.
So he is wrong in thinking he is HNW. His manifestos are wrong, I see the intentional fallacy? Well I dont go with that as fully as you seem to.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
His music is based only on the anti-music which was described by Savage as the only sound/musical factor which determines the "industrial music".
That is simply not true, or again your reading across and despite what Savage actually said. Savage uses the term ANTI-MUSIC once in his Industrial Principals. Here in full is #3
"3) USE OF SYNTHESIZERS AND ANTI-MUSIC. This is self-explanatory. Although music was the means to an end, rather than the end in itself, there was still the necessity of matching form to format. In this, Throbbing Gristle's Second Annual Report (1977) with its reliance on synthesizers and non-musical sounds, was prototypical. Punk's predilection for amplified noise--as well as works like "Loop" or "Sister Ray"--was refined into a new approach to "music." This development was taken (and is still being taken) to its fullest extent by the profoundly disturbing and haunting work of certain "industrial" artists, whose occasional records provide perhaps the true soundtrack to the final quarter of the twentieth century. "
He does not say anti-music is the only sound musical factor. He says " USE OF SYNTHESIZERS AND ANTI-MUSIC" in Second Annual Report. Moreover he rules out Vomir as being 'Industrial' "the term "industrial" is now obsolete and useless." " The context has shifted: pop is no longer important: temporarily, television is. It is there that the next round in the Information War is being fought." This in 1983 pre dates Vomir.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
Vomir can be considered as an artist from the outside of "industrial culture", but not from "industrial music" - having regard to Savage's criteria still.
Using Savages criteria the term by 83 was obsolete and useless.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
"In terms of the development of Art, the impressionist movement led on via Cézanne to Cubism etc. "
Yes, impressionist is called as very important for the Avan-garde movement but it isn't "avant". Impressionists focused on light which a little destroyed mimetic side of art, but it was still located in classic formulas of beauty. Art historians aren't agreed. Some of them see Impressionism as avant-garde, others - not. I am in the second group.
You miss my point, if you consider the impressionists not as being avant garde, fine – please give some examples.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 09:59:15 AM
"If breaking the cannons was the most important then development would be simple and easy, as was punk. And in a way punk was a kind of retrograde step back to a simpler pop of rock and roll, skiffle music.
So lets say the current cannon - in your terms is noise, then to break this would be simple, start playing tunes. Nice tunes."
These your words proofed that you don't understand the essence of Avantgarde. You don't understand, what is mean "classic beauty" in the art. You don't understand what does it mean BEAUTY in the art. Sorry, but we meet in the place, where we stand before lack of basic knowledge, one of us, about aesthetics in the Art. Sorry, but I don't feel like explaining such things for you here. This basic knowledge, which is well known for everybody who wants to know art history/aesthetics, you may find in every book dedicated to this case. It isn't disputed.
OK so you've basically called me ignorant and so ducked out of this discussion / argument. Actually there are any number of theories regarding beauty / aesthetics. Even if we take some of the most significant, Kant, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Benjamin, Adorno Heidegger - we see differences. I'm surprised you think otherwise and you are not aware of this. But now we, I at least, are in danger of straying into philosophy which will upset the horses. Anyway it was fun.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 11:04:58 AM
Then there is no problem – you are using "industrial avant-rock" to describe what all the quotes I gave including Savage as "industrial". And of course you are free to do so, but it can, obviously as here cause confusion. It might do more? Fail to trace the development of Industrial via PE to Noise, Harsh Noise and finally HNW.
Confusion is when people using "industrial" to name typic industrial rock bands like Ministry, NIN or even Marilyn Manson. When "industrial" appears in case of techno, EBM and other Goth music shit. Confusion is when people aren't conscious where from and what should mean "industrial" in context of development of music somewhere between academic, scholastic music, and pop culture with such trends like rock music.
Confusion is when people want to mix up something what is "rockish" and comes from "classic" imagination of music, with "avantgardish" what is and should be against every "classic" types of esthetics/forms based on melody, regular rhythm, symetry and will to put in order all pieces of music, just including rock music.
