i don't care either way but i wish writers got more public credit.
literally nobody knows who writes any given song and just assume the singer/band wrote it
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33014203]Why are they not artists? Because they are not in front of the spotlight? Or because they are not famous?[/QUOTE]
Because the writing and creation of the music is the art, not just playing it for a recording.
No.
A musician is, by definition, someone who creates music. Merely singing out words is music. Which is not to say you have as much credit as the guy writing AND singing.
Good music writters should write music. Good performers should perform.
We should credit and criticize each accordingly.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33014203]Why are they not artists? Because they are not in front of the spotlight? Or because they are not famous?[/QUOTE]
Because they're told what to do.
[editline]29th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=FearsomeMudcrab;33015626]Because the writing and creation of the music is the art, not just playing it for a recording.[/QUOTE]
Creativity and Imagination add to what they're expressing. Without which it's just generic.
As long as they pay for it, yes.
[QUOTE=FearsomeMudcrab;33015626]Because the writing and creation of the music is the art, not just playing it for a recording.[/QUOTE]
So photography is not art because you just take pictures of things you did not create. It's not like when you sing you just talk away, proper singing requires a lot of skill and the result is a piece of art.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33021781]Because they're told what to do.[/QUOTE]
All actors are, is it not art then?
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33022047]
All actors are, is it not art then?[/QUOTE]
They're given a script, they're told how to say things, but they're not GIVEN personality... that's something they themselves have to do.
You are now questioning whether acting is art or not, point of that is?
[editline]29th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33022047]So photography is not art because you just take pictures of things you did not create. It's not like when you sing you just talk away, proper singing requires a lot of skill and the result is a piece of art.
[/QUOTE]
Photography is a tricky subject. Photos tell us about the world rather than the personality of the photographer, however they choose what to capture so it kind of relates.
I think the OP more means musicians who have original songs written for them by others
I think its horrible. I don't think it's horrible that another musician is performing and playing someone else's music, because that's where they add their own spin on it - but I think it's criminal that credit is often not given to the person who may have written a popular band's greatest hits. Often a lot of hit artists these days are performing a song written by somebody who is behind the scenes, standing in the shadows and it's their sentiment that the singer is channelling. That itself isn't bad but the fact that the person who wrote whatever song for whatever popular artist isn't credited more is pretty bad in my opinion.
Fair enough, songwriters not recieving equal credit is an arguement, but lets not forget that the artists are the ones who turn the words into their own.
The only person who I think has recieved a lot of credit for someone's entire career is Bernie Taupin who wrote lyrics for Elton John his entire life.
I wouldn't call them artists as much as I would call them musicians though. I think the artist is the person who pens something original and expresses it through the sphere of their own life and experience instead of someone who uses their skills to make another person's work their own.
In a sense its like an orchestra playing the composers work. You can congratulate both the band and the composer but I would call the composer the artist and the band the medium through which he expresses his art.
No, but they can if they want. And for clarity, here are definitions from Wiki:
A musician is an artist who plays a musical instrument.
An artist is a person engaged in one or more of any of a broad spectrum of activities related to creating art, practicing the arts and/or demonstrating an art.
Wiktionary defines the noun 'artist' (Singular: artist; Plural: artists) as follows:
1. A person who creates art.
2. A person who creates art as an occupation.
3. A person who is skilled at some activity.
[QUOTE=jakeabbott96;32995104]Many musicians in this present day and age publish music that isn't written by them. Though not a very present example, the band "Aerosmith" never used to write their own music, but still published it in their name.[/QUOTE]
It seems you're implying that when the music is published, the band, artist, or musician assumes all credit. But that's not true. When music is published, songwriters and composers get credit.
[QUOTE]My question is, should musicians write their own music?
My answer: Yes. Anyone that claims themselves to be the artist or directs the music should definitely bother to write it out first.[/QUOTE]
Why? If a recording artist (which is technically just a performer) chooses to use a songwriter, and the songwriter is acknowledged, what's the problem? And what the heck is "directs the music"?
[QUOTE=FearsomeMudcrab;32999894]As a musician myself, I've always wrote my own music but I have also recorded and performed covers live. If a musician records and performs a song written by someone else they will get a smaller percentage of royalties, this is more prevalent in the more mainstream music industry. I think for musicians to call themselves artists they need to write their own music, it creates a fine but noticeable line between artists and performers.
I personally see no problem with people recording and performing someone else's song as long as they don't try to pass it off as their own, they are essentially session musicians who then go on to perform a cover which is seen as their song even though it's not. I have more respect for bands/musicians who write their own music because they are expressing themselves instead of expressing how somebody else feels unless they can relate heavily to the message/tone/emotion expressed in a song.
The example OP used is a great example, Aerosmith connect amazingly with their earlier songs, they give life to them and make them their own. Other musicians like the ones in Take That are pretty much just the face of someone else work, Gary Barlow seems to be the only member who is taking his career seriously.
My view on the subject, good topic OP. :)[/QUOTE]
The most correct response I've seen so far.
Wiki is not a valid source in philosophical or critical discussion
[QUOTE=killerteacup;33022422]Wiki is not a valid source in philosophical or critical discussion[/QUOTE]
Dumb. It's only for definitions.
[QUOTE=Pal13;33022446]Dumb. It's only for definitions.[/QUOTE]
The definition of artist isn't something that you can just pull out of a wiki. Especially in the context of this thread, because "a person who creates art" is such an easy way out of defining it.
[QUOTE=killerteacup;33022501]The definition of artist isn't something that you can just pull out of a wiki. Especially in the context of this thread, because "a person who creates art" is such an easy way out of defining it.[/QUOTE]
You're doing it all wrong. The definition of "artist", and what you think an ideal artist is or should be, are separate things.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33022064]They're given a script, they're told how to say things, but they're not GIVEN personality... that's something they themselves have to do.
