Jump to content
IGNORED

Wu-Tang Clan - Once Upon a time in Shaolin


Nebraska

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry, I just can't buy any of that shit. The speed at which information is transferred may be getting faster, but the origination of the content behind that information is still being created the same way. I.e. you cannot really compare the physical act of me recording music to the digital act of sharing my opinion on this board.

 

So ultimately, with this Accelerationist outlook, any long term effects of cultural fallout or completely broken systems of ever-increasing demand with ever-decreasing supply...are just completely overlooked in favor of "we want the world and we want it now". I mean, I'm sure you don't mean it like this, but "It's futile to resist" - who the fuck are we turning into, The Borg?

 

I don't think the instant gratification aspect of current technologies is a positive thing, in a lot of situations. It clearly fosters an unrealistic attitude toward everything consumable, to the point that things which are not intended to be consumed in that way are being forced to fit into that paradigm. I.e. the reduction of art to data alone, when it's clearly much more than that, at least at the source. But a picture of a loaf of bread is not a loaf of bread, and that's the dissonance of things like Spotify.

 

And anyway, I'm not trying to piss you off when I say this, but, the absolute LAST thing our culture needs is people to "not bother resisting" the extremely-fast changes and not bother questioning the current status quo. Just because things are a certain way, does not mean they are supposed to be. Not everything can be turned into raw data and fed to mindless consumers via proxies, hashtags and skippable ads.

 

Sorry to the OP I guess, but I still think we're more or less on track with discussing the original intent of Wu Tang and their new album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm sorry, I just can't buy any of that shit.

:trollface:

 

The speed at which information is transferred may be getting faster, but the origination of the content behind that information is still being created the same way. I.e. you cannot really compare the physical act of me recording music to the digital act of sharing my opinion on this board.

I don't see why not. Frequently changing digital stations can be more like message boards than albums.

 

So ultimately, with this Accelerationist outlook, any long term effects of cultural fallout or completely broken systems of ever-increasing demand with ever-decreasing supply...are just completely overlooked in favor of "we want the world and we want it now". I mean, I'm sure you don't mean it like this, but "It's futile to resist" - who the fuck are we turning into, The Borg?

The system is only going to look broken from the point of view of us humans, not the system itself. We're in too deep man.

 

I don't think the instant gratification aspect of current technologies is a positive thing, in a lot of situations. It clearly fosters an unrealistic attitude toward everything consumable, to the point that things which are not intended to be consumed in that way are being forced to fit into that paradigm. I.e. the reduction of art to data alone, when it's clearly much more than that, at least at the source. But a picture of a loaf of bread is not a loaf of bread, and that's the dissonance of things like Spotify.

Exactly, resistance is futile at this point. It would involve avoiding all temptation for what we have been conditioned to desire. Not only for users, but particularly software/platform developers seeking easy profit.

 

And anyway, I'm not trying to piss you off when I say this, but, the absolute LAST thing our culture needs is people to "not bother resisting" the extremely-fast changes and not bother questioning the current status quo. Just because things are a certain way, does not mean they are supposed to be. Not everything can be turned into raw data and fed to mindless consumers via proxies, hashtags and skippable ads.

 

Sorry to the OP I guess, but I still think we're more or less on track with discussing the original intent of Wu Tang and their new album.

Would it be true to say that the cultural relics that remain from the past that hold the most interest to us were the most non-utilitarian? The least necessary activities it might be said, have the most potential to transcend their origins on into the future. Imagine all the raw fucking data we are leaving strewn about the place! Utilitarian activities are necessary by definition, so isn't there something noble in them? They do pay well. We could stop doing necessary things but wouldn't that lead to ruin? I suppose we can't all do extra-ordinary things but shouldn't we try? I suppose there is nobility in being ordinarily reliable but unfortunately it is also boring and easily forgotten. When we, and all the things we have bought are dust, the music will live on!! :nyan:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, if you get some noble pleasure from being a utility of society, that's you. Takes all kinds. However, even the so-called "well paid" utilitarian jobs in our society are going to be gone sooner or later, thanks to the very crux of your Accelerationist mentality. Ever hear of something called "soft assumption"? It's a polite way of observing the fact that many areas of our culture and economy, specifically the mundane/utilitiarian/service industry positions, will be replaced by completely synthetic interfaces. Who needs a human being to talk to when you can call a VRU? Or use a website? Or if you're out and about, why not use our convenient digital kiosk?

