I've had a mixed past 24 hours. The condo in Edgewater that my friend Mike and I thought we'd be moving into for sure we didn't get, and was given to a young family because they had a baby so they were given priority. Just another reason to hate children.
My band is playing a showcase show in April now that will be hosted by the once popular Mancow Muller. I didn't know Mancow was still around, but he still is apparently and he will be our MC and introducing my band to the audience at the show. I am not a fan of Mancow so I don't really care, but I find it funny to play a show hosted by the once famous DJ.
I got into a very serious conversation almost turned argument over what it is to be Avant Garde. I find it those who don't like avant garde have no way to define and in turn only don't like a concept they can't understand. It has brought the question to my mind of what is it to be Avant Garde? Any takers have any definitions/ideas?
I'm thinking about starting my own jazz/funk/experimental band. I like being accessible and playing pop/rock music, and playing shows to big crowds who dig the music, but I really enjoy music that it more creative and rather break boundaries than appeal to fans. Now the problem is finding musicians who want to be in a band whose focus is on making creative and interesting music and not necessarily interested in making music the majority of people want to hear.
The bar Simon's is really starting to grow on me.
I'm feeling kind of hipster today, think I'll head over to Wicker Park decked out in Ben Sherman.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Avant Garde…
I was only introduced to this term last year and, to be sure, I have little experience with things that would fall under this category. It's a slippery thing, trying to define to it. The term's etymology is simple enough. It means something that pushes forward or advances the vanguard. It was coined to describe things that pushed the limits of what was understandable or recognizable. But by its very nature, then, it is indefinable because what is considered avant garde should always be changing--unless once something is considered avant garde, it remains that way. But, for the sake of discussion, I'll throw out some parameters that--at least for me--enclose this nebulous genre.
Something avant garde is anything that is created with the intent of being experimental, so long as it is coherent. Usually this also means it was created with the intent of avoiding popularity; if it were popular it would be recognizable and not edgy. In other words, it is created to be different and new. Naturally, most people will see something avant garde and be confused by it because they cannot easily relate it to other things they know. Some people are comfortable with this and some even embrace it--like you have. For me, I see avant garde things as eccentric and I tend to focus my energies on exploring works whose intent is not on being different but on being perplexing. While the two are certainly not mutually exclusive, I like the idea of taking the known and the certain and making them unknown or uncertain; that is, I like paradoxes. Just when you think you have the answer you don't. Avant garde works in my estimation take the unknown and make them known. That they reverse the process I find engaging by fathering something new (taking the unknown) and representing it (making it known) may be why I'm not that crazy about avant garde works.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
Post a Comment