So an interesting set of developments from yesterday's post... an epiphany almost... In case you missed it, most of the conversation took place on the weblog forums at Masslive.com, I posted a link to my "superbowl fluff" post to the forum and it ruffled a couple of feathers... My first response was a rather informative missive explaining the difference between a bass and a guitar, thus explaining Paulo's lack of instrumentation at the bowl... ok... My Bad and thanks for the info... then I got another reply...
"when I read stuff like Bayblogs post, all I can think is how little a lot of people know about music. As you said HC, you can dislike the guy, but to say he was lame is, well, LAME."
Well.. how rude... and I pointed it out as such... in this person's reply he pointed out that his comment was nothing 'personal' but was a comment on my post, but that my comment on his post was 'personal'... huh? He called me lame and I called him rude... sounds personal to me... Oh wait.. is the difference that he said "Bayblog's POST" and I said "you, 44444's, came off as just rude"? The difference between "Post" and "you"... huh... maybe he has a point... or does he? Are 'we' what we write or do our posts have an identity all themselves? How do you seperate the person from the person's words? Can you? Doesn't a person have to be behind that post? The post doesn't just appear out of nowhere, with it's own opinions... OH.. but what about "fiction"... It's highly unlikely that Stephen King writes from personal experience... so what about that? If you criticize King's books should King take it personally? Crap.. wait... he made up the stories out of his own imagination, so isn't a critique of his book still a critique of his imagination? *sigh... this is getting exhausting...
Are we what we write or can you seperate the person from the words? Good question...
Ok.. so then lets take this a step further... I handed some extreme criticism to Sir Paul... and you know what... I felt it was 'nothing personal'... go figure... I was rating his performance and questioning his professionalism, not him... or was I?? He's a big impersonal music figure... not a person... huh?? Wait... no.... that doesn't make sense... If we are what we write... or perform... isn't a critique of the 'art' a critique of the person?? Double Crap... I hate being guilty... So I did it too... so... we're back to square one...
Performance versus personal... add in the old "people need to take responsibility for their actions" and you've got an even bigger mess... are my posts a 'performance' or is it 'me being me'? Is the guy critiquing my post commenting on my words or on me? Am I calling that guy rude or his words to me rude? Do I think Paulo's performance was not superbowl quality or do I think Paul is not superbowl quality? OK.. now lets add into the equation "Everyone has an off day.." Does one performance or one post or one comment encompass the entire person? Certainly not... Paul could have been having an off day, I could have been experiencing an extreme mind fart, and the commenter could have just been in a bad mood... All perfectly understandable... so... YEAH... we're back to "the performance should stand alone" and can be critiqued without the criticism falling back on the person... and the crap pile just keeping getting deeper...
Well... now that we all have some major food for thought, and I'm confused as hell... What do you think? Are we what write/sing/paint/build.. whatever? Is a criticism of the 'work' a critisicm of 'us'? Or does this post really suck? OH... but then if this post sucks, then does that mean that I suck? CRAP!!!!!!!!!! Maybe I'll just get back to work...
Later....
No comments:
Post a Comment