"So he is wrong in thinking he is HNW. His manifestos are wrong, I see the intentional fallacy? Well I dont go with that as fully as you seem to.
I don't know what he is thinking. I know that HNW is part of Industrial Music, its sub-genre. It comes from rational considering what is music, what is noise and what does it mean for art and people. You have right don't accept my view. Everybody has right to live and feel as he wants... Even if rational arguments are against to such projections.
I know that my views may be surprising/shocking, especially when somebody didn't consider that knowledge which was read/intruduced generates wrong imagination, and just confusion in communication between people. I know that people would rather live in well known positions of terms and don't want to change this comfortable, but false image of reality. I have no delusions that "industrial" is going to mean still the same, everything and nothing.
"He does not say anti-music is the only sound musical factor. He says " USE OF SYNTHESIZERS AND ANTI-MUSIC" in Second Annual Report."
you should add: "was prototypical", to be fair. As when he mentioned about The Velvet Underground "Sister Ray" - following your arguments - The Velvet Underground should be named as "industrial"?. "Synthesizers" isn't type of music/sound, only the name of a new instruments. He didn't explain what he meant by "use of syntesizers" but we may think out that he found that many composers/bands use synthesizers in his music. Besides, I focused and suggested his criteria because he diagnosed very well phenomena, other problem is how he described and explained his thesis.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 11:04:58 AM
OK so you've basically called me ignorant and so ducked out of this discussion / argument. Actually there are any number of theories regarding beauty / aesthetics. Even if we take some of the most significant, Kant, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Benjamin, Adorno Heidegger - we see differences. I'm surprised you think otherwise and you are not aware of this. But now we, I at least, are in danger of straying into philosophy which will upset the horses. Anyway it was fun.
Sorry, but you used stupid arguments in previous post. And now you are mentioning different names to proof that there are many concepts of esthetics. This is a manipulation. I didn't write that there aren't various concepts about what is esthetics and how it works in history art or in philosophy. I wrote that there isn't disputed what is considering so called "classic image/cannon of beauty" in art. History of art knows various cannons of beauty and some philosophers understood it in different way, but everyone (who can experience the first phenmomenas in Avantgarde art) agreed that was "classic" beauty and the new one, which was against the classic. If you find any words of these philosophers which you mentioned above, that can proof your displeasure of my statement you are ignorant in this matter, I am able to sorry you here and name myself ignorant. OK?
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 11:04:58 AM
The main musical bloodline, obviously TG were very much influenced by Fluxus and performance art, and there are endless debates about musical bloodlines. But sure they used a kind of rock band format. It was in GPO's terms a way of popularizing his art. And to note you rule out much of what is generally considered Industrial, PE and noise. The rock band format. Most if not all, including most Japnoise.
Which Japnoise artist has rockish format? Note: I remind about essence of music. Before you will write about Merzbow or Hijokaidan or Keiji Haino, consider what he/they have done with "rock music" in their noise... And think if TG 's artistic aim was the same in treating rock music in such way.
I don't think this exchange is going anywhere if it ever tried? And as its annoying certain people maybe its best to stop. But i''ll say a few remarks.
"I don't know how you and others, but I hate every tradition (especially in the art/music) and I am convinced that everyone should break every tradition in his life."
OK, this has now become a tradition in itself! If you / I define Avant-Garde as doing such it merely sets up another tradition.
"I know that my views may be surprising/shocking, "
Not shocking for me. A worn out feature of Modernity.
As for ""classic image/cannon of beauty" in art. " you will see that this in history has changed e.g. – romanticism over no-classicism, modernism over romanticism, and now post-modernism... What for the Romantics was sublime, nature, was once thought ugly...
As for genres they come and fade into 'styles'. As such its possible to even now find such styles as 'modernist' or 'Victorian' or 'industrial'. A style lacks content, or a mismatch between the appearance and content. "Everything now is retro" - Mark Fisher.
I'm a member of the ICA, (supposedly where the genre industrial began- and pop art) the restaurant is very good, its current concerns, colonialization and queer theory.
