From: owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org (precious-things-digest) To: precious-things-digest@smoe.org Subject: precious-things-digest V7 #56 Reply-To: precious-things@smoe.org Sender: owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk X-To-Unsubscribe: Send mail to "precious-things-digest-request@smoe.org" X-To-Unsubscribe: with "unsubscribe" as the body. precious-things-digest Tuesday, March 12 2002 Volume 07 : Number 056 Today's Subjects: ----------------- The Siren thing (Was Re: precious-things-digest V7 #54) [Richard Handal <] Re: Tori marketing [JNe9027355@aol.com] Re: Thoughts on artists promoting themselves. [JNe9027355@aol.com] Re: Thoughts on artists promoting themselves. [JNe9027355@aol.com] Threads That Are Golden --- [Mysterilady2001@cs.com] Re: entertainment not a real job... [Dracovixen@aol.com] Re: Tori marketing [Jennifer Mitts Cypres ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 03:18:22 -0500 (EST) From: Richard Handal Subject: The Siren thing (Was Re: precious-things-digest V7 #54) Quoting a post from me, Redstamen began to speak: > > All Great Expectations was for Tori (aside from minor incidental > > music in the score), was one song she did to a click track--and none- > > too-thrilling an experience for her, either, I might add. > > what's a click track? just curious :) Oops. Sorry. An electronic metronome is sometimes put on a recording-in- progress and then played through the headsets of all the performers so they can easily keep the same tempo, even though they may not be laying tracks at the same time and place. In film music specifically it's used a lot, because much of the music is known in advance that it is being composed to be a specific length to fit a scene. If the tempo were to be shifting around during a piece how long is it going to be? The composer wouldn't know that in advance if the specific tempo was subject to shifting around the whole time. Also, with lots of electronic drums and other instruments hooked up together, a composer and the programmers are going to have a much easier go of it if the one unyielding tempo is kept throughout. That's all fine and dandy for the score composer for Great Expectations Patrick Doyle, not so fine *or* dandy for Tori. > btw, siren is one of my favorite tori songs of all time. i didn't know > it was a bad experience for her. ??? i know she collaborated with the > guy who did the score on it, but i assumed it was a good collaboration > (because the song just rocks). I'm afraid I wasn't able to find the reference to her saying something to this effect in my quick search. I recall hearing something she said over the past, oh, six months, but I can't place my finger on it right now. Perhaps someone else remembers where she addressed this issue. You are right to question this. Absent a citation, feel free to not believe my memory. It might have been a friend's telephone report of the Ann Powers interview, but I have yet to hear a recording of it. I can get it transcribed and check stuff like this if I ever get a recording of it! ;-) I'd been curious about this, though, since I first heard Siren (which I enjoy also, BTW), as one of my first impressions of it was, "Wow--she's never played to a click track before. How bizarre." For someone whose music truly lives and breathes I had to think it might have been a problem for her; emotionally, conceptually, and from the true life logistics of having to actually perform that way. This issue is, of course, the basis of why she always used to record her own parts on her studio recordings, and then have the drummer, bassist, and other players come along afterwards and record along with what she'd already done. choirgirl was the big break with that tradition, as she hooked up with Matt Chamberlain who could sense her rhythmic elasticity enough to record with her in real-time as she laid her tracks. For Tori, having to deal with a click track must have felt like she was handcuffed. She seems okay with the song itself, as she played it a lot on tour last year. My sense is she probably has good feelings about the song itself, even positive associations with it. One reason is the circumstances around the first time she played it in concert, which was with the band in Richmond, Virginia, on 11 August 1998. She'd had (for me, anyway) a scary amount of chest congestion for a couple weeks, peaking with the New York, NY, Madison Square Garden concert of 28 July 1998, and she seemed unable to completely shake it for what felt like an eternity. The MCI Center concert in DC on 8 August 1998 was a disappointment--*I* was disappointed, and I felt frustration coming from the stage as well. My interpretation was that she was 97% over the sickness when she felt it ought to have been gone by then, but it was surprising her to be still hampering her performance, and it was a hometown show for her (parents were there, RAINN people were there, etc.). How much longer would it take for her to totally shake this thing!? After two off-days was the Richmond show, and although it was a bit low- energy compared to many of the shows earlier in the tour, it confirmed she was back, at long last, to having pretty much 100% of her voice, and to being in control of her own concerts again. Three shows later was the 15 August 1998 Knoxville, Tennessee, show I used until last year as the marker for the most musically