6 responses so far ↓

• 1 Craig // Dec 16, 2008 at 2:26 am

  That is pretty damn awesome.

• 2 xJane // Dec 16, 2008 at 3:02 pm

  This is an awesome song—I think these two are the only ones I’ve heard by Dan Le Sac vs. Scroobius Pip; I wonder if they’re all as thoughtful (“use it to get into their heads), cynical, and religiously-themed.

• 3 Craig // Dec 16, 2008 at 3:07 pm

  I love music that makes you actually *think* about anything, really, but even better if it makes you think about your world-view, preconceived notions, etc.

  To me, music (as an artform) is meant not solely to entertain, but to educate and to share important ideas. All art should do that, I think. Of whatever genre.

• 4 xJane // Dec 16, 2008 at 4:32 pm

  *nodding* I often make the distinction between “films” (which I consider art as you have defined it) and “movies” (which I consider more popular/entertainment). Some might well be both, in which case I may change what I call a particular work mid-discussion (also “flick” which has little redeeming value). I wonder what kind of words might be used for musical tracks?

  I often find “song” limiting, since I feel it implies singing (which excludes rap) and lyrics (which excludes instrumentals). But then “piece” sounds like something I pick up off the sidewalk and “musical piece” is too long/pretentious.

• 5 John // Dec 17, 2008 at 1:58 pm

  One more thing that art can do, besides inspire, is disturb. Since I’m feeling prescriptive, the last thing powerful art should do is make us feel complacent.

• 6 Craig // Dec 17, 2008 at 2:03 pm

  I agree, disturbing = good, complacent = bad.

Leave a Comment