| 2:05a |
Where'd the music go?
*Be forewarned: There is meaningful stuff in here, at least to me... Please don't attack me for what it says, I'm trying to bring up valuable points. If I mention someone you don't like, please don't attack me for it, I have used musicians I have and haven't liked as an example*
This was something I wrote in a friends-only entry in my own journal earlier. It starts off pretty stupid, but, I think it gets better towards the end:
I hear this all the time from the girls and guys in school...
"So and so sucks... His/her voice is completely taped over"
"They don't write their own music."
"The singer took like, all the credit. You don't hear about the rest of the band."
On and on and on quotes of the like.
Now, first, although I hate Brittany Spears, I'm going to argue on her behalf simply because of the idea her voice is taped over...
All musicians voices are taped over. A recorded singing voice sounds weird, they have to cancel that out. However, people use this to say that she has good looks and never had a good singing voice. I beg to differ. I don't like her music because the songs are all slutty, and so are her costumes and music videos (although all music videos are like that anymore and I'm getting way too used to it). However, when she first came out on CD and my sister went bonkers for her music, I did learn some things. Such as that she was winning and scoring high in singing competitions as young as 11-12 years of age. So... You people talking about how it's all because of her looks and she had no potential before then, shut up. You lost that one. Like everyone in the world saw an 11-12 year old and thought "OMG SO SEXY LET'S MAKE HER A SLUTTY TYPE SINGING STAR!!!" When I told these people this, they asked me what place and I said "second"... And because she scored second they immediately dismiss her as "she scored second so she obviously had no talent back then"
.... Um. Excuse me? Last I checked, second place was pretty damn good. I don't know when second place became equal to worst. But second place is supposed to be really close to first.
Ironically, the girls and guys that say this like Eminem's songs... *coughgagdie* If you ask me, between Brittany Spears and Eminem? Brittany takes the cake. Better to sing about being a slut than about the bodies you've stuffed in a closet and woe is you, person born in the ghetto. Is that even true about him? I thought he was a suburb boy.
Now, the lead singer thing bugs me in regards to ANY band, but last time I heard this from a classmate it was in regards to Avril Lavigne. Now... Who knows anyone other than the lead singer in U2? How about Smashmouth? How about Train...? Black Sabbath? Queen? Evanesence? Oh... Really? Let's face it. The singer usually becomes most popular, then the guitarist, than the drummer, back farther and farther. In depth fans will learn all their names. But, when it comes to the general music world, people fall for the one singing at the microphone. Avril Lavigne was lead singer. The idea that she's the only one that's taken the limelight in a band because she's the lead singer is bull shit, it's just what happens... *rolls eyes* People seriously look for excuses to hate bands or singers most of the time, and their arguments could be vastly improved if they at least hated people for the right things.
For instance. I like Avril Lavigne, at least in her first CD. I like songs mostly based on what they're about. Because of this, I liked those songs. I hated Eminem's songs and still do. But I liked Avril Lavigne,Train, Savage Garden, Linkin Park, and ESPECIALLY U2, which is the most awesome band that ever walked on the planet, and I'm going to get more into that later. But, they're only the best to me because I personally go for content and what meaning I find in the lyrics.
U2 is my favorite. Why? Because of what they're singing about. Anti-terrorism, pro-peace, on and on and on. U2 is not necessarily religious, in fact they have many qualms with the wars religions cause (and have every right to be, look at all the terrorist attacks in England/Ireland due to the Protestant/Catholic conflicts, and England and what they have of Ireland and whatnot). Because of those things, but also their search of spirituality (I still haven't found what I'm looking for has so many more meanings than searching for the perfect girl, and if that's what it was written about, it can be interpreted very differently). But the things they write about. Beautiful Day, I still haven't found What I'm looking for, Hanging on, etc., etc.
For all the things that they've written seriously about, I love them for it.
I don't understand why songs have come to what they've come to. I wish, with all my heart, we could get people writing about the more important things in life in regards to songs. Sex, drugs, murder, gangs, war... But, songs weren't made to promote dispair, or talk about the nasty feelings with no hope. Music, with words or not, is meant for hope. There should never be no hope in a song, even when it is about hoplessness. It contradicts the reason why music has meant so much to people from it's creation on.
Music is supposed to bring out the best in us emotionally. Song is to make us remember to have hope, to love, to see the good things throughout despair. Music is supposed to stir people's hearts and make them think it's not over. It can get better. Songs are losing that more and more, and are becoming nothing more than fads. People dismiss them so easily. But song, and music, they are meant for whatever is in us that is greater than just our physical being. They are meant to bring us power, spirit, and joy, even in the worst times of our lives. Music and song can raise the hearts of those stuck out in war. Music and song brings us calmness when a loved one dies. A good song is a song you listen to, feel, and remember for a long time to come.
Think about the history of music and song. During times of war, it could stir up warriors in realization that they would go out there, possibly to die, to help their tribe, family, or country. In ancient times, music would be used before hunting. It was used in hopes to bring about change in the weather... Look at what the African and Native American tribes would use song for. Look at what churches, synagogues, and mosques use music for, or Hindu, Buddhist, or any other spiritual songs. Now compare that to music today. It is degrading to everything music ever stood for.
I don't know where the real music went. But music and song, and what they're for, what they're meant to communicate to us through ways we can acheive through no speech written or spoken, is quickly diminishing through songs of today. It makes me cry, literally, to think of what songs were. Songs have always meant things through love, but not just love. Sex should not be all it's about, or getting caught cheating, or throwing bodies into closets. Much of the music out today, in my mind, completely destroys music, with lyrics and otherwise, for what it was meant to be.
So why is all the music about sex and drugs and gangs and murder now? When was the last time you heard a song that wasn't just a fad, but truly meant something? Why have songs lost so much of what they were? They brought out hope, peace, pride, happiness, love, joy, sorrow and despair but never sorrow and despair without hope? In short... What happened to the music that really MEANT something?
Maybe I'm over-reacting. But, to me, music is becoming endangered of losing what it was meant for and what it should always stand for. Bring on the real tunes. |