An idea that had been trying, for a while now, to worm its way into my brain’s list of things tagged ‘actually worth thinking about’, has finally managed it. Ergo, I now have something to write about.
Why is it that I must simultaneously aspire towards my ideals of art as well as of society (immediate and otherwise)? On the surface of it and often (very inconveniently) deep down below, the two are incorrigibly at war. Unfortunately, their symbiosis is undeniable.
Are honesty, open-mindedness, dynamism, alertness etc in every aspect of everything, not precursors to being an honest, open-minded, dynamic, alert etc musician? Everything that I regularly convince myself I must be, in order to be a good musician, I find that I must incorporate into my person, into my conduct with society as well.
This is all very well and very virtuous. But this takes up a lot of brain-continuum. Wouldn’t it be easier if I could allow myself to file social responsibility away as another avoidable form of cacophony and focus on music instead? On an everyday level, this dilemma is cacophonic.
Is it acceptable, for instance, that right in the middle of an extremely intellectually and emotionally demanding concert, I’m acutely aware of the resources that we as musicians consume? If I’m out walking on the street with a tune in my head that’s asking to be sung or composed or altered or heard, does that justify my ignoring everything I inescapably see around me that I think needs to be changed? When I’m singing, I try to reassess everything that comes out of my mouth. I try to be open to other ideas, I try to make sure I don’t stagnate and that what I’m singing is honest. Wouldn’t I be a hypocrite if I don’t do that when I’m talking to somebody? Or writing this post? Writing this is a bit of an effort to sort this issue out. Shouldn’t I just be singing right now?
At the root of this cacophony, I think, is guilt. When I’m singing, I’m guilty about not doing twenty other things, and doing them well. When I’m doing any of those things, I’m guilty that I’m not singing.
On the other hand (the masochist in me is glad there are always at least two of those), maybe I’m on the right track. Maybe I have to try to be good at everything, because maybe by trying to be the master of all trades, I come closer to being the master of me. Because, at the risk of invoking Batman and Descartes in the same sentence, I think therefore I am, but it is what I do that defines me. I think I’m a trader – that’s what I’m trying to be a master of.
Either that or I still haven’t accepted my own decision to sing.
Posts
2 comments:
Good post. You should write more often.
BTW it was Descartes, not Socrates.
I totally understand man.
I think part of what bothers you is the fact that those are things you know you _can_ do well. Look at it this way. Imagine one thing you're bad at or just aren't interested in. Cooking, sweeping, playing an XBox, watching Star Wars - you wouldn't feel as guilty. You would easily dismiss it. What truly bothers you is that you have 24 hours in a day, and that you are good at things other than singing and they do excite you and you feel you don't do them justice.
That's exactly the dilemma Batman has - there is a criminal in front of him whom he can prevent from destroying a hundred people. He however, also has a good grasp of social responsibility, ethics, morals. His life would have been so much simpler, had he been a moral philosopher with no money or strength to beat criminals to a pulp, or had he been strong with no grasp of what it means to be "good".
In that respect, you are Batman when you sing. You wear your mask and do your job.
Post a Comment