Merzbow / Japnoise, as I said above they in simple terms can be seen as being similar to abstract expressionism, where expressionism, like industrial and PE was about psychological states, raw emotion / human sensation, with noise this content was removed / overwritten – musically if not performativly in some cases.
But speaking of shocking – I seem to have done better than you in upsetting people in this thread "I didn't even have an issue with Impulsy, in fact I quite enjoy his writing on this area. You, on the other hand, seem like a pompous, purposefully contrarian ass. "
i'm not being that serious in that last remark...BTW.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 01:19:12 PM
OK, this has now become a tradition in itself! If you / I define Avant-Garde as doing such it merely sets up another tradition.
"I know that my views may be surprising/shocking, "
Not shocking for me. A worn out feature of Modernity.
As for ""classic image/cannon of beauty" in art. " you will see that this in history has changed e.g. – romanticism over no-classicism, modernism over romanticism, and now post-modernism... What for the Romantics was sublime, nature, was once thought ugly...
As for genres they come and fade into 'styles'. As such its possible to even now find such styles as 'modernist' or 'Victorian' or 'industrial'. A style lacks content, or a mismatch between the appearance and content. "Everything now is retro" - Mark Fisher.
I'm a member of the ICA, (supposedly where the genre industrial began- and pop art) the restaurant is very good, its current concerns, colonialization and queer theory.
Merzbow / Japnoise, as I said above they in simple terms can be seen as being similar to abstract expressionism, where expressionism, like industrial and PE was about psychological states, raw emotion / human sensation, with noise this content was removed / overwritten – musically if not performativly in some cases.
But speaking of shocking – I seem to have done better than you in upsetting people in this thread "I didn't even have an issue with Impulsy, in fact I quite enjoy his writing on this area. You, on the other hand, seem like a pompous, purposefully contrarian ass. "
i'm not being that serious in that last remark...BTW.
Sory that I'm not letting you to fisnish but you used some very important thoughts which in contrary must be explained for other (if any still are here) readers this topic have more fuller image and can / want to create opposite ways to their consideration/reflexions.
"OK, this has now become a tradition in itself! If you / I define Avant-Garde as doing such it merely sets up another tradition."
Yes, this is a tradition. Because everything belongs to the culture, even if we name something as "anticulture". But...
it depends on in which tradition we want to live. In tradition of building something new using old, checked (classic) rules? Or on destroying these rules and building new one which are adopted to our time and needs?
The first tradition gives us illusion of life in which we may live more comfortable and safer, but this life is primitive and it generates confusing in this world and life.
The second tradition give us symptoms of true life, filled with destruction, lack of safety, but with bigger control and connection to our world.
What is very important - we can not connect these two traditions....
As you and maybe other can suppose it is metaphorical dissonance between "Avantgarde" and "classic traditional art".... This is even something more.... This is dissonance between people who respects conservatism/tradition and people who prefer liberty and antytraditional thinking - world view.
" you will see that this in history has changed e.g. – romanticism over no-classicism, modernism over romanticism, and now post-modernism... What for the Romantics was sublime, nature, was once thought ugly... "
You are wrong. This is typic thinking who doesn't understand what is difference between being innovator and avantgardist. Always were innovatores in the art who were doing something new in their time. Question is (see my the first sentences above here) if they wanted to build something new on the basis of checked (classic) rules or they wanted to build something new be using destroying old (classic) rules? This is quintessence being "avantgardish". So, this isn't true that nowadays aren't avantgardists in art or in music... They are here and there... There aren't innovatores....
"Merzbow / Japnoise, as I said above they in simple terms can be seen as being similar to abstract expressionism, where expressionism, like industrial and PE was about psychological states, raw emotion / human sensation, with noise this content was removed / overwritten – musically if not performativly in some cases. "
Ok, I would accept your poin of view if "abstract expressionism" would be genre in music art. This term doesn't exist in musical literature, at least I don't know such. Besides, "abstract expressionism" isn't able to describe music which is, every type of music, very abstract. "Expressionism" in turn is very ambiguous in context of music. Expressionism is in gothic rock, black metal, or in the neoclassical genres.