 

It all feels very terrifying to me, and maybe that's just me showing my own colors as something of a traditionalist. Maybe I'm just getting old? I feel like we're absolutely right around the corner from the talking medicine cabinet in THX 1138.

 

Sure, everything will be dust eventually, but that's going beyond an Accelerationist outlook and more toward a fatalist view, esp. if you're using it as your reasoning for not wanting to buy things. I've said it earlier in the thread, and I'll say it again - if you consider something artistic important, there is no legitimate way to acquire it while also expecting it to be free or renewable. It's an impossibility that will inevitably lead to creators being treated as a disposable resource to be used and thrown away like an empty Coke can, after they have outlived their usefulness (realizing that the river only runs one way). I don't think that creative impulse will ever cease to exist, and arguably the worse things are, the more passionate the creative minds become, but that's a whole other discussion. So from my perspective, as someone living just barely on my craft, it is not about the acquisition of wealth or material goods, or even a perpetuation of consumerism and object importance, but rather that I'm more like an architect, in a utilitarian job, contributing a flow of culture to our society, which makes life more bearable and interesting for people like you. Yet, this is a utility that does not pay well, and cannot be replaced by the soft assumption I mentioned earlier.

 

Also, I don't think you understood my comment about how making music is not the same as posting on a forum. Changing digital stations? That's an act of consumption, not creation. I was trying to point out that the creation of content is the same now as it has been since the beginning of time - i.e. someone creative makes something. This has no bearing on the methods of distribution and dissemination that content uses once it's been completed, and you cannot avoid this integral fact with the broad justification that information happens to travel faster now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mellow U, should we meet back here in 30 years to see who was right? If music destroys money I win and if money destroys music you win OK?

 

Deal. How's 9:00 AM sound?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Upon the verge of singularity, 9:00 AM sounds perfect.

 

Good. Cos I have something at 9:30.

Edited by Mellow U
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Which is fair enough, but again - I struggle to understand the reasoning and logic behind the "great disconnect" of today? I.e. why so many people who profess to love and support music turn around and fight with the creators themselves over how even the most basic works could not happen without financial intervention. Intervention that is indeed the thing being so viciously pulled from the hands and mouths of hard working people, while they're looked at sideways when they question the act.

 

Anyway, I get your point about "we invented money but not sound", but what exactly do you hope to achieve there? That all art should be free of a monetary system entirely? If all sound is merely a discovery or an arrangement of a discovery, then we should just put our machines down right now and start listening to the rain falling instead.

 

No, I think, while money is indeed a great motivator, and I am not financially motivated to write this, I can still sit here as a self-employed artist and say "If you do something well, never do it for free"

 

And THAT is where the problem is, really.

I agree that money for art can be a great motivator, and services like Spotify are making it harder for people we like to support. But I guess I'm a bit of an Accelerationist. I'm keen to see more of these changes brought on even more quickly. While in the short term the creators of services like Spotify win out, getting rich quick at the expense of artists, it's only because they are speeding up (and lubricating?) a musical-informational process. A process by which aesthetic memes are spread through 1's and 0's and their influence fed back to their creators. I think it's futile to resist, because there are far greater forces at work here than royalties. We are used to the idea of 'the social internet' regarding communication, but we have been slower in thinking of art and entertainment itself being an integrated part of digital communication. I'd be apprehensive of an argument that went: if you have something important to say, never say it for free.

