Re: OT: pop-songwriting in the 21st century

On Fri, 2003-11-28 at 05:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This fellow the article is about must be the anti-messiah of
> songwriting....Certainly, though he doesn't admit it, a song for this man is
> product.
> 
> http://www.newscientist.com/opinion/opinterview.jsp;jsessionid=GEPCDBBBKLFH?i
> d=ns24231

The guy in this article, Mike Stock of Stock, Aitken and Waterman fame,
stands for many things I hate about music industry. However I thought in
this article he comes across as quite likeable and reasonable guy, in
fact some of the things he says make perfect sense.

..."I see myself as serving the public, rather than imposing my ideas on
them. With Blur or Oasis you buy into their world. In my world, which is
pure pop, your song is going out to people."

Well, when you put it like that... I have to admit I see nothing
fundamentaly wrong with this. In fact I sort of appreciate humility of
this point of view. It only becomes the problem when "song going out to
people" comes to mean "rammed down people's throats by the PR machine in
an operation of complexity and expense comparable to staging a minor
war".

For me, it always comes down to this: my problem with music industry is
that it is just that: industry. I maintain the proper level for music to
be is at the level of craft - in other words, on the level practiced by
the bult of artists that I like, and in general, by many of Ecto
artists. This might be more than a coincidence :)

PS. What was this article printed in New Scientist?!? I don't see the
relevance...

 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism
as it is a merge of state and corporate power" 
-- Benito Mussolini

-- 08:06:11 up 6 days, 18:38, 1 user, load average: 0.23, 0.06, 0.02--