The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay (The Inefficacy of the Imagination and Art)

For the past few weeks, I've been reading a book call The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay. The book proposed an interesting question that I haven't been able to stop thinking about.

The book is about two Jewish cousins who make comic books during World War 2. Sammy Clay is Brooklyn born, and Kavalier is an expatriate from Czechoslovakia. Although he was able to escape from Nazi Europe, the rest of his family remains trapped. He and his cousin create a comic book character called The Escapist, a man who can escape from any trap. He fights to free trapped people around the world, and the story is an obvious allegory for the European conflict.

Joe becomes obsessive over his metaphorical fight against the Nazis via art, but he struggles with the fact that no matter how much the "Razis" are beaten up in his comic books, the real conflict remains the same. He gets into fights with all of the Germans he sees because he feels powerless. He chains himself to his drawing desk and becomes obsessive over his work, not allowing any time for pleasure.

Eventually, he gets a bomb threat, and his publishing company wants him to stop metaphorically beating up Nazis. His cynical editor George Deasey tells him this.

"This kind of work is a graveyard for every kind of ambition, Kavalier. Take my word for it. Whatever you hope to accomplish, whether from the art of out of...other considerations, you will fail. I have very little faith in the power of art, but I remember the flavor of that faith, if you will, from when I was I was your age...But this. Powerless. Useless."

This caught my attention. I've heard quite a lot of art as salvation against the world, but I never heard of money as a salvation against art. How does artistic expression become detrimental? Isn't the corporation the evil part? But if you think about it, the concrete corporation can give you more sanity than art.

It's probably a habit of a majority of artists to create an imaginary world in which they are victorious, or important in some way. Visual artists can literally create the image of whatever they please. Other forms of art can warp the world as desired. One of my definitions of art is that art is a metaphor to reality. It is not reality itself. It is a re-imagining of what already exists.

It's nice to live in your imagination. But there's always one trap that all people fall into. Your imagination is not real. Everything you envision in your head does not exist. It is a lie, and you can't live inside of it forever.

There is a need of all people to have some sense of reality, even if they thrive in a metaphysical world. This is because you cannot fully live inside of your imagination. There is always something to pop the bubble, and when it pops, you suddenly realize how bad your reality is. Though you can run away and hide in your bubble again, there will always be forces that remove you from that safe space, because that's what always happens. Though Joe Kavalier could live in his bubble for a while, he couldn't hide when his publisher gave him the ultimatum of ending his fictitious war against the Nazis or losing his job.

To a certain extent, everyone lives in their own version of reality that's adapted to what they want to see and observe. In order to cope with the fact that we are menial beings in the scope of the universe, we feel the need to develop an individual outlook on the world. In order to avoid pain, we create a construct in which we avoid all things we perceive as harmful. When this idea of reality is destroyed, we believe that the world is working against us. This is not the case. Just because things don't go your way doesn't mean the world is to blame. Your mind cannot control the world, but you can control your mind into thinking it can. It won't help you much.

I believe that every kind of emotional breakdown people experience stems from one thing, and one thing only: Reality letting down personal expectations. You can run, but the longer you have expectations, the more you end up frustrated, disappointed, and powerless. 

I wonder though, can a person be an artist if they don't live off of expectations? If Joe didn't feel the need to metaphorically defeat the Nazis, could he make comic books? Most artists come from difficult backgrounds. They use art as a coping mechanism for their powerlessness in the world. Though art does make a good distraction, is art actually an effective coping mechanism, or does it lift you up into a fantasy world, making it a harder fall when you tumble back into existence? Perhaps, but on the hand, it's probably fine in balanced doses. Xanax relieves pain, which is good, but if you use too much you die, which is bad.

Joe Kavalier stopped being obsessive when he got a girlfriend and his life became more hopeful. Though he continued to battle the Nazis, he created other comic book characters that had no relevance to the Nazi conflict. He worked less, and started living a more normal life.

So from all of this, I suppose there are a few things I can conclude. Art is a way of accomplishing your expectations of the world in some concrete form. However, art is not reality. Artistic expression is a coping mechanism for the disappointment that stems from the failure to achieve your expectations, with varying levels of success. If you take art too literally though, and get confused between imagination and reality, you can plunge into insanity.

Perhaps this is why artists are such broken people. And perhaps this is why I've had so much trouble finding the desire to make art, because I don't have problems like I used to. At least not dire ones. At the moment.

The Untethered Soul

First of all, I have to say that never in my life would I ever imagine myself reading any sort of self-help book, especially one dealing with spirituality. All throughout my life I dismissed such work as false, useless junk that is only read by stay-at-home moms in upperclass households trying to find meaning out of their empty lives. I mean, that's what Oprah and Martha Stewart and all those other people do.

Regardless, The Enneagram and other forms of spiritual self-analysis have always been a secret passion of mine. I am susceptible to searching for spiritual connections outside of mainstream religion, probably because I was raised in an atheist household and I always wondered if there was more to life than meets the eye.

God, I can't believe I'm even saying this. I can't believe I read a spiritual self-help book and it actually helped. It is completely outside my character, my lifestyle, and my beliefs to even acknowledge something greater than what I see in front of me. But sometimes, things take a turn for the unexpected, and I'm going to try my best to explain the book and spirituality as I understand it.

Who are you?

One topic the book delved into was this question. Now, there are many ways a person can answer this question, and it is likely all of the questions they will give are wrong. Perhaps a person could say,

Who are you?

I am Ellen Cooper.

But no, I am not Ellen Cooper, at least I am not just Ellen Cooper. The phrase I use to identify myself is nothing but a collection of letters that reads out phonics into a pronounceable word. If my name wasn't Ellen, would I cease to exist?

Who are you?

I am a junior at Herricks High School. I live on Long Island with my family. I performed on the accordion for my school's musical last year. 

No, this isn't who I am either. These are things that have happened in my life, but that doesn't mean that is who I am. Your life is not defined by the events that have happened to you. I did perform in Fiddler on the Roof, but that is not happening to me right now, so is that who I am?

Who are you?

I think, therefore I am.

A lovely quite from Descartes, but wrong again. You are not your thoughts. You simply observe your thoughts.

Who am I?

You are not the objects in your life, or what you observe around you. You are not your thoughts. You are not your emotions. You are the observer who sees these things.

What does this mean? It means that everything you define yourself by is arbitrary. You are not a person. You are an essence who is aware of the things around them. It's a strange concept. Let me try to explain this further.

You're at a party, and someone tells you, "You're ugly." You think, "I'm angry because this person just insulted me." But that is not true. You feel angry. This feeling is not a part of you, it is simply observed by you. A feeling is nothing more than a sensation that enters your body. This sensation can leave, if you identify its cause, justify it, and then release it from you.