powerful of all shows I'd ever seen. By Knoxville her voice had completely returned, and the band was playing together at a new, higher level. At any rate, just *attending* that Richmond concert and others in context around it instilled those positive associations in *me* for Siren. I have no trouble thinking it left positive memories with Tori, too. An amusing aside about that Siren in Richmond: some of us knew they were planning to debut it that night, but by sheer coincidence, a couple friends of mine who were unaware of this decided to play a trick to see how far a false rumor they made up would travel that day before the show. That afternoon before and after the well-populated meet and greet they told a lot of people that Tori and band were going to premiere Siren that night, and they got all happy with themselves when they heard it coming back to them before the show from an astonishing number of people; they were quite proud of themselves for having so successfully spread this "false" rumor. You can just imagine their jaws dropping when, for the first time ever, the band actually launched into Siren. Funny stuff. :-) I'll go, now. Be seeing you, Richard Handal, H.G. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 03:15:22 EST From: JNe9027355@aol.com Subject: Re: Tori marketing In a message dated 3/10/02 10:22:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org writes: > But ultimately, haven't many of Tori's albums reached about the maximum > number of listeners that you think will love them? > Does she think she should be bigger? > A solid fanbase but decreasing general sales is a common enough pattern. > Tori was the new Kate, and then a new artist in herself, so she got lots of > media coverage, but now with each album she's just herself again & again, > rather than freshly, and aside from people too young ten years ago to read > about her and hear her, how many people will newly discover her? Tori > doesn't combat her kooky image, she often seems to cultivate it when on > 'mainstream' shows like Leno, so can we expect people who dismiss her to > bother finding out themselves? Even as she moves towards more standard > rock > arrangements, to me she seems to often wilfully produce obscure lyrics, > sometimes without any resonance (beyond herself or deep fans) as metaphor. > > Hmm. She's unique and that makes her difficult and gorgeous. > Karen she's featured alot in mags, so it's not like she's that obscure anyway. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 03:31:48 EST From: JNe9027355@aol.com Subject: Re: Thoughts on artists promoting themselves. In a message dated 3/10/02 10:22:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org writes: > Art exists to entertain, to enlighten, to expose and provoke, to identify > with or be unsettled by. And when it becomes commerce, to me it becomes advertising, and advertising is money. > Tori was pointing up the difference between entertainment soley made for > commercial aims, > and art for personal satisfaction. Not all artists do what they do to make > money and be > famous....many are perfectly content to be able to support themselves doing > what they love, > and don't care for riches or notoriety. It's a hard thing to achieve in our > society, where people > think as you do...that art is not necessary for day to day living....and > are unwilling to be > involved or support it in any way....to the extent that people will no > longer spend $15 on a cd > and support the artist, but instead think they are entitled to it for free. I never think im entitled to it to begin with. It's really not that important. Everyone is creative--everyone is artisitic.What's the big deal? Why spend money on something i can probably create myself? I think you're really overrating the entire concept of this. Many artists will never be > > able to support themselves doing what they love, but they will never stop > doing it, because it is > what they are, whether they have an audience or not. That's fine. That's their business. Just don't expect anyone else to care about it or look at you differently because you're a starving artist, one so passionate that all they can do is live for what they love. > > Personally I can't think of what else life is for other than the chance of > personal expression, > and to try to be alive through my senses. If I did not have music as part > of that the world would > be a dark place indeed. To me, EVERYTHING is musical. the sound of rain is musical, and so forth. So why should i care about someone trying to profit off something that can be had anywhere? It is very much a necessity in my life, as are all other forms of art, both > > those created by other people, and those I create myself. I am striving to > find a place for > myself in the world where I can do something I'm passionate about. I > realize I may not make > very much money at it, but my definition of success is measured by being > able to do > something I love, not by the balance in my checkbook or how many people > recognize me on > the street. To me that is as necessary as the air I breathe. > > To say forms of personal expression are not the very essence of > life....think about that for a > minute.... ok, what isn't a personal expression? everything one does is a personal expression. why should i sit here and listen to someone overrate a virtue we all have--and then try to