Quote from: Strangecross on June 26, 2020, 03:16:23 PM
ok so just make another thread about how its really obvious that the shared experience of the conception of the industrial genre is obviously subjective
Everything is subjective experience. Problem is if you or me are able to legitimatise our (subjective) experience.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:25:17 PM
Quote from: Strangecross on June 26, 2020, 03:16:23 PM
ok so just make another thread about how its really obvious that the shared experience of the conception of the industrial genre is obviously subjective
Everything is subjective experience. Problem is if you or me are able to legitimatise our (subjective) experience.
"Intersubjectivity also helps to constitute objectivity: in the experience of the world as available not only to oneself, but also to the Other, there is a bridge between the personal and the shared, the self and the Others."
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 02:05:37 PM
Sory that I'm not letting you to fisnish but you used some very important thoughts which in contrary must be explained for other (if any still are here) readers this topic have more fuller image and can / want to create opposite ways to their consideration/reflexions.
I've no problem discussing this topic with you, and as Mikko the OP quoted me, and raised the idea of something missing unlike Japsi I see that this is neither a wank fest, or are we derailing the discussion. I don't particularly like being called " a pompous, purposefully contrarian ass" but maybe in your terms of avant garde being ' contrarian' is an asset.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 02:05:37 PM
"OK, this has now become a tradition in itself! If you / I define Avant-Garde as doing such it merely sets up another tradition."
Yes, this is a tradition. Because everything belongs to the culture, even if we name something as "anticulture". But...
it depends on in which tradition we want to live. In tradition of building something new using old, checked (classic) rules? Or on destroying these rules and building new one which are adopted to our time and needs?
This more or less chimes with the now old and defunct ideas around modernism. i.e. the tradition that came to an end in the mid 2othC. Modernism itself – being avant garde in part was very much a reaction - destruction to Victorianism, in Architecture, Art, Music, Poetry etc. And Victorianism itself a reaction to the previous Georgian period. Modernity was typified by such " destroying these rules and building new one which are adopted to our time and needs". Each set of rules being replaced by another hegemony. (you have in modernism this binary process, you can see in po-mo the non binary, or in Deleuze & Guattari the Rhizome as opposed to the Hierarchical arboreal ) So post-modernism isn't yet another set of rules, another set of grand narratives, but a rejection of that very process. And with it a rejection of the ideas and mechanism of modernity, including the avant-garde. Everything is allowed. Not only that but the structures – of say serious music and pop music were deconstructed. A recent example would be Reich's Radio Rewrite (based on Radiohead..) Warhol & The Velvet Underground maybe the first such example in music?
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 02:05:37 PM
The first tradition gives us illusion of life in which we may live more comfortable and safer, but this life is primitive and it generates confusing in this world and life.
The second tradition give us symptoms of true life, filled with destruction, lack of safety, but with bigger control and connection to our world.
What is very important - we can not connect these two traditions....
As you and maybe other can suppose it is metaphorical dissonance between "Avantgarde" and "classic traditional art".... This is even something more.... This is dissonance between people who respects conservatism/tradition and people who prefer liberty and antytraditional thinking - world view.
Sure – and as I said the whole process of modernity was replacing one set of comfortable rules with another- which though at first seem uncomfortably shocking to some soon became the norm. This, its said generated a feeling of Paranoia, paranoia is the diss-ease of modernity, which is no longer found in post-modernity, Schizophrenia has replaced Paranoia. You seem still stuck in the illusion of modernity's hegemony, you see 'reason' as somehow significant.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 02:05:37 PM
" you will see that this in history has changed e.g. – romanticism over no-classicism, modernism over romanticism, and now post-modernism... What for the Romantics was sublime, nature, was once thought ugly... "
You are wrong. This is typic thinking who doesn't understand what is difference between being innovator and avantgardist. Always were innovatores in the art who were doing something new in their time. Question is (see my the first sentences above here) if they wanted to build something new on the basis of checked (classic) rules or they wanted to build something new be using destroying old (classic) rules? This is quintessence being "avantgardish". So, this isn't true that nowadays aren't avantgardists in art or in music... They are here and there... There aren't innovatores....
