Couldn't agree more Chord. And noticing your posts over the past few days ..I can't but help comment that ARR's music also seems to be extracting some amazing thoughts/feelings (in the form of these writings) from you :-).
Not just you - I have seen a spurt in people putting down their feelings as posts. Truly its ARR's artistry thats causing all this :-) I enjoy reading every bit of it ...so keep it up .. -A On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 7:49 AM, Chord <[email protected]> wrote: > As a teenager, I used to visit a local fine arts museum through > school trips and with family. There was a Picasso painting there > that I always used to gaze at but never really appreciated it until > one day, several visits later, it finally "hit" me. Then I fell in > love. As I was thinking about this memory, this experience, it > dawned on me how this experience in some ways parallels another more > contemporary experience. > > There is a distinction between arts and fine arts. Film music is > commonly commercial and weighs mostly on entertainment factor. For > example, if you look at the music of SEL, they have a very > entertaining, uplifting style of composition that's very celebratory > in nature. It's one of the reasons why I like them a lot. Their > music is instantly likeable, catchy, makes you feel positive. Yet, > their music also sounds fresh and not stale. Some other good MDs out > there also follow this example. > > With Rahman by comparison, the additional factor in his music is his > dabbling into the finer arts in terms of his compositional style. > There are splashess of Western classical, Indian classical, jazz, > folk in his music laid out more in depth and elaborated than any > other MD's works. When I hear a great Rahman composition, I find > more subtlety, more refined beauty in the sound, the arrangements, > the melody hits you very differently than a piece that's instantly > likeable and catchy. Hence, why we often need repeated listens for > the song to finally "hit" us due to the deeper layers and us as > listeners being forced to acoomodate to the new musical directions > rather than assimilate to an existing one. Of course, many of > Rahman's songs are also instantly accessable and catchy, but more > often than not, there is this finer arts aspect to his music that > makes his scores very special. > > Sometimes his songs evoke images of a Picaso painting, a Leonardo De > Vinci sculpture......striking, yet subtle, booming yet modest, > divinely beautiful yet subdued. Rarely is his music ever flashy, > gaudy, obvious. It's the subtlety, the refined beauty of his songs > overlapping into the finer arts category that really sets him a world > apart. But, keep in mind, not everyone has the sensitivity to > appreciate this in his music. Those music listeners who are > interested in only the obvious, the flashy, will not appreciate > Rahman's finer compositions, the finer layers, the deeper sounds, the > small ornaments. And the amazing thing about Rahman is that you > cannot label or categorize him as only one type of composer. At the > drop of a hat, he can create a racy, flashy piece of music that will > send the charts on fire. In the next instant, he can wear Mozart's > or John Williams' hats and create a Monet-esque or DaVinci-esque > refined sound sculpture worthy of display in a future musical museum. > > Rahman is not just an entertainer, he is a true artist in the very > finest sense of the term. > > > -- -A http://viewsnmuse.blogspot.com