First, you realize, "I feel angry." Why do you feel angry? "Because I've been insulted." Why does this insult affect you? "Because I feel somewhat self-conscious about my appearance." Why? "Because I feel like I'm unattractive." Why? "Because Larry made fun of my nose in the 7th grade and I still feel self-conscious about it."

This is letting yourself be defined by events. Perhaps Larry did make fun of your nose, but that was years ago. Why should you still care? It makes no logical sense for you to care. What if you just decided you didn't care? What if you said, "I like my nose because it's mine and because it's human."

Now, let's rewind. If you are ok with your nose, you don't feel unattractive. If you don't feel unattractive, you feel attractive. If you feel attractive, then what does one person calling you ugly matter? There are 6 billion people on this planet. If one of them has a problem with you, it shouldn't matter, logically. 

In fact, perhaps this person only called you ugly because they feel ugly. If that's the case, you shouldn't be angry. You should feel bad for them for having to put someone else down, and hope that one day they will decide to live a happier life.

And now that you have gone through this process, you can let it go. It happened, and it is gone. It doesn't matter.

The voice inside your head

You're trying to sleep, but you're having one of those nights where your mind can't stop thinking. You're thoughts go like this.

"Did I pass my chemistry test? I hope I passed my chemistry test? I studied so much. If I do badly my parents will be so upset with me. It will drop my grade. Oh I'm so worried?"

Let's think about this logically. There is nothing you can do to change your chemistry grade. Once the test is taken, it is taken. Your score will be returned to you and that is that. Your thoughts don't change the outcome. They are a useless waste of time that bother you and hinder you.

Let's explore this further. You're going on a walk, and in order to entertain yourself you narrate your life around you.

"What a pretty house. I love the pink and purple color. Oh, look at that dog! It looks just like my dog Rufus. That flower is delightful. I think it's a daisy."

Why do you narrate yourself? You can see the house, the flowers, and the dog. Is there a need for you to point these things out? Your mind automatically analyzes so many objects around you. If you stopped wasting time trying to pick out items from your vision, you will observe so much more of the outside world.

Doesn't this voice get annoying after a while? Imagine if the voice in your head was a real person, with all of its doubt, panic, and incessant talking. You would HATE that person! So why do you put up with it? What if you were to just stop? What if you just let the voice go?

Letting Go

Your life becomes exponentially more simple if you just let things go. People keep the burdens of their past events, failures, and future worries on their back. They hold onto these things because they feel as if they must have something concrete to define themselves by. Everyone holds these burdens. They hide them and pretend they don't exist, and instead of dealing with their problems, they simply find more ways to cover them up.

Think about it like a thorn. The pains we carry are like thorns in our body. There are two options. You can cover up the thorn and find ways to deal with it, without removing it. This appeals to most people, because removing the thorn of psychological pain is a difficult and painful process. But it's not productive on the long run. If you really want to free yourself of the burdon, you must remove the thorn, and let it go.

The world forgives you

If there is really a god out there, observing us from the heavens, do you think that he will hold your petty flaws against you? Of course not! A person who observes sees that the world is beautiful, with all of its flaws. An observer doesn't care what is happening so long as something is happening. Everything is incredible to them, and nothing can ruin that.

So whatever you have done, you are forgiven. And whatever you may do, you are also forgiven. You will always be forgiven, because in the scope of the whole world, what you do doesn't matter all that much.

Being an observer

People always complain about how much they hate their lives, and how much they hate the world. This is simply because the world does not fit the expectations that they generate for themselves in their head. The world does not work in a way that is predictable to them, and because of that, they fear the world, and they hide themselves from reality.

If you have no expectations, you cannot be disappointed. You will see that everything around you is incredible. The miraculous system that holds everything together is complex and beautiful. Everyday is a miracle. Every day you're alive and living is a miracle. We can die at any moment. What a great way to appreciate life around us to realize that it can always be taken away.

How this relates to every religion ever

You may think after reading this that what I say reminds you of a certain religion. Freeing yourself of desire is quite Buddhist. Forgiving yourself for inevitable sin is a very Christian concept. But if you look closely, you will see that despite all of the conflicts that take place between religions, they are all essentially they same thing. The thing that religion connects you to is difficult to put into words. That's why there are so many interpretations with their own nuances and technicalities. There is an energy that connects everything, and we feel it if we choose to remove ourselves from our complex human intricacies.

That is the best way I can describe my thoughts at the moment. I hope that was somewhat coherent. I did base much of what I wrote from the book.

Workshop: Songwriting with Brian

Brian began the work by introducing himself and what he does. What fascinated me was the way he talked about his passion for teaching. Basically, he said that as we grow older, we acquire knowledge, and it is our responsibility to pass on that knowledge and pass on that legacy. He talked about one of his most precious teachers, an 80 year old man who came out of retirement because he was so passionate about his job. Brian met with this teacher for half an hour every week. I don't know why, but this captivated me. I once believed being a teacher is what someone did when they gave up on their chance on a personal career, but what I see now is that being a teacher is creating a legacy for yourself, making you live on beyond yourself. It's admirable. It's beautiful.

Perhaps I should talk more about the songwriting, considering how that's what the workshop was really about. Brian outlined the music business. This is the breakdown of a record, from what I can remember, and what I can piece together with my late night mental mush.

49% for the songwriter/songwriters
26% for the record company
20% for the music distributor (the store)
4% for you
(give or take a few percentage points)

Now, let's consider you're given a contract for $1,000,000. First of all, a contract is a loan, not a gift. You have to pay it back. This is how the contract is divided.

$700,000 for recording an album/studio time
$300,000 for the manager

As you can see, you're only getting $700,000 to make the record, but you STILL have to pay back all $1,000,000. And you don't make a single cent off your CD until you do that.

So factor 4% of album profit into paying back $1,000,000 in debt. It's fucking ridiculous. I wanted to ask how illegal downloads factor into the situation, but I didn't quite get the chance. On the other hand, most of this stuff doesn't matter, because a lot of people produce out of their basements and promote themselves.

We heard some of Brian's songs as well. He's currently in the process of creating a musical about vampires and Mexicans in motor bikes. I think most of us were relieved by how our own personal songs were not the feature of the workshop. I know for me, I wrote mine 2 days before.

But of course we did end up presenting our songs, and I went first because I like taking initiative. Brian didn't say much in particular about my song, but he recommended to all of us that we try to write a song daily. He showed us some of the songs he wrote on his computer, and he had a total of around 80.

During the workshop, I started having this strange feeling where everything started fixing into place. Suddenly, it all made sense, it didn't seem so scary and complicated. When Brian played his songs I knew his process. When Brian talked about daily practice, I understood that the reason people don't do things is not because of a lack of time, but instead, a lack of making time and having discipline.