Above you say "destroying these rules and building new one" now you say "There aren't innovators.... " a person who introduces new methods, ideas, or products." Are you happy with your contradiction?
I could equally say you are wrong, but you are not. Within the Schizophrenia of po-mo there is no longer binary opposites, or rather they can co-exist with non binarys. Your avantgardists - who are destroying what? The deconstructed post-modern world. Seems such a process is like "Make America Great Again".
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 02:05:37 PM
"Merzbow / Japnoise, as I said above they in simple terms can be seen as being similar to abstract expressionism, where expressionism, like industrial and PE was about psychological states, raw emotion / human sensation, with noise this content was removed / overwritten – musically if not performativly in some cases. "
Ok, I would accept your poin of view if "abstract expressionism" would be genre in music art. This term doesn't exist in musical literature, at least I don't know such. Besides, "abstract expressionism" isn't able to describe music which is, every type of music, very abstract. "Expressionism" in turn is very ambiguous in context of music. Expressionism is in gothic rock, black metal, or in the neoclassical genres.
There isn't a abstract expressionist music as far as I know. I was using it as a metaphor. I suppose the nearest musical analogy would be Reich's its gonna rain, where the content of the speech is not relevant. (music can be abstract, but also not, e.g. the pastoral symphony or opera!) And sure that's the divide between Industrial / PE and noise. Even if there is content in noise, its nature destroys it.
P.S. you might like to give this a look...https://arthistoryunstuffed.com/death-of-the-avant-garde/
or a longer work https://www.amazon.com/End-American-Avant-Garde-Experience-ebook/dp/B00EIFPF7G
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:25:17 PM
Quote from: Strangecross on June 26, 2020, 03:16:23 PM
ok so just make another thread about how its really obvious that the shared experience of the conception of the industrial genre is obviously subjective
Everything is subjective experience. Problem is if you or me are able to legitimatise our (subjective) experience.
when I need you to
legitimize my experience, i'll come running to that new thread
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 03:37:55 PM
Above you say "destroying these rules and building new one" now you say "There aren't innovators.... " a person who introduces new methods, ideas, or products." Are you happy with your contradiction?
And you still don't understand that we can build on base old, checked concepts, or we can build something new avoiding these concepts. Yes, in the modern art, nowadays aren't innovatores, even in the avantgarde. There are many artists who are still rejecting classic concepts and operating in the new (in meaning opposite to the old, classic forms/ideas) fields. They aren't innovatores because of secondary basing on "avantgardish" idiom of art which is opposite to the classic arts. What is schizophrenical in that?
Quote from: Strangecross on June 26, 2020, 03:43:03 PM
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:25:17 PM
Quote from: Strangecross on June 26, 2020, 03:16:23 PM
ok so just make another thread about how its really obvious that the shared experience of the conception of the industrial genre is obviously subjective
Everything is subjective experience. Problem is if you or me are able to legitimatise our (subjective) experience.
when I need you to legitimize my experience, i'll come running to that new thread
No, I wanted to legitimatise your subjective experience by yourself. Mine - be myself. Is it more clear?
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 03:37:55 PM
P.S. you might like to give this a look...https://arthistoryunstuffed.com/death-of-the-avant-garde/
or a longer work https://www.amazon.com/End-American-Avant-Garde-Experience-ebook/dp/B00EIFPF7G
I don't know these works but I know concepts about death of Avantgarde. Everything depends on how author wants to consider this trend in the art. I could ask such author who sees death of avantgarde if he sees death of anything from classic form of art too? If anybody still demends innovatores in the Avantgarde, then yes, the avantgarde is dead. But avantgarde is first of all alternative way of creating art which rejects classic rules which dominated art since over at least two thousand years. And, if we would like to segregate artists who are still creating in old way and who these are committed to avantgardish ideas - then we must name this world as Avantgarde (as neo-avantgarde or post - avantgarde and so on) because it still exists.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:58:14 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 03:37:55 PM
Above you say "destroying these rules and building new one" now you say "There aren't innovators.... " a person who introduces new methods, ideas, or products." Are you happy with your contradiction?
