![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
When I said next gig I meant for SON
Feb. 6th, 2004 11:50 amPaul came in with printouts of a review last week. If you asked me what I thought of reviews, I'd say they generally don't matter much. Constructive criticism is useful; someone on Mono pointed out a crowded vocal line and so we've changed it, but otherwise people like what they like and if they like us that's good and if not, well, fair enough.
A recent post by verlaine exasperated and amused me in equal measure. He claims not to understand why musicians are seen as sexy and demanding respect. Anyone that can get paid to do stuff in public seems to command that, though; people like power. There are people out there who think Michael Howard is sexy, for crying out loud. Abjuring teenagers not to form cliched three chord bands is surely one of the classic columnist's cliches in itself?
The exasperating part is that in the same post, he's found the key to why people do it. Really, it's not to get laid. Spending half your time and money on practice rooms and equipment, being in another part of the country playing to half a dozen people when all your mates are out on the town on a Friday night, dissipating the immediate post-gig euphoria in shoe-horning all your gear into a small car while the audience are pairing up and buggering off to the next place of fun, this is not how you get laid. But karaoke, the act of singing encouraged by a small circle of friends, the experience of being *in* a song and making it your own, he gets the point of that.
So what do you think all those bands out there are doing? Those spotlights blind - you can't *see* the audience. If you've the time to look hard you may be able to pick out people you know well, if they're standing somewhere better lit. You get up there in front of people but you do it for yourself, because the process itself feels like nothing else. If it turns out that the audience don't like it, then okay; change something if that makes you realise there's something wrong, change the audience if you were playing in the wrong place, if all else fails play just for yourself in a secret place. If the audience do like it, for some unknown reason, then hey, it might be that you get to do it again only with added benefits like not having to pay through the nose.
So we have a very positive review. It seems the author of the webzine in question, alt-uk.com only writes positive and enthusiastic reviews but let's assume the best case scenario, that he doesn't bother to review bands he doesn't like. Some of it does go a bit OTT. What this offers to me, though, is not some sense of validation or being appreciated - it's more selfish than that. I don't know the reviewer and if his day is better for listening to us, I'm only glad for him in an impersonal way. The secret benefit, the glow of hope kindled, is just that we might get to do it some more.
( the review.. )
Meanwhile, the next gig for me is a Bad Fucks one, tomorrow night in Burgess Hill. About six bands on the bill in total and we're not even on first. I'd better get it right..
A recent post by verlaine exasperated and amused me in equal measure. He claims not to understand why musicians are seen as sexy and demanding respect. Anyone that can get paid to do stuff in public seems to command that, though; people like power. There are people out there who think Michael Howard is sexy, for crying out loud. Abjuring teenagers not to form cliched three chord bands is surely one of the classic columnist's cliches in itself?
The exasperating part is that in the same post, he's found the key to why people do it. Really, it's not to get laid. Spending half your time and money on practice rooms and equipment, being in another part of the country playing to half a dozen people when all your mates are out on the town on a Friday night, dissipating the immediate post-gig euphoria in shoe-horning all your gear into a small car while the audience are pairing up and buggering off to the next place of fun, this is not how you get laid. But karaoke, the act of singing encouraged by a small circle of friends, the experience of being *in* a song and making it your own, he gets the point of that.
So what do you think all those bands out there are doing? Those spotlights blind - you can't *see* the audience. If you've the time to look hard you may be able to pick out people you know well, if they're standing somewhere better lit. You get up there in front of people but you do it for yourself, because the process itself feels like nothing else. If it turns out that the audience don't like it, then okay; change something if that makes you realise there's something wrong, change the audience if you were playing in the wrong place, if all else fails play just for yourself in a secret place. If the audience do like it, for some unknown reason, then hey, it might be that you get to do it again only with added benefits like not having to pay through the nose.
So we have a very positive review. It seems the author of the webzine in question, alt-uk.com only writes positive and enthusiastic reviews but let's assume the best case scenario, that he doesn't bother to review bands he doesn't like. Some of it does go a bit OTT. What this offers to me, though, is not some sense of validation or being appreciated - it's more selfish than that. I don't know the reviewer and if his day is better for listening to us, I'm only glad for him in an impersonal way. The secret benefit, the glow of hope kindled, is just that we might get to do it some more.
( the review.. )
Meanwhile, the next gig for me is a Bad Fucks one, tomorrow night in Burgess Hill. About six bands on the bill in total and we're not even on first. I'd better get it right..