I wouldn't say I felt strongly motivated to write more music, but I did think it was a worthwhile workshop and I thought Brian was a great guy.

On the other hand, I am almost done with my notebook, which is quite a milestone. I've been using the same notebook since I first began writing songs back in 9th grade, and now I only have one page left. I may just tear it out so I don't have to feel the pressure of making a worthwhile song to complete my set. In fact, I'm going to do that right now.

*throws away paper*

I can now say that I have finished my first notebook. Wow! This is such a milestone!

Inner Voices: Log

I will admit, John and I had the goal in mind today that we would complete the music for the opera/R&B musical delight. I will admit, we did not accomplish anything.

I want to take a moment and analyze the artistic process that I have used thus far in the project to see where and what I should be doing next.

When Luke gave me the script for the opera, I took it with bold optimism. Without any kind of preconceptions, I wrote the music. Having Anika and Danny with me was a huge help. What happened was that I would play a few chords, Anika and Danny would improvise a vocal line, and then I would record the line. I have a collection of recordings on my phone for each musical line. After about a period of work, we all needed to take a break, but we accomplished quite a lot. Almost half the script was composed.

Then Luke asked me if I could finish the opera at home. I attempted this, but I could not complete the opera. I got stuck, unable to think of vocal lines and chord progressions. I could write a few pieces, but I couldn't assemble something particularly coherent. My hope was that I would be able to bring the piece to school and attempt the same process as before.

After the whole STAC Live mess, the opera was temporarily forgotten, until today when John and I revisited the piece. I showed him the recordings on my phone, but they were of such mediocre quality as to be almost inaudible. I attempted to play the opera on the piano, but without practice I stumbled on notes and chords, so that didn't work out well either. The opera wasn't completely coherent when I tried to play it as a whole. John pointed this out to me, and I agreed but I felt as if the beginning of the opera should have sporadic voices because it plays upon the value of surprise.

Another thing John and I discussed was the direction of the scene. It seemed like it was just a date with some singing (but we can't say just!). It seemed as if the opera was a joke that could not be prolonged because it wasn't going towards any particular direction. That probably means we should make it short and sweet, because it is definitely a funny shtick.

There wasn't much else to say after that. I didn't really know how to move the session towards writing more music. It didn't come to me as easily as it did when I had Anika and Danny assisting me. I was so uncertain, I ended up in a trap where I didn't much know why I was even doing anything at all. John asked me, "Do you want to keep the music you wrote? Do you want to rewrite this? Do you want to keep working on this?" I didn't have much of an answer to offer. It's probably my fault that we ended up being unproductive today because I couldn't make any definitive decisions. I had this hope that everything would be figured out tomorrow, and I spent the rest of the period dozing off.

Hopefully tomorrow we will be able to write music more effectively. I suggested to John that we have the singers assist in the composition process, but he's not sure if it's a good idea to get more people involved. We'll figure it out. Maybe.

Music as Languages (And Other Cultural Debates)

As some of you may know, I've been taking Human Geography in school, and it's changed my outlook on everything. Geography has to do with everything. It explains history, it explains politics, it explains culture. Whether it's the lack of cultural diffusion due to large mountains, or the border disputes in Africa, or the psychological effects of the sizes of countries on a map, if the reason for an event taking place is unclear, it is often either geographically or culturally related. That being said, I'm going to talk about languages and it's not going to involve much geography.

The other night, I was reflecting on the experience that I had writing a song for Brian's workshop. Even though the workshop never took place (perhaps we will experience it later), I viewed my project as a learning experience, as I view virtually all events in my life. One thing I noticed when I was writing is that I felt like my music had no basis. As in, I was working from scratch. I had no intentional musical style, no framework, and no purpose. It wasn't very good in my opinion, and that's probably why.

I pondered this for a while. For centuries, musicians have been working off the music of their ancestors, developing techniques and traditions that created a more complex system over time. All of these music genres have a framework. This may be a somewhat prejudice statement, but I feel as if much of pop music has no structure. Either that, or it's structure is very simple, based only on chord progressions and theoretical musical ideas.

Then I realized, perhaps music is similar to language, which I've been learning a lot about in Human Geography. There are two types of languages. Natural Language is defined as a language that has emerged and evolved within living or historic human communities. A language is a complex system that develops overtime, based on the needs of a group of people. Words in some languages do not exist in others, like Farpotchket, the Yiddish word that means "to make something worse when you were trying to fix it." Languages can also be diffused, so some languages contain similar words to others.

There are also Artificial Languages, although they are not very common. An artificial language is one that is invented by humans and did not arise organically. For example, J. R. R. Tolken invented Elvish for his Lord of the Rings trilogy. Also, there was once an attempt to create an international language, with simplified grammar and common vocabulary from many languages. This is known as Esperanto.

Another thing to note about culture is the difference between Folk Culture and Popular Culture. Folk culture can be summarized as the local culture of a small area, based in traditions that have logical justification but no identifiable origin. Popular culture is widespread, mainstream culture, where phenomenas are spread without much purpose other than widespread appeal.

I feel as if you could categorize music as a language under these terms, folk music could be considered natural while pop music is artificial. In fact, perhaps much of modern art, rebooted in 1913, could be considered artificial. At that point, art stopped following traditions and began inventing a new set of rules and expectations which are constantly being expanded upon.

Now this may not be the case. That would assume that modern art and pop music are complete reinventions of what came before. And as we know, art is evolutionary, not revolutionary.

Another hypothesis I considered in the development of the language metaphor is perhaps pop music is a Pidgin Language. A pidgin language is one that "combines the vocabulary and/or grammatical practices from two or more languages that have come in contact." That would imply that pop music is a simplified mix of everything. A great example of a pidgin language is our own language, English. It incorporates aspects of French and Germanic language, simplified of their complex grammatical structures.

I don't know much about the history of modern pop music, but one would believe that it emerged from a few genres, such as blues, jazz, and before that, other things. Now, it has become it's own genre. This could be considered a Creole Language, "a language that develops from a pidgin language and is taught as a first language."

Of course I'm using pop in a very broad sense. There are many subgenres, but in a way, they all have great similarities. Perhaps we could consider rock, metal, generic pop, and alternative different kinds of Dialects, or "A variety of a language characterized by distinctive vocabulary, grammar, and/or pronunciation."

I believe if we can't see our art in the larger system, it will be empty and devoid of meaning. In the scope of the world, one person is not important. Great cultures are not invented by one person. That is, unless you're Tolken or J.K. Rowling. Even so, isn't it scary to think that only one person can invent a universe used by many? What I mean to say is, we should study the past and reuse what has been used for generations, joining in the cycle of life and the universe instead of working from ourselves as our only source.