You are now questioning whether acting is art or not, point of that is?
[/QUOTE]
Acting is art, it's been art since greek times and before. Actually often they are given a personality that they have to act out.
Also musicians aren't given a personality either when they are given lyrics. You can sing the same lyrics either slow and sad or you can rock them. That in itself is expressing you/your stage character.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33022064]
Photography is a tricky subject. Photos tell us about the world rather than the personality of the photographer, however they choose what to capture so it kind of relates.[/QUOTE]
Not all art has to be expression of yourself. Was Mona Lisa artist's expression about himself? Probably not.
I think musicians should create their own music, but I'm not against the creation or arrangement of music for other musicians to perform. Hell, if you are a shitty musician, but have a great mind for composition, and you just want to sell your piece of music to a band, I have nothing against that.
I don't even care if it's shitty music, people will listen to what they like.
[QUOTE=Pal13;33022351]No, but they can if they want. And for clarity, here are definitions from Wiki:
A musician is an artist who plays a musical instrument.
[/QUOTE]
Definitions from wiki aren't viable enough.
Anyone can learn an instrument, it's about being creative that is the matter.
[editline]29th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=killerteacup;33022422]Wiki is not a valid source in philosophical or critical discussion[/QUOTE]
Surprised I didn't see your reply before I posted :/
[editline]29th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Pal13;33022446]Dumb.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, all you brought to the discussion were Wikipedia and Wiktionary definitions.
[editline]29th October 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33022614]
Was Mona Lisa artist's expression about himself? Probably not.[/QUOTE]
I think the Mona Lisa is a great example of expressive art. It's complex because there could be so much to read into what the artist wants to convey.
Artists don't have to express personal thoughts in an obvious way, your example may well be an expression about himself.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33025879]Definitions from wiki aren't viable enough.
Anyone can learn an instrument, it's about being creative that is the matter.
[editline]29th October 2011[/editline]
Yeah, all you brought to the discussion were Wikipedia and Wiktionary definitions.[/quote]
Your reading comprehension is terrible as usual.
[quote]The definition of "artist", and what you think an ideal artist is or should be, are separate things.[/quote]
Also the OP is either a trick question or worded wrong because "musician" does not mean or imply creative artist.
[QUOTE=Pal13;33026158]Your reading comprehension is terrible as usual.
[/QUOTE]
There's no point in insulting just to hide your patheticness.
Try harder man. :smile:
[QUOTE=Pal13;33026221]Try harder man. :smile:[/QUOTE]
Either form an opinion or just leave.
You've pointed out the obvious, "songwriters get credit because it's written on the record" and a few simplistic definitions.
If someone wants to be an artist, they'd have to build their own creativity rather than copy someone else. Artists are always influenced in some ways by a mixture of things, so in essence the credit should go to more people than just the songwriter and performer.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33025879]
I think the Mona Lisa is a great example of expressive art. It's complex because there could be so much to read into what the artist wants to convey.
Artists don't have to express personal thoughts in an obvious way, your example may well be an expression about himself.[/QUOTE]
What is art? Is it something that is made purely for expression or is it something that looks good? Videogame concept art is most definitely art but it has nothing to do with expression of self. And most of the time it follows the art director, so the artist is just putting the vision to life, he isn't thinking his own art.
I don't care if someone made their own lyrics or not, if they sound good, they are art to me. As I said, having lyrics in text in no way defines the style you will sing it in. Various tones in premade lyrics can easily be used to express yourself. It's expression without words.
[QUOTE=AceOfDivine;33026768]if they sound good, they are art to me.[/QUOTE]
Now that's a different world of opinion there.
See, I could simplify all opinion by saying "music is as good as it makes you feel"
In terms of lyrics, I don't even think they're a whole lot important unless that's what the artist wants you to enjoy.
Bob Dylan for example, I listen to what he says rather than how he says it.
If we were to look at instrumental artists like Miles Davis, we could understand where people are coming from.
We can say he's just a trumpeter, because that's all he did for the music itself. But the reason why he gets all the credit, isn't just because his name is bestowed onto the packaging, it's because only he has put together the art. The session musicians in jazz aren't artists unless the creativity is as a band.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33026524]Either form an opinion or just leave.
You've pointed out the obvious, "songwriters get credit because it's written on the record" and a few simplistic definitions.
If someone wants to be an artist, they'd have to build their own creativity rather than copy someone else. Artists are always influenced in some ways by a mixture of things, so in essence the credit should go to more people than just the songwriter and performer.[/QUOTE]
My opinions are clear. Your opinions consist of going off on tangents.
1. I don't think musicians have to write their own music.
2. I don't think recording artists have to write their own music.
3. If recording artists have someone else compose their music or write their lyrics, those parties need to be acknowledged and compensated.
And I regard recording artists who write their own music / lyrics higher.
[QUOTE=Pal13;33026871]And I regard recording artists who write their own music / lyrics higher.[/QUOTE]
Why?
If music is about expression, why should it matter what they have written on paper?
The output is what you are given, technicalities don't need to matter at all.
Songwriting is a skill. Playing an instrument is a skill.
Creating music with these skills is an art.
[QUOTE=AK'z;33026919]Why?
If music is about expression, why should it matter what they have written on paper?
The output is what you are given, technicalities don't need to matter at all.
Songwriting is a skill. Playing an instrument is a skill.
Creating music with these skills is an art.[/QUOTE]
"Write" means "create" in the context of that sentence.
Also songwriting is an art and skill.
of course not
a writer may want to convey a certain piece but doesn't have the musical ability to do so.
Did Beethoven even play his own pieces?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.