Gaffaweb >
Love & Anger >
1996-40 >
[ Date Index |
Thread Index ]
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
From: Len Bullard <cbullard@HiWAAY.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:36:57 -0500
Subject: Re: Video History
To: love-hounds@gryphon.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Blind Dillo
Reply-To: cbullard@HiWAAY.net
Sender: owner-love-hounds
From: Richard Bensam <rabensam@earthlink.net> >Not to impugn the word of Dave Clark -- I have nothing against the man, >honest! -- but musical shorts were a regular part of a night out at the >cinema back in the 1930s, alongside cartoons and newsreels. These short >films were usually what we might consider performance clips, except that >they were not films of actual performances, but bands "acting" like they >were performing, miming over a prerecorded track just like the videos of >today. True. If it weren't for these, there are some very good early black jazz groups that would have been swallowed up without a trace in history. Part of the preservation effort for old film going on is recovering some of these. So Dave, you weren't the first. Now, narrowing it down to rock videos, maybe he has a case. I dunno. I sat in front of the TV the day MTV first broadcast with my then picking buddy, Ricky V. We looked at the acts then looked at each other and decided to get daytime jobs. It was obvious what was coming and that musical skill had just taken a back seat to looks and outrage, but since the rock genre was burned out some years earlier, it wasn't really a big surprise. MTV did get the music industry out of the economic dregs of the time. MTV has produced some good changes, but by and large, it hurt music. Compare a band today (most - not all) and compare one to 1973-78 when you really had to play well, and skill wise, there isn't much to compare. Of course, compare the Beatles to Cole Porter and one gets the same results. It comes and goes... One item we debate these days in my business is what to do with some of the neat technical toys we have. VRML 2.0 is not only cheap animation, but a good way to build an interface into albums. One approach is to retrofit it to existing CD-ROM legacy. When the CD came along, the 12 inch vinyl disappeared and that got rid of the album cover as art form. The size of the CD just doesn't lend itself to what could be done before. Now we will be delivering payforplay and downloadAlbumBefore neighbor direct distribution and we can really raise the ante on the presentation. We are also seriously raising the ante on skill level required. That was exactly what Kate Bush did to her contemporaries. When one looked at what she could do in terms of dance, mime, composition, singing, etc, it was really intimidating at the time. She wasn't the first, of course, but she was the best. So, we can build VR worlds for the legacy out there (e.g, you can run up that Hill with Vkate), and we can tightly integrate with new works, which will be quite a bit more fun. Some folks like Todd Rundgren have experimented with it. Tossing rocks at Rush Limbaugh for points is fun. For the newer bands for whom computers are second nature, a new art form is emerging. So, we will see rock live again as part of virtual theatre and interactive fr-iction. This is an area where kate could do stellar work because a good camera eye, sense of proportion, and a wild imagination go a long way for cheap in this medium. And in this world, one is forever young. Or, given her many characters, this is a place to make them all live and play together. Je suis frontiere... The artists of the next century are not discovered yet. len