My favorite pop music is often rooted in folk culture, whether it's the Beatles or crossover Balkan. To me, a lot of pop music is dull and insipid, and I feel like what I've explained above is one of the main reasons why.

On that note, I think it's time for me to return to one of the books I happen to be reading at the moment, "Music in Ireland."

The perks of having a musicologist mom, this stuff is great!

STAC Wall Faces

When brainstorming ideas for the wall faces, I imagined having a bunch of self-portraits where I cover my face with things like toilet paper, saran wrap, and paper bags. Then I asked myself, "If I put a plastic bag over my face, how will I breathe?" In response, I decided to take pictures with my mouth showing, thinking that it would look utterly gruesome and cool at the same time, and prevent me from dying. To make the mouth look more prominent, I colored the lips and tongue while keeping the rest of the image black and white. 

The biggest problem I had while taking the pictures was making sure that my head was centered in the right spot. I put the camera on a tripod and pointed it at the wall, but I couldn't figure out where to stand in order to be center shot. Obviously I couldn't look through the lens. In the end, I just decided to mark the center with a pencil. Hopefully it will erase. Right?

I also had a bit of a problem navigating the scene with my eyes covered. The walk between the spot where I covered my face to where I needed to take a picture was quite the adventure. I stuck my arms out and stepped around very slowly, hoping I wouldn't trip over my dad's boardgames or knock anything over. Perhaps there is a better way I could've approached this. Maybe I should've tried getting help, but it is what it is.

Aluminum foil. This one's my favorite!

Toilet paper

Saran wrap. I'm not sure if my mouth looks too fake on this. Also, I'm not sure if it fits the theme because you can see my face. I must decide what to do with this.

Plastic bag

Gift wrap. My mom helped me on this one.

I want to do 8 images on this. So far, I have 5. I need to figure out what else I can use to cover my face.

A Question to Danny About Color Theory

Here's one thing I never quite understood about RGB values on the computer. How come some colors are easier to find than others in a color field?

For example. if you want to choose purple, you have a pretty good selection of purples, all of which genuinely look purple.

Same for green.

For some reason though, it's really hard to find a decent orange.

Maybe I'm just being picky here, but to me the colors look darker and browner than orange. Even on the color slider on the side, the region for orange is considerably smaller than that for the other colors. Even yellow is more prominent, although it's pretty difficult to choose a decent yellow as well.

Now, it's very possible that I'm overanalyzing some colors over others. Perhaps it's difficult to find what could be considered a "true color" on any color field. If so, why is it so difficult? How come there are so many variations of a color that don't even resemble the color all that much?

Perhaps our minds are more adapted to the different kinds of greens as opposed to the different kinds of oranges. A color like green is very widespread. We see many variations of green in all sorts of plant life. We can look at a color that isn't even close to "true green" and think it's green. If we try the same thing with orange though, we may find it deviates more from our imagined "true orange." 

Today in class you were telling me about how we generally accept the color cyan as blue, even though it is not. Cyan, magenta, and yellow are part of a different set of primary colors. Yet, we assume cyan is blue and magenta is purple. At the same time, yellow is still considered yellow in all contexts.

Is this a misconception that stems from the way our brains compute the light absorbed through out eyes, or is it something psychological?

I don't know if these are questions you've already answered, but that's what I'm curious about.

Here is Danny's Response

The Women's Myth

I'm going to try my best to keep this post as little guerrilla feminist as possible. I promise!

Luke's discussion in school today brought forth a topic that I myself have pondered for years. He talked about the hero's myth, specifically the male myth. I wonder, why are almost all adventure based myths centered around males? Bulcsu in Kontroll, Luke Skywalker in Starwars, Alexandre Beck in Tell No One, Odysseus in the Odyssey, these are all male heroes. Even in Cloud Atlas, only two females were featured, and in their stories they had roles where they were largely assisted by men. That's not saying all hero myths are male, it's just that most of them are.

Now, why would I bother talking about something so obvious? Our society is patriarchal  there is always a tendency to prefer men in these kinds of things.

When I watched Cloud Atlas, I noticed something strange. My favorite plot line was the one in Neo Seoul. To sum it up quickly, the futuristic Korean society has created a set of drone-like clones who's only purpose is to serve food to customers at a New Seoul restaurant. These women are not allowed to be shown anything of the outside world, and they can be killed upon command if they disobey their masters. One of these clones, Somni-451, accidentally leaves her sleeping box, which puts her in grave danger. A man by the name of Hae-Joo Chang comes and rescues her. They fall in love, but it is brief, and she also leads a revolution for a while.

I feel like in all story-based art, we have a tendency to sympathize with the character that relates the most to us, and to put ourselves in their spot, as if we were the character. While watching this part of the movie, I found that I was not putting myself into the shoes of Hae-Joo Chang, the savior. I felt as if I was Somni-451, being rescued from a terrible life in order to lead a revolution.

It makes sense. We always relate more to people who are similar to us, and often, people of our gender seem pretty similar to us.

This brings me to my main point. If all action films are patriarchal, what can girls relate to? When you watch an adventure movie, you're supposed to relate to the hero, regardless of gender. To a certain extent I do. But when I see the male hero's point of view on women, I see women as beautiful, precious objects that are admired for their charm and beauty. Thus, I deduce that a woman is a beautiful, precious object that's admired for its charm and beauty. Thus, I believe that I should be a beautiful, precious object that's admired for its charm and beauty, and that will bring me happiness in life.

All women's myths teach girls that exact moral. Sleeping Beauty waited for her prince to wake her up. So did Snow White. Cinderella was saved by her prince taking enough interest to search for her with his only relic, her shoe. Jasmine road on some carpets with Aladdin and that's all she had to do.

When watching Cloud Atlas, I thought not about all the revolutionary things Somni-451 was doing, but how awesome it would be to have a man just come and rescue me. I mean wouldn't that be great?

But there's one major flaw with the Female myth.

IT SUCKS

Sure, it's nice to ponder being rescued for mundanity, but in real life that doesn't give you much excitement. How much of Snow White's life did you hear about before she fell unconscious? Do you really want to hear Penelope talk about the agonizing 20 years she spent waiting for Odysseus? Which story is more interesting to read, "The Girl Who Fell in Love" or "The Girl Who's Waiting Really Patiently"? Actually, let me revise that. Would you rather hear about "The Girl Who Fell in Love" or "The Girl Who Went on a Quest and Fell in Love Along the Way"?

It's more interesting to be involved in the adventure. Does adventure need to be a male-centric thing?

If girls can only see an active life from the male point of view, they how are they supposed to apply the morals to their own lives without seeming like a man? People say a girl can do anything a man can do, but when girls do things like carrying heavy objects, working ambitiously to get ahead in a job, or proposing marriage, people thing it's weird. They don't believe it wrong, they just view it as unusual.