And you still don't understand that we can build on base old, checked concepts, or we can build something new avoiding these concepts.
I understand that I think, in music this would be in the first instance Wagner, in the second Schoenberg and serialism. Or if you like i the first case Whitehouse and PE building on Industrial, in the second Noise n.b. Merzbow esp.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:58:14 PM
Yes, in the modern art, nowadays aren't innovatores, even in the avantgarde.
Then you cant build anything new at all, either based on old or avoiding the old " we can build something new" then you have innovation - new.
A clear contradiction.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:58:14 PM
There are many artists who are still rejecting classic concepts and operating in the new (in meaning opposite to the old, classic forms/ideas) fields. They aren't innovatores because of secondary basing on "avantgardish" idiom of art which is opposite to the classic arts. What is schizophrenical in that?
If they are not innovators where is this new field and who is creating it?
Look your definition of Avant Garde is just that, yours, but even here there is an apparent contradiction.
And what are old classic forms/ ideas and what are these new fields you talk of. Could you answer that please, and deal with your contradiction.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 04:20:45 PM
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 03:37:55 PM
P.S. you might like to give this a look...https://arthistoryunstuffed.com/death-of-the-avant-garde/
or a longer work https://www.amazon.com/End-American-Avant-Garde-Experience-ebook/dp/B00EIFPF7G
I don't know these works but I know concepts about death of Avantgarde. Everything depends on how author wants to consider this trend in the art.
Well that might be but the real killer is that avant garde as generally understood entails "French, "advance guard" or "vanguard", literally "fore-guard") are people or works that are experimental, radical, or unorthodox with respect to art, culture, or society. It is frequently characterized by aesthetic innovation and initial unacceptability." is that there is no hegemony in po-mo as to what the front is.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 04:20:45 PM
I could ask such author who sees death of avantgarde if he sees death of anything from classic form of art too? If anybody still demends innovatores in the Avantgarde, then yes, the avantgarde is dead. But avantgarde is first of all alternative way of creating art which rejects classic rules which dominated art since over at least two thousand years.
could you say what these classic rules are please... because the rules used in western music have certainly change over 2000 years.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 04:20:45 PM
And, if we would like to segregate artists who are still creating in old way and who these are committed to avantgardish ideas - then we must name this world as Avantgarde (as neo-avantgarde or post - avantgarde and so on) because it still exists.
Who are where. And what are these new rules...
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 04:25:13 PM
I understand that I think, in music this would be in the first instance Wagner, in the second Schoenberg and serialism. Or if you like i the first case Whitehouse and PE building on Industrial, in the second Noise n.b. Merzbow esp.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:58:14 PM
Yes, in the modern art, nowadays aren't innovatores, even in the avantgarde.
Then you cant build anything new at all, either based on old or avoiding the old " we can build something new" then you have innovation - new.
A clear contradiction.
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 03:58:14 PM
There are many artists who are still rejecting classic concepts and operating in the new (in meaning opposite to the old, classic forms/ideas) fields. They aren't innovatores because of secondary basing on "avantgardish" idiom of art which is opposite to the classic arts. What is schizophrenical in that?
If they are not innovators where is this new field and who is creating it?
Look your definition of Avant Garde is just that, yours, but even here there is an apparent contradiction.
And what are old classic forms/ ideas and what are these new fields you talk of. Could you answer that please, and deal with your contradiction.
"in music this would be in the first instance Wagner, in the second Schoenberg and serialism. Or if you like i the first case Whitehouse and PE building on Industrial, in the second Noise n.b. Merzbow esp."
I don't consider Wagner as an avantgardish composer. He was innovator who created something new but on base of classic formulas and traditional image of beauty in music art. Shoenberg and serialism (which one? this is a method of composition which is in various styles/genres?) is questionable. He can be considered as pre-avantgardist in music surely, it is complicated... It depends on what do you consider when began real avantgarde in music? In my opinion after the Second War when run concrete musique with tape-recorders, synths, and other new electronics. Before this period were protoplasts of Avangarde, but not avangardists. There isn't agreement, so if you want to see in Schoenberg's works "avantgarde", it is OK, I see that and respect your opinion.