 

We are straying from the topic of "Once Upon a Time in Shaolin" here. :beer::music::fear::cisfor:

I actually agree with a certain part of what you are saying as far as the natural evolution of things here (sharing, streaming) as part of the picture may actually not be a bad thing and is in fact quite exciting in terms of creating a new paradigm. What frustrates me is more the attitude of "heeyyy i dont have buy any media hahaaa" from consumers. And it doesnt bother me cuz theyre bad ppl or anything or their out of there element, it's just who can blame them for holding that attitude when the foundation of our tech culture encourages that? I feel like it's these tech companies responsibilities (knowing that theyre now profiting in an endless goldmine of new media) to create more of a respectful environment for artists and to encourage fans and listeners to support the content creators that are allowing their entire industry to flourish. And im not saying Pandora needs to yell in ppls faces to buy the cd, but cmon, their brilliant start ups.. They can find ways to partner with artists in more mutually beneficial ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you talk about more mutually beneficial ways though, you mean royalties wise right? However, the thing that in one way seems like a naive pact to go into - 'we will allow you to broadcast for free, through our service, giving you valuable exposure' is a con only if consider rewards numerically or volume wise. If you start thinking in terms of memetic effect - it only has to be heard once by the right person and suddenly your idea or stylistic impression or whatever, the equivalent of genes in our collective imagination, can be out there breeding like rabbits in no time. Who cares? Well then why do people make such a hubbub about clones - this is voluntary cloning OF MINDSTATES.

Edited by webby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

btw: are you guys aware that rza invented serato?

 

http://youtu.be/TXsYXMqw4Zc

"When you get a patent, you gotta patent in over 1000 countries."

 

Over 1000 countries.

Dude where's that Replikator I needz it!
I call bullshit:

 

http://who-invented-digital-vinyl.co.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I can see what they're trying to say though and it doesn't matter that i'll perhaps not hear the music as i probably wouldn't have bothered anyway. If you read the blurb it makes sense as an attempt to try to make a statement, even if i don't agree with the concept i don't begrudge their bringing it up and selling it in this form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they want just anyone to buy this thing. They want to make more money than they normally would by auctioning it off to a record label. Plus that way it still reaches the fans. If they don't care if some rich kid buys it and keeps it to himself than it doesn't send a very good message if you ask me. Other than that it's a very clever idea and a slick way to rake in 5 milli in this post music buying world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Man, that's hilarious. What a butthurt way to deal with it.

I dunno, the listen to an album once in a museum if you're lucky then be jealous of the rich kid in Dubai it's auctioned off to thing seems like a fuck you to the fans. It's basically RZA going around the fans to make the most money isn't it? And this isn't a bad response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter that the release is a cash grab or not, the band is entitled to that. It's their dignity on the line, not anyone else's. The guy behind the Kickstarter is just butthurt about it and this is his way of dealing with it. I don't think fans understand that they aren't entitled to anything, even after investing years of listening and money in a band. The fact that he's going out of his way to make a spectacle of his frustration is just...ridiculous. Although I guess it's a fitting internet style end to something that only even happened because of the internet in the first place...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But they are releasing an album to all us peasants in July, are they not? Seems all these big Wu-Tang fans don't seem to care about that one.

Because the singles so far have been shitty. Even Raekwon agrees. People would definitely rather hear Wu tracks from 15 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How stupid. I was wondering how this Kickstarter went, and now I see it was far from being a success and the guy wants to buy and destroy the record? What a cunt.

 

As far as the so-called album that's supposed to come out next month, you can pretty much bank on it either not happening or not being very good. It's the least united that they've ever been and that assures us that it will not be a quality record. This makes me incredibly sad because they're my very favorite hiphop group, but I really didn't want them to even try to make this thing without everyone being on the same page. Raekwon refusing to do it and Ghostface only contributing minimally? It's a seemingly thrown-together project and I just don't have high hopes for it. The only thing that we can be sure of is that Method Man will have great verses throughout because he seems to be the only one who was all in from day one.

Edited by flim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.