My question is simple. Is the Female Myth a dimwitted version of the general adventure myth?

Perhaps the Man's Myth actually the Human's Myth, something that is meant to be applicable to all people regardless of gender.

If that's the case then we should have more girls starring in mythic stories. We need better role models.

Making Mistakes

You stand at a crossroads. There are two paths. One will take you to what you believe to be your destination, the other one will lead to a dead end. You cannot tell which one is which. Confused, you think of a way in which you can find out where the paths lead without taking a single step. Quickly, you realize this is not possible. So what do you do?

Well I don't know your life, but I can tell you from my experience I would likely stand there, indecisive. Perhaps I would turn around and not even bother.

Why do I, like so many people, fear making mistakes?

From what I've observed in life, a person isn't afraid of making mistakes per say. After all, a mistake just means something went wrong. Once you figure out what happened, you can make sure it doesn't go wrong again. You may be disappointed by your imperfection, but it's not a big deal.

Fear lies in the consequences of making a mistake.

If you choose the path which ends up being a dead end, you may end up stuck. You know you had the opportunity to take the right path, but you didn't. To no fault of your own, you trap yourself. However, because the situation seemed remotely within your control, you blame yourself.

Mistakes are a healthy part of life. A person has to make mistakes in order to learn how to live. How many times has someone warned you not to do something, but you didn't listen and you end up wishing you did? Words don't penetrate the mind like action does. Read about a slaughterhouse and you don't care. See a slaughterhouse and suddenly you're inspired to make revolutions. Does a person support cancer because they feel extra nice? No, they do it because their cousin died of cancer. We can't conceive how the world works without experiencing it, and we can't experience new things without making mistakes. New experiences mean you lack experience, and it is almost certain you will handle a new situation incorrectly unless you luck out, which isn't going to happen 100% of the time.

If new experiences are awesome and mistakes aren't a big deal, then why is there so much fear?

It can easily be summed up in one word. Regret.

A side effect of failure, regret is a feeling you acquire when you've made a mistake that cannot be undone. Many mistakes cannot be undone. You can't unkill someone. You can't unspoil someone's innocence. The past cannot be undone.

Those who are hopeful have the view that we should ignore the past and move on with our lives. I think you would all agree that's easier said than done. Besides the fact that you have trouble letting a mistake go because you feel as if you chose for things to go wrong, other people often do not let go of the mistakes of others. You can drive safely 99% percent of the time, but the one time you end up in a accident is what matters. If a mother crying because her son got killed by a car, saying "I usually drive pretty well" isn't going to make her feel better. Her son is dead. To quote the movie Juno, "That is one etch-a-sketch that cannot be undid, homeskillet." In the film they were talking about a pregnancy test, but you catch my drift.

I can say I don't have many major regrets in my life. However, many nights when I'm sitting in bed unable to sleep, I review my actions and I think, "Damn that was really stupid." Then I get mad at myself, even though there is nothing I can do to change the situation and my frustration is ultimately futile. I can think about things I did in elementary school that still make me feel like a fool. I'm sure you guys can as well.

With the internet, a whole new layer of complexity has been added to the process of mistake making. In the old days, if you made a mistake, you could pretend it never happened. Now, if you make a stupid post on facebook, or add an embarrassing picture of yourself, or send a message to someone that you probably shouldn't, it is there forever. Sure, you can delete it. But what difference does it make when your shameful moment has already been seen by so many people? Once information has entered the head of another person, it is no longer within your control. They can think about it as much as they want. They can do with it as they like. They can shame you as much as they want. And you can't do anything about it. The film Inception told us, "There's nothing more powerful than an idea." Once Mal had the idea that the world she lived in was not reality, she couldn't let it go. The thought could not be unthought.

There are some people out there who just don't learn from their mistakes. A serial killer won't stop killing people just because someone told him it's not the right thing to do. These people are psychopaths who disregard social norms and live life in a delusion. Others acknowledge their mistakes, but are simply too lazy to fix them. I'm sure my mother is fully aware that she has a hoarding problem, but she chooses not to do anything about. "It's too hard," she tells me. "I've always lived this way." That's giving up.

You shouldn't give up.

Even though our mistakes weigh us down, we must understand that they are simply a part of life. Any effort to avoid mistakes stops you from moving forward. And if you feel really badly about something you have done, try distracting yourself. I read like a monster. The information I learn always gives me plenty to think about, shoving those unwanted regretful thoughts out of my mind. In addition, you may not be able to undo the past, but you can tie up loose ends. Making an effort to fix your mistakes is better than just running away. A scar won't heal, but it sure looks better when you give it stitches.

Artist Habits and Themes

So about thirty seconds ago, I was reading Art and Fear when I came upon the section about habit for an artists. And after I finished reading it, I felt as if this was something that I wanted to speak about immediately.

In the field of art, many things are insecure. You never know when ideas will come, you never know exactly what you're working towards, until these things happen. There are two things you can rely upon. One is mastery of technical skill. This helps you create art that is pleasing to others, and encourages you to work harder when all motivation is gone except for that of "I want to have the ability to do this task."

But there is another kind of safety that art gives you. This is the safety of style.

Often, I hear about "realizing yourself as an artist" and I thought, what does this mean? Isn't the idea of art that it is ever changing, and you should never fall into habit?

Now, getting into a habit of habit is not healthy for an artist. If you do the same thing over and over again because you know you're good at it, then you're not accomplishing much on the long run. Think about bands who release their sophomore album, proving inferior to the first. Technically, the music is better written, but it doesn't have the freshness and sincerity of their premiere album. Simply put: something is missing.

But all artists have an underlying theme within their work. When you hear the first few notes of a Beatles song, you know it's a Beatles song. It's easy to point out a Klimt once you've seen past works. Heck, I found one while dashing through halls in the Met to reach the Musical Instruments exhibit. It caught my eye immediately.

We are all unique individuals. As unique individuals, we complete tasks differently, even if they are assigned the same way. If you ask a class to draw a picture of a person, let's say, Abraham Lincoln, each drawing will look slightly different. In fact, not only will each drawing not look entirely like Abraham Lincoln, but each will look a lot like the artist who drew it.

Every artist has a niche; a theme/tendency that they put into their art that makes it different from other art.

This niche is not easy to find. First, an artist begins by replicating the work of others that they admire. Within their inspired works, you can see glimpses of the individual. As they develop more experience overtime, their style becomes prominent, identifiable, and maybe even relatable and admirable.

NYC Project Plans

Basically what Lisa said, the two of us are planning on trying to get some conversations with strangers. I always feel like some of the most magical moments in life happen with those people you speak to briefly who tell you their life stories. Although it's unlikely that we will be able to audio record things, we'll probably try to note down the interesting things around us. Along with that we'll have some general recordings of sounds that we can hopefully make into a song.

