FdL
2007-04-13, 08:48 PM
I've just finished reading a lengthy interview with QotSA's Josh Homme on Pitchforkmedia (http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/42335-qotsas-homme-talks-new-lp-motivations-pirates), and I have to say that it was really interesting to read. I have to admit I'm not a QotSA fan at all, I can barely name five of their songs (although I think what they do it's pretty good and I know I should listen to their albums).
Well, this interview touches many subjects concerning his approach to music, but there's one paragraph that really interested me, mainly because it puts in words perfectly something that I've always thought:
"JH:(...)Because it's like punk rock without the judgment call.
Pitchfork: What do you mean?
JH: Well, I think in every scene there's a timeline: it starts with originators; and the second wave is people who understood those originators and do something that sounds original as well; and then, here come the warm jets, the mimickers and the copiers, and the people that just are ****ing derivatives. And here come the rules, like hardcore. "No long hair. Got to look punk, but not that way. Can't play this, only play this style." The rules where you're like, "**** you, Nazi!" That's not why you get into something. Like, "It's really great to be in this scene, because it's really great when people tell me what to do. It's awesome."
I think this happens a lot in art in general and in popular music in particular. I remember a literature lecture in which the teacher spoke in similar terms about romanticism. I think this "cycle" of creation of a new style or aesthetic trend is an interesting phenomenon to analyze and think about (ie, stop and think, are you listening to true creative artists, to today's or yesterday's "originators" or you just chew on what is ultimately derivative stuff).
In all, this interview interested me so much that I might start listening to his records, at least to see what he's all about musically.
Well, this interview touches many subjects concerning his approach to music, but there's one paragraph that really interested me, mainly because it puts in words perfectly something that I've always thought:
"JH:(...)Because it's like punk rock without the judgment call.
Pitchfork: What do you mean?
JH: Well, I think in every scene there's a timeline: it starts with originators; and the second wave is people who understood those originators and do something that sounds original as well; and then, here come the warm jets, the mimickers and the copiers, and the people that just are ****ing derivatives. And here come the rules, like hardcore. "No long hair. Got to look punk, but not that way. Can't play this, only play this style." The rules where you're like, "**** you, Nazi!" That's not why you get into something. Like, "It's really great to be in this scene, because it's really great when people tell me what to do. It's awesome."
I think this happens a lot in art in general and in popular music in particular. I remember a literature lecture in which the teacher spoke in similar terms about romanticism. I think this "cycle" of creation of a new style or aesthetic trend is an interesting phenomenon to analyze and think about (ie, stop and think, are you listening to true creative artists, to today's or yesterday's "originators" or you just chew on what is ultimately derivative stuff).
In all, this interview interested me so much that I might start listening to his records, at least to see what he's all about musically.