It's deep thinking time, R&P; should music (or any art) be self-expression?

I came across this David Byrne essay while cruising the rateyourmusic forums. http://bushofghosts.wmg.com/essay_2.php





"In the West anyway the causal link between the author and performer is strong. For instance, it is assumed that I write lyrics (and the accompanying music) for songs because I have something I need to “express”. And that as a performer it is assumed that everything one utters is naturally autobiographical. I find that more often, on the contrary, it is the music and the lyric that triggers the emotion within me rather than the other way around. By making music we are pushing our own buttons, in effect, and the surprising thing is that vocals that we didn’t write or even sing can make us feel a gamut of emotions just as much as ones that we wrote. In a way making music is constructing machines that, when successful, dredge up emotions- in us and in the listener. For some, this fact is, it seems, repulsive, a trick, a betrayal and deception. Many prefer to see music as an “expression” of emotion rather than a generator of it. This queasiness is connected with the idea of authenticity as well- for example, that musicians who “appear” down-home must be more real. It’s disillusioning to find out that rock and roll is an act and no regular folk in Nashville really wear hats."





This discussion of "authenticity" especially reminds me of some of R%26amp;P uglier moments.





Thoughts?





BQ: Favorite live, non-rock album?|||i completely agree with mr. byrne. further when i am writing lyrics i am a lot more interested in archetypes than i am self expression. for instance, i think guns and trains are really interesting things to sing about even though i have only taken the subway and shot a bee-bee gun. as you probably know, i do a open post on the first of each month for musicians to post some of their work and critique each other. i like doing this much more than i like sharing music with friends or family, because friends and family always want to know what all the lyrics are and what they mean to me personally, whereas people on the internet dont have the bias of knowing me personally. of course some people do write lyrics about there own lives, and that ok too, whatever inspires you. the point that byrne makes that i think is absolutely true is that the audience response is important, the artist's inspiration is more or less irrelevant although sometimes interesting.





james brown- live at the apollo


fela kuti an ginger baker- live!


charles mingus- live at antebes|||There is no "should" when it comes to art (music). Sometimes it expresses something, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes it brings forth an emotion, like he said, and sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes a painting of an apple symbolizes something bigger.... and sometimes it's just an effing apple, man.





BQ: Symphony: Live In Vienna ~ Sara Brightman


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rc4b2dhnu…|||I wish I had something profound to add here... all I can say is that, personally, everything I write %26amp; play has to express something which I'm feeling. If it doesn't help me get some kind of emotion out..then I don't see the point. Same with songs I learn on guitar, they have to let me express something or I just don't want to learn them.





But I don't mind *too* much why artists write the songs they do, as long as I can find something which I am able to relate to in the music...so I don't see why that would make me feel betrayed as I listen to the music for myself, not for the artist...if you see what I mean.





I think that music which I listen to triggers emotion within me, but I don't see how a song which you, yourself, write can only trigger emotion and not express it...but maybe that's not what you're saying. In case it's not, then...here are some pointless ramblings. Enjoy!|||I think it is this underlying assumption that lyrics are squeezed out of a performer's life and onto the page that leads to so much pop and R%26amp;B music being devalued. People assume that "If you didn't write it, you're not an artist" but I see art as more of a process of discovering the beauty in the lyric and exposing it. As far as "self-expression" goes, that's all well and good but if the song doesn't say something to ME, I honestly don't care how cathartic it is for the songwriter or artist,





The primary reason I don't listen to gangsta rap isn't out of dislike for the sound of the music or its message, per se. There's certainly plenty of country and rock music music about killing, cheating, lust and other less than savory elements of the human condition. It's because it doesn't speak to MY life: I don't spend my days driving around in a low-slung car with my gat seeking the last guy that crossed me to settle a score.





For the record, I do listen to OTHER rap music (for example Jurassic 5, Ugly Duckling and John Reuben) that I feel more of a connection to. Those bands IMO tend to write about stuff I empathize with..whether it's more about issues of racism, poverty, etc. or just plain fun lyrics.





BA: JAMES BROWN Live at the Apollo


JOHNNY CASH At Folsom Prison|||Interesting question.





If this is truly why an artist chooses to write then no, I don't feel betrayed. I don't feel like I've been duped nor do I feel that the wool has been pulled over my eyes. An artist's decision to write is theirs and theirs alone and should not be done out of sense of obligation to their listeners, and the content should not be molded or revised to fit anyone's perceptions of what *should* be.





I would find it only natural that the reason I listen to music, for the emotions that it creates and brings to the surface for me, would cause a similar reaction in the authors themselves. If that's why they choose to create, that's fine with me.