Also, for myself, I want to take some quick pictures of posters. Nothing like a big photography project. I just got inspired from the booklet with the Cold War Kid's album "Robbers and Cowards." Each song has corresponding pictures of shredded posters, some of which inspired the songs they are depicted next to.

With the elections in swing and my new interest in art as political activism, it would be to my detriment to ignore the opportunity of capturing the presidential campaign imagewise. Next month, everything will be back to normal again.

Dancing Dreams

I was pretty confused at first while watching this film. The film didn't give any context, so to me, I just saw a bunch of German kids who said they didn't know how to dance learning some modern dance and touching each other. I was kind of put off by the lack of explanation and the fact that I was trying to figure out what was happening the whole time, but I tried to keep an open mind just the same.

The dance piece the teenagers were performing was "Kontakthof", written by Pina Bausch. She actually directed many of the rehearsals. Because this piece deals so much with intimacy, they thought it would be interesting to have it re-enacted by 14-18 year old teens, who often at times are uncomfortable and unused to intimate contact.

It was quite amusing seeing how in the beginning, the kids were so obviously not ok with what they had to do. One kid was supposed to strip down on stage, and when he was told that he looked so uncomfortable. I laughed, probably because I was uncomfortable with the idea. For me personally, I won't even kiss an adult on the cheek because it makes me very uncomfortable. It may seem surprising, but I'm really not a huge fan of physical contact. When I saw how close those kids had to dance together, I got nervous.

After a while though, I realized the reason I felt nervous was because they felt nervous. As the film moved on and the kids became more confident, watching them was more pleasant. Over time, they didn't just become more confident with each other, they became more confident as people.

In terms of the actual theatrics, there were a bunch of things I liked. When the pink dresses girl walked to and fro in a line as the boy tried to hop his chair around and talk to her, I thought it was simple but effective in communicating a lack of communication. In general, a lot of the scenarios were basic concepts, greatly exaggerated.

I also liked the scene where the girl was being comforted/attacked by all the boys. It started with a few helpful hands, and degenerated into almost full on harassment. Not only was it a spectacle to watch, but it was also meaningful. In addition, I happen to like stuff about hands. Don't know why.

What I appreciated the most about the piece was how it was about intimacy and freedom, but it wasn't particularly sexual. Even in the scene were a girl and guy were sitting across from each other and undressing themselves, it didn't seem like 60s rock hippies sex freedom. It was beautiful, because it seemed fresh, like they were unexperienced and they were learning the wonders of contact. This is probably because they were unexperienced, learning the wonders of contact.

In terms of stealing, I really enjoyed the big visual spectacles, like the girl being covered with hands, and the part where the men were hopping in their chairs towards the girls frilling their dresses. It's hard for me to think of what to steal, because I'm not exactly sure what I'm stealing for, and I didn't feel too strongly about any part except for the two I talked about above.

The Fall

Although I don't think The Fall was executed perfectly, I really liked the concept of having a magnificent adventure story paralleled to the not so grandiose emotional breakdown of the man who shared the story.

When Roy killed off every character in the end, it was a metaphorical representation of his utter emotional collapse. I feel like in our lives we make our emotions feel much grander than they actually are. For those recovering from depression, they always make it sound like they escaped a war. They talk about how they were "saved", how they're "a survivor", and they're "ok now." I'm not trying to insult those with serious depression in anyway. What I am saying is that we, as human being, always exaggerate what we feel. Why? Because we don't know of any other feelings but our own emotions. Everyone has an emotional scale, and when something painful reaches above the scale, we shatter. If we build ourselves back up, the scale extends. If not, we get stuck.

Also, when all the main characters were unfairly annihilated, to me it represented how you don't always win. In real life, the bad guys often get what they want, and efforts to be good and wholesome are ignored and unappreciated. In real life, you lose a lot more than you win, and you don't get something even if you deserve it. Even though the story ended with the mask man still alive and Odious finally dead, he never got the satisfaction of killing the enemy and he never got the girl, just like his real life. The world's never going to do your justice. You just have to accept your fate.

If I were to take these things into account on an artistic scale, the movie sends me one clear message. Art is the grandiose demonstration of ordinary life. In art we explore a world of fantasy that's so much more appealing than the world we currently live in, but everything in this fantasy world is based off of real life. Even though we can't take big adventures to kill our arch nemeses in real life, we can always imagine doing so through art. For the most part, we can't murder people, or run away from home, or force people to fall in love with us, or bring people back from the dead, but in art we sure can.

That is to a certain extent. Even in Roy's story, he didn't get everything he wanted. When we make art, we can only perceive a world based on our world of emotions. The action of creating art is honest. You can't lie about being happy when you're not. You can't pretend to be sad when you've never experienced sadness. If you're not being real with yourself making art, then you're not being yourself. Sure, you can make complex songs, pretty pictures, and visually stunning films. But it won't be long before you drive yourself crazy from all the lies you tell yourself. That is, unless you're not emotionally invested in your life. If that's the case, you probably wouldn't be much interested making art in the first place.

In a lot of ways, real life is boring, filled with a few good moments and a lot of garbage in between them. As an artist, you control your perception of the world, altering it into what ideal you want it to be. If you want to kill yourself, that's the world you make. That's what Roy chose, until Alexandria changed his mind.

Dance Mix ABC: Big Week Questions 1 and 2

Questions 1

1) You've worked on a group film and on your own. In which situation are you most comfortable - group or solo? Which do you work best in?

Although I work generally well in both group and solo environments, I think I that work better in solo environments. Without a group around me, I don't feel pressured to appeal to everyone's needs and I don't feel dragged down. My Be Kind Rewind group worked well, and we were generally on the same page. However a lot of times groups seem like a burden to me, and when I work independently I can invest more into my work because I don't have to drag other people along.

 2) What did you learn that you expected to learn?

I learned that creating multi-layered music is a complex process, and you must be conscious of every piece of your work in order to make sure it stays interesting and sounds appealing.

3) What did you learn that you didn't expect to learn?  

I learned that there's a lot to admire about digital musicians (is that a good way to describe them?). They essentially create a symphony of sounds, and although their compositions aren't John Williams material, they can be quite great. Although using Garageband loops to make a song wasn't difficult, it opened me up to a world that I didn't much acknowledge, nor respect. I still wouldn't ditch all my exotic instruments for synthesizers, but the simplicity of creating such a prodigious piece of music is a concept that appeals to me, considering that I prefer doing most of my work alone.

Also, it opened me up to the world of audio engineering, since I had to mix the song by myself. I wasn't expecting to look into that at first, but now I'm starting to become fascinated with it.

4) What didn't you learn that you expected to learn?

New techniques. A lot of what I did felt like stuff I did before, to be totally honest.