rationalize that it's wholesome to market it for commercial purposes? > > Do you decorate your home? Hang a picture maybe, or buy a blanket with a > pattern you like? > Chose clothing you look and feel good in? Wear makeup, jewelry, get > tattoos? Style your hair, > and otherwise care about your appearance? Do you enjoy going to a > restaurant and having a > delicious meal? Did you pick out a car you liked, and later maybe even put > a bumper sticker > on it? Do you have opinions, and like to discuss or even argue them? > > All of these are ways you express yourself, and they are also made possible > by the > expression of others...the fine meal prepared by a creative chef, the car > designed by a > visionary engineer, the clothing designer with a flair for colour and line. > The favour works both > ways. Would you rather wear the same grey uniform every day, eat nutrient > paste out of a > tube, and live in a plain white box? Just how necessary are all the things > that make you YOU? Huh? these are all very obviously uxuries. one can LIVE with just THEMSELVES and basic necessities--like a cloth, food and water, and still be able to express themselves just fine. If you want pain, well go mush some berries and use some mud and make yourself an objet'dar. Anything beyond that is a want, a luxury. > > If Tori plays piano in a forest and no one is there to hear, does she still > play? > > I believe she would. Some would choose not. There is the difference between > an artist and an > entertainer. > Um, some probably wouldn't care to decide, simply out of how pointless it would be to. AJ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 03:41:09 EST From: JNe9027355@aol.com Subject: Re: Thoughts on artists promoting themselves. In a message dated 3/10/02 10:22:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org writes: > . > > That seems to me an unusually harsh view which someone on this list would > have of the arts. The arts feed the soul. I see nothing luxurious in that. > People suffer all manner of depression and emptiness without the arts. no, i think you got this backwards. people suffer without basic human decency and compassion, not some damn lack of a joyride. art/entertainment is essentially one big Coming Distraction. one of the main reasons art even exists is to fill a void in one's world, to create a more appealing diversion than what there situation has to offer. "One who can only live within one's means suffers from lack of imagination" Take a look at why some people became actors -their lives were hellish due to miscommunication and trouble among their people, so acting and watching movies was an escape. Instead of trying to remedy their problems, they just escape from it. Singers sing the blues away, painters paint themselves into oblivion, etc. Art on the whole isn't really positive or celebratory when it's actually being made--considering WHY it's being made, and when it's being celebrated...it's mostly by people who similarly turn to it as a diversion, not as a receptacle of general appreciation. at least this is so from what i've encountered. AJ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 04:11:11 EST From: Mysterilady2001@cs.com Subject: Threads That Are Golden --- Hi ya EWF, I've been following the marketing discussion. What I believe would be valuable is learning where/how current fans came to know of Tori's music and focus on those areas. For instance: I was *turned on* to T by my best friend Gary. He sent me LE back in late 92 or early 93, I don't exactly recall when. Gary had heard Winter on his local radio station one evening. The song affected him so deeply he pulled his car over to listen to the complete song before continuing on his journey. The station catered to a largely college aged demographic. Through word of mouth -- AND actually buying & giving LE to 4 of his friends -- 2 of us plus Gary are still fans who buy every album, pick up available singles and go to her shows. I'd never heard music like hers before. And when we saw her perform in those early days - small smokey clubs, half the people there to drink, paying zero attention to the redhead straddling the piano bench - it all fit together like long-lost pieces of a puzzle that fit together under my skin. Pieces I didn't know existed before then. Some of us were intently listening. Still are. How did everyone else come to know Tori's music? Here's to my best friend Gary Toodles ~ MysT *** ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:18:34 EST From: Dracovixen@aol.com Subject: Re: entertainment not a real job... I hope you're being sarcastic on this. Entertainment has been a real job since the beginning of humans, when we could communicate with each other in a more intricate language aside from grunts of hunger and anger and all that. At first, perhaps it was just a way to while away the time, and it certainly still is that today. But also, it was and is the business of the entertainers to make their audience feel so distant from their own problems, that to shift away the mundania of their life just for a short time renewed and refreshed them, making them more able to go on with their lives. Entertainers are often using self-expression of course, and some share their own problems, thus allowing others to identify with them, and to even be better able to cope with their problems knowing that they are not alone. Others, such