Stoney

DIRE STRAITS NOT TECHNICAL?
Oh my God, wait, I'm stopping laughing... I mean, do you really think the guitarist of Dire Straits lacks technique? Well, I expected a response like that, and here’s where the problem lies. Clear, right? They don't use distortion, they're not fast, so they aren't technical. Whatever. Look, there's a big difference between showing off and technique… There are many kinds of technique: precision, odd timings, speed are just a part of the vast world of technique applied to an instrument (and anyone who plays an instrument knows they are among the easiest to learn; talk to a "serious" guitar teacher and see what they say). The more a musician wants to be expressive, the more they need to learn technique; it's essential. There can be technique without expression (Dream Theater), but there can't be expression without technique (the rest of the world). Vibrating a note, doing a bending, arpeggiating, having more or less dynamics—those are real techniques, and truly difficult, because they are what characterize the touch and sound of various musicians and build their personality. The problem is, no one talks about it because you don't see it; it belongs to those in the profession. Everyone can be amazed if someone picks up a guitar and plays 200 notes per second; you don't need to understand music for that. But recognizing the nuances of a musician hitting ONE note perfectly at the right moment is something that really only a few can do. Anyone with a basic knowledge of music KNOWS that if you practice for 2 hours a day, in 3 years you’ll get good because you'll gain cleanliness and correctness in playing. In this sense, a piece like Metropolis is a textbook exercise; someone who studies guitar or drums seriously for 3-4 years can play it beautifully because they only have to do 2 things: keep time (which is mathematical) and hit all the right notes at the right moment. It's almost geometric; difficult, sure, but not impossible; I believe that any moderately good musician can do it without problems. But a piece by Dire Straits... who can make it as deep as Dire Straits themselves? No one. No one, even after studying for 100 years, could ever be IDENTICAL to the guitarist from Dire Straits because he is unique. Do you know how many kids I've met who could play Images and Words by heart but couldn't hold two notes in a 4/4? Thousands. There must be a reason, right? But have you heard the DT covering Metallica? Cold, icy. An album like Master Of Puppets, loaded with grit and rage, transformed into a clean, precise little bass conservatory exercise. The aggressiveness of the raw solo in Damage Inc. turned into a MIDI file. The cover of In The Flesh by Pink Floyd, featured on A Change of Season… terrifying. DT are masters at stripping music of its essence, leaving behind only the skeleton, but well-crafted and finely represented.

Furthermore, allow me one more note to Ktulu, then I'll be off. Since you say that there are few bands that manage to combine technique and expression, give me some examples of expressive bands that are not technical.

reverse, just open Wikipedia and do a quick search.

It's nobody's fault that when you were little, you fell off the high chair and knocked yourself in the head with the TV that went down with you.

As for the discussion about commerciality, I can tell you that no, really, perhaps there is nothing that isn't commercial. There might be some artist in the world who plays without thinking about their bank account, but surely they aren't organizing year-long tours around the world. It's simply crazy to think that at such levels, the logic of the market doesn't partially influence their stylistic choices. If the DT fans want to continue believing in the fairy tale that their idols play only for passion, they are free to do so, but it seems very stupid and fundamentally pointless to me. You see, I've already said, among other things, that the commerciality of a band has little to do with the judgment that should be passed on it. Tiziano Ferro, for example, I think is terrible because he makes awful music, not because he is commercial. If he weren't, I wouldn't save him, and if he made good music while selling a lot, I wouldn't criticize him. It’s the Dream Theater fans who categorize metal = good, prog = fantastic, pop = crap. I've never said that Dream Theater are bad because they are commercial; that’s different: it’s the DT fans who say they are good because they are not, so the discussion about commerciality was not initiated by me.

Look, I know the DT well, unfortunately, and I couldn’t care less about how they put together that creative abortion called Dance of Eternity. If I have to delve into the musical engineering behind a piece to appreciate it, it means that mere listening is not enough, and therefore its communicative purpose has failed. That’s exactly the hitch, you see, I thank you for grasping the heart of the matter. A piece like The Dance of Eternity "doesn’t reach" all listeners, and the trick is thinking that if it doesn’t reach them, it's because it’s "superior" and we simply don’t understand it. But even pieces by Xenakis don’t reach everyone; the difference is that Dream Theater, for someone with A MINIMUM of musical culture, are perfectly understandable; while Xenakis remains always obscure, and if one wanted to understand him, they would have to start studying, refine their musical taste, open up to truly different musical genres where even the concept of a note is put into question. And what makes me laugh is precisely this: who gets amazed by The Dance of Eternity? Those who know little about music, those who have listened to few things, the fourteen-year-old kid who discovers DT and believes he has found the universe, and holds onto this belief for the rest of his life. DT are hugely popular among metalheads, as I’ve already said, in whose circles they might rightly be considered the best... but with a broader perspective, one realizes that the world is indeed much wider, and that maybe they truly are the best, but only among the last.

I’m sorry, but I can’t do it. I’m just reading now: “In recent years, it’s been too cool and trendy to be an anti-Bush pacifist, and any excuse will do for that.” To me, it seems that in recent years it has become fashionable to act as if nothing is happening, to be obtuse and stubbornly refuse to understand, and for that, it’s just fine to adopt any ideology, regardless of its validity, and make it appear as a passé trend. Communism is a passé trend, the '68 movement too, and okay... railing against Americans despite their warmongering politics has gone out of style, being shocked by thousands of deaths is out of fashion, asking for a peaceful world is old news. And with these excuses, avoiding self-reflection, instead, is always in vogue. Poor fools, you still insist on thinking, on using critical reasoning, on interpreting the message of a film? Poor bastards, listen to marpado, we’re in 2007, thinking is out of style!

You see... when I read comments from people saying, "What political paranoia are you indulging in, hehe, it’s just a movie, enough with your conspiracy fantasies," well, when I read certain comments, I finally understand why the world is the way it is. And also why a filthy warmonger with a stupid face is able to turn the whole world upside down without anyone lifting a finger.

Every time Americans poke their noses into our ancient history, they turn heroes into pale imitations of Rambo. I can't stand it. And then: "it's too easy to label this film like many of its kind as (...) a movie full of semi-hidden ideologies etc. etc., too easy... really too easy." Exactly. If it's so easy, there must be a reason, right? Excuse me, but I can't handle it, no no no. The 300 that set off to war "without the approval of the council," because "freedom must be defended with blood," I've heard this story before, a few years ago, and not in books but on the news. An absolute enemy that embodies evil while one’s homeland is the only possibility of a free world. All that was missing was for the Spartans to say a couple of words about the price of oil and then it would have been complete. Moreover, all the fascist-American rhetoric is really WAY too much to overlook. Nice effects, breathtaking shots, and cutting-edge cinematic techniques are just the sugar coating of the pill, the anesthetic to help swallow the indoctrination better. A mountain, the usual, of crap.

Yes, I know, but it's still fun to speculate while talking about nothing.