Amen Jeff! It always bugs the hell out of me when the self-elected party revolutionary leader stands up at the show and starts yelling at people to start dancing. If he/she needs other people to dance for them to fell comfortable with dancing themselves, maybe they should get drunk or something. "Bite me" is what I usually end up thinking...
On Mon, 04 Nov 2002, Mxyzptlk wrote: > > While I respect your opinion and understand that your > comments are made in > the context of this discussion (and also that dance > music is ostensibly > made for dancing), I have to say that I find the notion > that someone gets > to say how *I* need to react to something else in the > sense that I can be > marginalized when I don't is reductionistic and at > least as problematic as > a person who doesn't respond in the way dictated by > whomever. I don't dance > and I doubt I ever will; perhaps it's childhood trauma > or an ill formed > sense of self - whatever. That doesn't mean I don't > enjoy the music nor > does it mean I have to be saddled with restructuring a > performative context > or bumming out a DJ. It would seem like the fact that I > haven't left the > venue should say something. > In an age where all kinds of criticism > (literary, etc.) has freed > art from static notions tied with the artist, I find it > interesting that > the monolithic notion of "must-dancing" still rules. I > do understand the > need for it and I understand how it creates a necessary > symbiosis - but why > does *everyone* need to be dancing in order for them to > enjoy and > appreciate something? > We aren't all dancers, we aren't all as comfortable > with dancing as each > other. As a qualifier, I am not saying that any > behavior or reaction to art > is equally appropriate, nor am I saying there is no tie > between art and > artist. I just find it a bit tyrannical and quixotic to > dictate behavior to > a set. Again, my comments are not directed to this > particular post (as I > can see the connection you are making vis a vis the > trend), but rather > towards the notion that seems to underlie it : if I > don't dance, I am > unappreciative and some kind of pariah. If it's really > about the music OR > the mix, then I should be left to appreciate it in a > way which is genuine > to myself and doesn't shipwreck someone else's > enjoyment. .02. > > > jeff > > > At 08:09 AM 11/4/2002, Toby Frith wrote: > >This is somewhat of a double-edged sword I think. In > one respect, people go > >to see a DJ like Mills so they can dance. In the other > respect, they go to > >watch his craft, which then takes the DJ out of his > normal context and into > >that of an artist, because you are viewing him/her > rather than interacting. > >(another argument which I'm not going to pontificate > on here) So you get > >one half of the audience dancing and the other just > watching. This has been, > >IMHO, the downfall of techno turntablism and the like > in recent years. Too > >much watching, not enough dancing. > > > >I went to see Mills in Zurich a year ago and there was > far too much of the > >latter going on. You could see him actually looking > rather annoyed as one > >absolute classic after another (Final Frontier, > Magnese) was being dropped > >only to see a leaden-footed and mute reaction from the > crowd. How must a DJ > >feel when they are faced by banks of motionless people > looking at them spin > >some records? TJJ ~in a perfect world, nothing is perfect~ ________________________________________________ PeoplePC: It's for people. And it's just smart. http://www.peoplepc.com