as Ms. Spears, are out there shaking their booty and getting others to do the same, to forget their woes and to just have a good time. Still others are making political and social statements, vying for the people's awareness, such as Marilyn Manson, Rage Against the Machine, and Ani DiFranco, and may even give people the incentive to become more active in society, to even give them a sense of purpose. There are painters and poets and writers that do all these things as well. Authors that write philosophical novels (such as Ayn Rand), or government satires (Voltaire's Candide), give people a new viewpoint, something to ponder on, and others write romance novels and mysteries, just to entertain people, but it helps them to relax and once again, shifts away that mundane awareness. Stories often help keep parts of history. Stories can give people a sense of purpose in their life. Even a painting can do this. A painting can make a once dark and lonely room into something brighter, and uplifting. People NEED entertainment. And the entertainers NEED to express themselves. Even if you have food, shelter, all that, if you're bored all the time, or if you never do anything fun, or if you feel you really have nothing to live for except working, eating, sitting, whatever...then what's the point? If there's nothing there to take you away from your problems, just as a temporary release, you eventually will go insane. So, the world may not be revolving around making the careers of entertainers, but entertainment certainly is a REAL job. Black Dove In a message dated 3/11/02 1:22:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, owner-precious-things-digest@smoe.org writes: << hey need to wake up --the world just isn't here to revolve around making you a career. Your job is not even a real job for one. You are first and foremost an ENTERTAINER. Anyone who makes a living out of giving an audience a show, be it in poetry, in acting, in photography, in what have u, that is a form of entertainment. It is not a necessity, it is a luxury to be had, so don't think you're doing anyone a huge favor by doing what you're doing --people truly don't need u or your show business. >> ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 12:05:47 -0800 (PST) From: Jennifer Mitts Cypres Subject: Re: Tori marketing Hey, all! Haven't written on here in quite a while. But had to pop in for a sec to add a comment. Karen wrote some good stuff: >>>>She has avoided touring with similar artists most of her career, and other than Alanis, she toured with so few female musicians compared to people like Sarah McLachlan, and many of Tori's potential listeners do fall into the category of enjoying many female-singer-songwriters :)>>>>>> I've always thought Tori should do a Lilith Fair or something similar (I mean, if Sheryl Crow and The Indigo Girls can do it-- they're huge), or tour with someone smaller but who is also a woman with a powerful or quirky message. Has anyone ever heard Meryn Cadell? A Canadian who's so... different, and funny, and touching, and haunting. She's been out for forever, but she's NEVER played. And she could appeal to LOTS of people, but no one knows who the heck she is. Tori could help people like that. But before she does, she could use some other brief mainstream exposure other than The Tonight Show or David Letterman. I honestly think the shows with Alanis were good for her. They got a lot of media exposure together. >>>>I think it is the lyrics and their increasing obscurity that keeps her out of mainstream radio... often her metaphors are far too dense for someone without experience of Tori's lyrical world to understand or bother trying to decipher. Little Earthquakes and its lyrical (and musical) simplicity still converts the most people that I know.>>>>>> Yeah. Radio doesn't like music with several different melodies (other than "Bohemian Rhapsody")and music with lyrics that seem disconnected-- only real Tori fans would see the vague connections or relish in the disconnection. It's almost as if to truly appreciate Tori, as a newbie, it's best to start with album #1. That's just my opinion, though. I'm not saying I want Tori to go back to the way she was in album #1, BUT a bit more of a connection between words and music would gain her more fans (and I love it when she sort of tells a story in her songs). I think that she seeks love and attention more than anything else, and a bigger REAL fanbase would just be so wonderful for her. I mean, no one can have too much love, right? Accessibility: I think you have to reach newbies with something accessible that will lead that person to reaching for the more difficult stuff. In fact, that's how I start listening to a new Tori album. I immediately drift toward the most accessible song, listen to it over and over, and then start peeking at the others. When I get a new Tori CD, I want to immediately devour what looks most appetizing-- the accessible chocolate cake-- and then later on eat my Tori vegetables that will take some time to grow on me but that I will appreciate more and that will stick with me longer. Love and shalom jen ===== It's Yahweh or the highway! -JC It's not my way but Yah's way! -JB - ----- Need a photographer? Check out my hubby's website: http://www.jean-philippe-photo.com ------------------------------ End of precious-things-digest V7 #56 ************************************