Wednesday, April 28, 2004
Damien Rice sucks on the radio. Well, at least compared to the CD. I hate that.
Why can't art be art? Why is it that a song can't remain how it was intended to be? I understand it when people cover songs at some live gig or something. They have fun with it, they make it their own. They might be using another's words, music and ideas, but they either make it their own or make tribute to the original. But not on the radio.
Oh no. God forbid.
God forbid we let the original version go on the radio. I hate covers that are purely for profit. You can tell good covers from bad covers really quickly. A good cover is like the one's mentioned above, and you rarely, if ever, hear about them unless you were at the event (or a live album is made with the cover on it). A bad cover is when some rap or R&B "artist" rips off a song, adds lyrics that change the meaning of the song, and make a million bucks off it. When your only hit on the radio is a cover song, there's something wrong. Damned Ataris! Damned Lenny Kravitz!
And why is it that, if a song is to be on the radio, it needs a whole frickin rock band behind it? Cannonball had drums, and not just a little, but a whole rock beat. Or how about Dakona's new album? What ever happened to those songs I remember so well from Ordinary Heroes?
Do they think that art can't stand up on it's own merit? If it can't, then great! It shouldn't! Art should be made for the sake of the piece, not for the sake of the money it can make. If it makes money, great; if it doesn't, then oh frickin well. Or maybe I shouldn't be so upset about the art, but about the insult. Maybe what they're trying to say is that I can't appreciate the art, so they need to make it more appealing.
I guess I'm a bonehead.
"Still a little bit of your ghost your witness
Still a little BIT of your face I haven't kissed
You step a little closer each day
THAT I can't SAY what's going on"
"So it's not hard to fall
When you float like a cannonball"
