Listening to lots of
Girl Talk, and both listening to and reading about Crystal Castles lately has had my mind on sampling and creativity in music.
But the larger issue, one that leaves me sitting here with palpable frustration over stupid human beings--
I don't think there's much that I hate more than people who
lie because it is profitable.
Michael Moore(previous posts
1,
2)
- Makes documentaries, creating the expectation that what viewers see will be essentially true.
- Consistently doctors footage, timelines and facts to make for a easier soundbite and story.
- He has good things to say. A 'true' film might have had fewer grabby moments and might have been more difficult to put together. But that's what he should have done.
King of Kong(original posts
one and
two)
- Funny, well-made documentary film that offers a glimpse into the little world of retro gaming high score nutjobs.
- In order to make it as funny and easy to follow as it is, they made shit up, altered timelines and sold out more than a few people who have a genuine love for that little world. Yet are now seen as villains or idiots as far as the outside world is concerned (again, the 'documentary' style of filmmaking lending credence and authority where there should be none).
- The actual story probably wouldn't have been as entertaining. But in the end, the filmmakers still know that they lied about something which is currently making their careers. I don't understand being OK with that, even if it's about something as stupid as a movie about arcade games.
...and the newest member of the club:Crystal Castles(
Pitchfork rundown,
Torontoist follow up)
- I have forever loved so-called 'chiptune' music, where synthesized melodies and/or beats are produced by antiquated sound chips, often including those beeps and blips produced by old videogame consoles. The diversity and depth of the chiptune scene is unbelievable, as is the talent of many of the artists who occupy it.
- Crystal Castles have co-opted that chiptune sound and packaged it with a) a more finely honed pop sensibility than most of the artists in the chiptune scene and b) a fantastic female vocalist (who I have compared stylistically to Karen O of the Yeah Yeah Yeahs). End result being, I enjoy the hell out of much of their music.
- It seems that they are a less a band and more of a marketing strategy. And at least one of the parts of that strategy seems to be ripping off other artists (whether its for
unlicensed artwork on their album cover, or
uncredited samples for a ton of their songs) and betting that the original artists won't know or won't say anything. Timbaland is probably
the most famous example of this sort of thing happening recently, but at least he hasn't seemingly based his whole career around the idea of theft.
- I'd like to believe that there's no way
Glass Houses Crystal Castles can produce (or even conceive of) music like this without being genuine fans of the chiptune scene. But it's hard to ignore the feigned ignorance of things like Creative Commons licenses and claims that they "don't have anything to do with" the 8-bit scene. Why couldn't they instead embrace their role and duly compensate and credit some of the shoulders that they stood on? They'd still be the most commercially successful producers to incorporate the chiptune aesthetic into a general indie act, and they'd still make plenty of money and have a following (including me) because the music remains quite fucking good.
I can be a pretty cynical person at times. So while I'd like to say it is
beyond me that there are people/groups who do this kind of thing and lie through their teeth about it, that's not really true.
The part that bothers me the most is the apologists. Those people who equivocate and hedge when presented with the evidence because it's easier not to do the math. I dealt with many of them in the days and weeks after I came home from first watching
Bowling for Columbine, did a couple of hours of online follow-up and proceeded to tell everyone within earshot that we were being manipulated (ever so slightly, but manipulated nonetheless).
Does Scott McClellan fall into this category? Lies for profit while he works for the White House, then profits again when he comes clean a few years later?
Then you can look at the Bush administration and any number of people who are benefiting enormously because of our commitment to Iraq and its oil pipelines. But those are sins much too large for an individual to appreciate on any meaningful level.
I hope one day to make a solid career out of doing something that I love. The artists I've listed above are all talented people who clearly love what they do. But there's a disconnect at some point, a definite moment when they're in that editing room where they
know they've crossed a line and just don't care. Cynical or not, I still find that completely fucked up.
sidebar:
Since it's been in the news lately, I should mention the whole
Coldplay plagiarism claim.
a) People write songs based on that progression all the time. At least eight more have been written since I started typing up this blog post.
b) With that in mind, these are still two very different songs.
c) Also, it doesn't help that Coldplay
demoed their version months before you say they first heard it at your gig. Which they also did not attend!
conclusion: The accusers are performing the rare and delicate feat of
double reverse douchebaggery. Falsely claiming to be victims in order to get attention! OK, so there's something else to hate.