5) Praise your amazing achievement and explain your brilliant plan for pulling it off.

My brilliant plan for pulling this off consisted first with experimentation, in order to learn the tools. I observed what I had to work with. After pulling together some random loops, I listened to some music for inspiration. I created the whole song, but because I viewed the music alone as a little dull, I decided to add a vocal part on top.

I found a ghost story, and I revised the words in order to make them more lyrical. This is what I like to call artistic recycling. I compiled all the parts together, and then I mixed the parts, working with panning and trying to adjust the sounds; specifically trying to dim down the vocal part.

All of these components came together, and honestly, I think it sounded great. The piano riff in the beginning flowed into the beat beautifully. My voice sounded really cool, and the way I worded the phrases fit the rhythm just how I wanted to. It sounded a lot like LCD Soundsystem, which I'm totally proud of. The break into the chorus was an explosion, and the chorus itself was catchy. In the second verse when the woman was screaming and the crazy synth part came in, the whole thing got lifted to a whole new level. And in the end where the voice described his death to the tune of the lone piano, I almost cried when I hear it. In fact I almost cry every time I listen to it.

On Shiana's blog, she said it sounded professional. Thanks Shiana. That means a lot. 

Questions 2

1) How much time did you spend working?

On the first day I worked for 2 and a half hours in STAC making the basic mix and probably about 3-4 hours at home adding the vocal line and tweaking. The next day I worked for another 2 and a half hours in STAC mixing the song. On the last day I spent 2 hours doing final mixing and trying to adjust the sound levels for the voice. 

2) How much time did you spend thinking about the work - sort of sitting there and staring at it, or listening to it over and over again, etc.?

On the first day a lot of what I did was pounding stuff out without much thought. The next day, I worked straight through mixing, although a majority of that process included listening, interpreting what was needed, and adding it. On the last day, I listening to the song at least 8 times over trying to work out small kinks. Then I listened to it a few more times cause I liked it.

3) How much time did you spend doing other stuff that seems like work to that make you think you're working but you're not?

Personally I'm not the kind of person that pretends to be doing work to feel like I'm working, because when I sense I'm not getting anything done, I usually just stop. But I do admit, a lot of my "constructive listening" was just me mindlessly listening to LCD Soundsystem while I dozed off into la la land. Hey, we all need a break, and at least I was semi-productive.

4) How much time did you spend socializing?

The first day, not a bit. The second day, a little more. The third day, not so much. The fourth day, a lot more.

5) How did you use your community?

I didn't want to include my community so much because I wanted to keep things a surprise. But I did spend most days sitting with Jessica and Anika, and having them as moral support made me happy.

 6) Rip apart your awful project and how did such a disaster happen?

Well, this project is a standard for how my standards have declined. Using musical loops to make a song? That's so easy. That takes no effort. That doesn't take more brainpower than clicking some buttons. The voice was too soft. And my voice doesn't sound good, even in speaking form. The recording lacked 3 dimensionality, and it sounded so flat. It was only in 1 key.

Techno music sucks. It all sounds the same, and it lacks both the complexity and the maturity of music in almost any other genre. It's so easy anyone can do it, so my project really isn't that special, nor is it any sort of accomplishment. The lyrics were weird, and probably unnecessary. All in all, it was a waste of 4 days, because I haven't really learned anything. Essentially, I was using all of the skills that I already knew, and the only reason I felt like I was trying something new was because it wasn't a project I specifically attempted to accomplish before.

7) You've completed a step on your path. What is your next step?

My next project is to work on the music a video game level designed by my brother. In addition, I've found a whole collection of books on world music from all different areas of the world in my basement. I've already read through Carnival Music in Trinidad, and next I'm probably going to read Music in East Africa. Soon, I will know about all music ever. Sort of not really.

I haven't really thought ahead on the rest yet. Maybe I'll try to complete another album this year and fix everything that went wrong last time. 

Dance Mix ABC: Big Week Reflections

I know that we're going to do a reflection on the project in two weeks, but I want to reflect a little here, while my thoughts and feelings are still fresh in my mind.

I'm a bit disappointed in myself. Not because I thought the project came out badly. In my opinion, it sounded great. However, I feel like I didn't put enough effort into it. I chose a project that was too easy. Most of the tools I understood, and I wasn't doing anything particularly out of my comfort zone, like so many of the bold and brave people did today.

You all did a really good job. I mean that. My letdown is purely a product of my own feelings, and not because I felt personally attacked.

While I was reflecting on my disappointment, I realized something. Last year, I made a whole album in 40 days. Of course I feel like I'm falling short. Now that I've achieved something so great, I have to not only rank myself against the world of music, but I have to rank myself against myself. I've created an entirely new standard, and I failed to realize that while setting my goals, and I failed to realize that until now.

One of the biggest motivators in my life is humiliation. When my teacher shames me for not practicing, or my friends insult me for bad behavior, I always make it my goal to do better next time in order to redeem myself. Maybe that's just my ego talking. I like to take advantage of it, so I can keep improving.

Right now, it's time for me to find what to do next. I have a few options. One thing I could try is to make a better album, inspired by something completely different, using tools and techniques I've never done before. Another thing I could do is pursue this interest in audio engineering, or synthesizers.

Or I could take a deeper look into some other genres of music in the world spectrum. On my obnoxiously large hard drive, I've put a plethora of world music. In addition to that I've been really cultivating an interest in world affairs (another obsession of mine).

I suppose this is one of the main difficulties of an artist. How do you reinvent yourself?

Dance Mix ABC: Day 4

Today I returned to my song for one last listen, and I found a big issue I'm really surprised I didn't notice earlier.

When I was in the musical Spamalot at camp (as the French Taunter), the vocal coach told me I was great at projection because I had a voice that can really pierce through sound. I didn't fully understand what she was talking about until today. While I was listening to the recording, my voice sounded so sharp it was like my ears were being attacked with knives. I knew something had to be done.

For about an hour, I messed around with different audio effects, trying to get a decent sound. I played with bass reduction, treble reduction, the visual EQ, the compressor, and I even tried using overdrive. The sound became more flat and electronic, which I kind of liked, but in certain points it would get scratchy and I had no idea how to fix that. Eventually, I got the voice to sound alright, not to shrill. It still peaks in places and scratches, but after a while I realized that there was nothing I could do to fix the problem without getting some help. And so I let it be.

In STAC I learned some more about audio engineering. I want to pursue this subject more. It's captivated my interest by meshing two of my favorite things: music and awesome technology. Luke once mentioned that for the STAC music people he wants to take a trip to a recording studio. I would love to learn enough to be able to try some actual adjusting in a studio (that is, if they'd even let me touch the buttons).