PE and noise, the first or second, aren't based on industrial music because of PE and noise are parts of industrial music. Industrial music (including PE, noise) is based on academic avantgarde music or electronic avantgarde or academic avantgarde, what you prefer.
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 04:33:07 PM
could you say what these classic rules are please... because the rules used in western music have certainly change over 2000 years.
So I am giving up :) Sorry, but I can't help you if you don't know what were classic rules in visual arts or in the music over 2000 years based on which all the art before Avantgarde were created. Sorry. It is fundamental in discussing about art ;)
As I wrote earlier, we can talk about questionable things but not about evident.
Quote from: Japsi on June 26, 2020, 12:14:13 AM
I didn't even have an issue with Impulsy, in fact I quite enjoy his writing on this area.
Cosigned. I like the read on industrial wrt its sub-genres. Some of the ideas rhyme with mine, ditto Bruce Russell's notion as published in Bananafish of
noise as an empty quarter in to which all musics bleed (if I've got that right, if it wasn't Russell Haswell?). (You can swap out industrial for noise, don't matter much to me.)) So here the suggestion of the possibility of any number of disparate personalities and characters converging in time and place, regardless of origin culture personal predilection whatever, none with any shared notion of what they are about except that perhaps they are not about what seems generally to be about, what some have here and elsewhere described as characteristic of the good old days eg before everything got gentrified scuse me genre-fied. A suggestion of the possibility of describing what seems to have happened but which may no longer happen, or at least relatively speaking not quite so much given the sheer numbers involved (and only due to grow in exponential terms).
The discussion as it stands is useful in considering Impulsy's chief antagonist as repping a kind of aggregate bot of prevailing public opinion (wiki et al), against which to bounce the various shall we call them more and less freakishly charged notions. This may sound exceedingly un-generous, because it is, and does not really represent my actual opinion. But let's say it did for the sake of argument. You'd still want it because it would still provide perspective and context, assuming you hadn't long since drowned in a bottomless ocean of text.
All that said-
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 11:04:58 AM
Japnoise
uhh, my dude...
Quote from: ImpulsyStetoskopu on June 26, 2020, 04:55:38 PM
So I am giving up :) Sorry, but I can help you if you don't know what were classic rules in visual arts or in the music over 2000 years based on which all the art before Avantgarde were created. Sorry. It is fundamental in discussing about art ;)
As I wrote earlier, we can talk about questionable things but not about evident.
Well i'm glad you are giving up because we or i - seem to be annoying folk. As for not knowing the classic rules, certainly in music and the visual arts there are non that remained fixed for 2000 years. "From the thirteenth century onwards there took place remarkable innovations in melody harmony and rhythm..." The introduction of perspective, and at the beginning of the 2othC its abandonment...
The development of tonal systems Harmony and forms such as Sonata, Symphony etc. not to speak of the development of instruments, notably valve instruments... the Piano, Saxophone up to electric amplification and electronics.
AKA - you cant help because you don't know - it seems. So as they say, you cant put up so rightly youve shut up.
As for the previous post, i gave Wagner as building on the old - your example of non avant garde, and Schonberg's serialism a creating something new. You seem unable to be consistent regarding your own theories. You might like to think why.
Quote from: Bloated Slutbag on June 26, 2020, 05:09:25 PM
Quote from: Japsi on June 26, 2020, 12:14:13 AM
I didn't even have an issue with Impulsy, in fact I quite enjoy his writing on this area.
Cosigned
Great, he thinks Throbbing Gristle and much of Industrial, Power Electronics Noise, Japanoise included not Industrial, not noise but some form of rock! he has a set of contradictory ideas re the avant garde and concludes that Vomir is industrial. Funny i give you. And that Art has had classic rules in visual arts and in music over 2000 years.. yet when asked what these were / are cant say. Why? Because they are like the flying spaghetti monster... Hilarious. You don't take him seriously do you? As for "a kind of aggregate bot of prevailing public opinion (wiki et al)" nice one. I should have used Novak, I did use Hegarty. I suspect Impulsy was unaware of his book, as also his work with and about Vomir.
