Turnover (part two)
I was watching an interview with an artist (Thomas Nozkowski) recently and he said something that stuck with me. He said that artists always think what they are working on currently is their best work yet. But that's not always the case. What comes next will not necessarily be better than what came before.
However, this mind set is essential for an artist to keep moving. Although you may keep going back to the same themes, you try to approach from another angle, focus on a different aspect, in hopes of not only making a good work but also discovering a path to lead you on to something unexpected and exciting. It's the only way. Making things leads to making other things.
The same does not apply to being in a band. Being in a band requires two separate things. One is the creative process of writing music, lyrics and arranging them with the band. The other thing is to then repeat the same songs again and again with the aim of playing them as well as you possibly can.
I never got that second thing. I approached it as a visual artist always moving on to the next thing. I wrote songs at a breakneck pace and I always thought that the last song I wrote was the best or at least the most interesting. I think Trevor were active for maybe five years, and during that time we must have performed 60 to 70 songs on stage. there must be another 40 I wrote and recorded that were not introduced to the band or were done in the practice room but not live. Every time we performed there was at least one, but often more, new song that we were playing live for the first time. Exciting for us but maybe not the best for the paying audience.
It's one of my biggest regrets. I wish we had settled on a 15 song set list and just practiced and performed it to perfection. We should have played a constant live schedule and featured the same basic set each time. As it was, if someone ever did see us live more than once they may not have seen a single song twice. Just like in any commercial enterprise that depends on favorable reaction from customers who may drop in at any time, consistency is the key. If you have an off night, physically or emotionally, at least you can offer a competent well rehearsed set.
Unfortunately I was far more enthralled with the creative process and far less dedicated to perfecting what we already had. In the end, making stuff up is way more fun than practicing.
You know, I have often thought about the question of why some bands/ musicians make it and others don't... there are a few other variables, such as: 1. To keep a band going you have to sustain a regular performing schedule to build momentum- tough to do for people with bills to pay or other interests. 2. You have to market, even if it is lo-fi or anti-marketing marketing- you have to be visible for people to find you. 3. You have to be prone to liking fucking tedious administration bullshit in a self-directed way. 4. You have to be able to manage a bunch of people (their personalities, their life circumstances, their dynamics together) because you are all getting together to work for free for the pay-off of the creative process and joy of performing- something that isn't "enough" for everybody. 5. You have to be making music that resonates with other people- some of my favourite songs are ones that I doubt any one else likes all that much, but for me they are little glass bottles containing perfect little ships that I lived on. I love them. 6. You have to be in the business of managing the "scene". Being nice to a-hole promoters as much as nice promoters, etc. Not stepping in the wrong places... like being seen in "business casual" attire in Mile-End! I could go on, I believed for a long time that if someone made great art it would float to the top of the lists of people with great taste- and while this certainly does happen in some instances- it is certainly not based on the quality of the work alone.
ReplyDelete