Then again, I don't want to obsess over it too much right now. I have a tendency to obsess over things for a short amount of time, and then completely forget about them. Before I do anything extreme, I want to see if this is an interest that will actually stick.

Dance Mix ABC: Day 3

Today, I made a bit of a breakthrough. For the first time, looking at all of the various buttons used by audio equipment, all the nonsense started making sense.

Yesterday, I downloaded the program Nanostudio to my computer. Why? Well, it was free. And lucky for me, it came with an amazing tutorial, not only explaining the features available in the program, but what these features actually do.

I'm a very hands-on/visual learner. Give me an instrument and I can make a sound quickly, but give me a book, and I can stare at the words for hours, trying to decipher them the way that someone would decipher an art piece of Duchamp's.

What does it mean? I don't understand.

I started off by reading the glossary. Many of the definitions left me confused, so I figured I'd just try to read the manual listing the functions of each tool, and experimenting with the program right beside me. The manual was written in simple language, making it much easier for me to understand than the grossly verbose Wikipedia articles on the subject.

Although a majority of the words I needed to know were explained, some were not, and I had to push through the wild forest of the internet to find definitions. Thankfully, a lot of the information is cumulative, and the more research I do, the better I become at interpreting the information.

While learning how to use the drum pad, I found out that an output bus is a device that communicates sounds to the CPU, and send effects are sound effects the output bus adds directly to the sound before sending it to the computer (I think).

Velocity is the force of which a pad is struck, determining the volume. When you're not using your hands, this is important.

Here's a picture of the drum pad.

The synthesizer had much more to teach. 

An oscillator generates sound, and its waveform determines the sound, based on the shape of the soundwaves. 

Filters change the sound of the oscillator by removing certain frequencies (basically taking away higher sounds, lower sounds, in between sounds, or a combination).

Low Pass allows low frequencies, and takes away high frequencies.

High Pass allows high frequencies, and suppresses low frequencies.

Band Pass works in the middle.

The filter envelope allows for the sound to be shaped over a period of time, and prevents sound from being flat. This happens in 4 steps.

Attack: How quickly the envelope reaches the maximum level. I'm not sure, but I think this means how long it takes for it to reach its loudest level, or most intense level.

Decay: How quickly the envelope drops to the sustain level, where it remains steady.

Sustain: The level where the sound remains steady until it is released. 

Release: How quickly the envelope fades to minimum when released. When the sound cuts out.

In the left picture, the upward slope is the attack, followed by the dropping decay, the dormant sustain, and the ending release

Insert effects adjust the sound like send effects, but instead of recreating the sound, it simply changes it.

By the end of the 3 periods, this is about as far as I got, which isn't so bad. I won't be making a mix tomorrow, but at least I'm starting to understand audio engineering for the first time in my life. There's still much to work on, and I'm probably going to have to read the manual 5+ times before all of the functions stick in my head, but it's all good.

In addition to all of these learnings, I had a bit of an epiphany today.

I asked Luke a simple question. "After an audio engineer has experience, does he know exactly what he's doing? Does he know what every function does to the sound?" To me, it seems crazy that anyone could understand every minute detail of this complex system.

I got a response along the lines of this.

"At first, he does just play around with buttons, but after a while, he knows exactly what he's doing. His ear is trained so that he can tell what each track needs, and he has the abilities to make the changes necessary."

"Of course, it's a lot of fun to experiment. A few of my buddies would buy mixers and spray paint them black so they couldn't see the buttons."

"At first, you can get beginner's luck. But after a while, the tools begin to wear on you and become old. It's like when you make a friend and it's really exciting to hang out with them the first time, but after the 40th time it's just like 'hey'."

"It's like love. It starts out amazing and goes downhill. It's like sex. After a while you're just like 'hey'."

Thank you Luke for your words of wisdom. I'll be sure not to get my hopes up.

"After a while though, you realize it's good to be in control of what you're doing."

Ahh, human nature. You seek what you desire, and once you achieve it, you realize what you left behind. Anyway...

Luke introduced to me the idea of 3 dimensional sound, and I listened to Animal Zoo by Spirit. Although audio is only observed left to right, it sounded like things were coming from all directions: forward, back, above. But how could this be?

Well, we see art that looks 3D, even though it's on a 2D surface.

Although the picture is surely 2D, it gives the impression of a 3rd dimension, and that's exactly the goal audio engineers are looking for when they mix a recording.

I went back and listened to the mix I made yesterday. Needless to say, it was flat. If you were to compare my song to Animal Zoo, it'd look like the difference between the above image and a circle doodle.

At least I'm well-defined!

Obviously, this new knowledge isn't something I'm going to be able to add to my song. But it'd definitely something to think about for the future.

I wonder if you can create audio illusions that fool your ears like visual illusions fool your eyes.

On that note, I'm going to end this post. Tomorrow I shall work final touches on my previous Garageband mix and explore Nanostudio further. I'm taking things in steps. It's a healthy process.

Dance Mix ABC: Day 2

Today, I worked on putting more panning into the track, making the transitions flow better, and improve the piece as a whole.

I succeeded in some things, and not others. One problem I had yesterday was improving the flow of 2 different sections: one ending on a dance beat and the other beginning with an ambiguous sound. Instead of heightening towards the ambiguous noise, the song seemed to fall flat. Thankfully, I figured out that adding a soft ambiguous sound right before the transition gives a good lead up. In other words, it sounds a lot better now.

One problem I have is in the vocal track. I added some vocal effects to a part, and for some reason at the beginning of a phrase you can hear a boom sound. I clicked random buttons trying to find a solution, but I really couldn't figure it out.

Huh?

What?

AHHHH!!!

A lot of my strategy is clicking random buttons and hoping things works. This has been successful for the most part.

Another problem I'm having is the lack of good keyboard sounds. The beats are great, but the synth pads and simulated orchestral instruments really leave something to be desired.

At any rate, let me talk about some inspirations!

In terms of electronic music, probably my favorite groups would be LCD Soundsystem, Justice, Passion Pit, and St. Vincent.

Some favorite songs:

Everything by LCD Soundsystem is great, but I like this song in particular because I think it's really nice. It makes me smile.

It's songs like these that made me wish I had a crazy synthesizer.

This is what I wish mainstream dance music was like.

I love the chorus on this, how it explodes into electronic symphony. It really shows the full scope of the capabilities, and it's beautiful in a robotic kind of way. Sort of like the robot that seems loving and caring but doesn't really have a heart inside. But who cares?

At any rate, I think I'm basically done with my project except for a few finishing details, exporting, etc. My plan for the next two days is to make another song, but using a different program. The Apple Store offers some really great music synths; a lot of which are totally free. By tomorrow, I'll find a good one and start playing with it. I don't know if I'll finish this next project so quickly, but I'll just see if I'll have 2 songs by Friday.