Thanks for correcting my typo, (we all have our uses, and speaking of that) i wonder if you could direct me to the Bruce Russell or is it Russell Haswell quote... they are easily confused i guess... :-#
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 05:29:47 PM
"From the thirteenth century onwards there took place remarkable innovations in melody harmony and rhythm..."
To consider. Classic mimetic imagination of music was based on beauty in which music must be PERFECT to describe a God and his created world. Or human's emotions. Both (classic) visions of music had to created on base of MELODY, RHYTHM and HARMONY. All two thousand years of music were based on this classic formula and its various variations which is about quote above.
AVANTGARDE MUSIC broke this formula in every aspects. Rjects every melody, regular based on harmony rhythm, and every harmony. Besides avantgarde focused on SOUND, especially on nOISE which was taboo in human world till these years. Besides, AVANTGARDE focused on mimetic creating sound of our world because of a new instruments, mainly electronics and tape-recorders - tools which in the history weren't available for composers who wanted to imitate a reality - the main aim of the art. Avantgarde allowed to make this. Avantgarde rejected emotions in music too, what is fundamental breakaway with classical tradition in music. AVANTGARDE rejected perfect mimetic of reality - so God in the other meanings. DO you know already what was/is eternal classic in the Art before Avantgarde?
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 05:54:56 PM
Great, he thinks Throbbing Gristle and much of Industrial, Power Electronics Noise, Japanoise included not Industrial, not noise but some form of rock! he has a set of contradictory ideas re the avant garde and concludes that
Come on man, what are you fuckin here ? Where I "thinked" that "much of Industrial, Power Electronics Noise, Japanoise included not Industrial, not noise but some form of rock! " Are you crazy? Did you read me with understanding? I know that my English is fucked up, but you may ask abouto explaining. Now you are writing some shit what never happened. What do you do?
Quote from: JLIAT on June 26, 2020, 05:54:56 PM
Great, he thinks Throbbing Gristle and much of Industrial, Power Electronics Noise, Japanoise included not Industrial, not noise but some form of rock! he has a set of contradictory ideas re the avant garde and concludes that Vomir is industrial. Funny i give you. And that Art has had classic rules in visual arts and in music over 2000 years.. yet when asked what these were / are cant say. Why? Because they are like the flying spaghetti monster... Hilarious. You don't take him seriously do you? As for "a kind of aggregate bot of prevailing public opinion (wiki et al)" nice one. I should have used Novak, I did use Hegarty. I suspect Impulsy was unaware of his book, as also his work with and about Vomir.
Thanks for correcting my typo, (we all have our uses, and speaking of that) i wonder if you could direct me to the Bruce Russell or is it Russell Haswell quote... they are easily confused i guess... :-#
I literally read that Russell article over twenty years ago, so I honestly can't recall, nor do I have the magazine anymore (fyi I would wager between Bananafish #9 - 11). But it did resonate, obviously. I'm less concerned with who is right than simply that someone is sufficiently (emotionally) invested to go against some aspects of what would seem to rep prevailing sentiment. And by prevailing sentiment I'm referring to sentiment somewhat more broadly shared than that to be found on this tiny pimple on a donkey's arse forum. And not just to go against the supposed prevailing sentiment but to spell the argument out in specific (possibly aesthetic) terms. I do take that seriously, yes, at least as seriously as I take the counter-arguments. (My personal jury is currently out as to which I'd wish to elevate.)
Taking another look at that empty quarter- call it what you will- into which all musics bleed, and into which all notions of what it is may similarly bleed...
I reckon, as long as we keep asking these questions, we'll be fine.
But suffice it to say, it's gonna get bloody.
Thanks I'll try to find this. The noise into which everything bleeds is the very noise the cosmos makes it seems
TL;DR?