MUSICAL LANDSCAPES

At about the same time I was discovering my musical "ear", I was also learning how to read topographical maps. I loved those maps, I loved looking at contour lines, landmarks, rivers, roads and just about every other feature they displayed. Even more than that, I loved walking over the same land I saw on the maps. Walking in the bush around the escarpments, over rivers, down gorges and up the ridge lines. Finding the campsites we had planned. At times the plans went somewhat awry, usually the fault of the weather, I also love weather maps, and pay closer attention to them now.

My journey of discovery into music was pretty much the same, it was mapped in part by some, in particular my older brother, who had gone before me. My brother introduced me to Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, Jethro Tull and many others of that same era, but there were some that left a lasting impact. And for very good reasons.

Neil Young's Harvest. Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells. Yes, with Close to the Edge. Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon. These Albums perhaps had the greatest impact. The music was layered, authentic, it was the work of people that were willing to craft their work, rather than just pump it out. I was thinking today about some of the songs on Harvest; Old Man, Alabama, Words, A Man Needs a Maid to name a few. I can't tell you what it was about these songs, they were all different. But they all impacted me.

Tubular Bells is perhaps a bit obvious, or is it? Was it just an epic piece of work that quickly became the favourite go to piece for movie makers? Certainly the music has shifting moods and many big moments. Was it the astounding idea that one person wrote the music, played every instrument in that recording and did the recording himself? Possibly. There's nothing like a bit of (truthful) mythology to galvanise the attention of your audience. Or perhaps maybe, the music is just brilliant.

Yes, and their Close to the Edge Album. The Roger Dean artwork on many of their album covers is certainly a drawcard. But you don't listen to the artwork do you? No, the music must speak for itself.
Yes is not to everyone's liking, but they got my attention. Was it the music, again so layered and multi faceted? The dreamscape lyrics that took you into the fantastical artwork? Many of my contemporaries were less than tolerant of my love of this band, they dismissed the songs as too long, maybe the music was too complex. Yes' style was often described as, symphonic rock, playing "pieces" rather than songs. Their first three albums however had more of a Jazz-Fusion feel to them. Their first drummer Bill Bruford, like Charlie Watts, was a Jazz drummer. Their sound however changed and evolved. They survived a horrible period in the late 70's. Today they still play the music that marked them out from the mainstream crowd.

Pink Floyd need no explanation, they were more than ground breaking, they were earth shatteringly brilliant.

Back to the beginning. My musical ear was developing at just the right moment. Otherwise I might not have known how truly awful Disco really was, it was so in authentic, it was fast food pop. Driven by the gods of commercial wisdom and trend setting. Pop music for me, comes under the same umbrella. It's Mills and Boon with a tune.

The other night I was watching Les Mis',the one with Hugh Jackman. I had an epiphany, of sorts. I realised that truly magnificent music requires serious engagement, both from the listener as well as the writer. Isn't that true though of all writing? To write a song, or a musical score and then to perform it with some sort of justification requires a serious investment of yourself. At the time of the Beatles explosion on the music scene, the majority of popular music in America was written by just a handful of people. Imagine that, an entire market controlled by just a few people churning out the same diet of paint by numbers 3 minute 20 second pop gruel.

If you haven't made the investment, why should I buy it? You have to earn my audience. Pop music and it's current trend of performance criteria. Well see for yourself. Any live music performance that needs massive stage productions, bevies of dancers and performers, has just one purpose. To dazzle you beyond your ability to recognise a bad song. If the music itself is not enough to hold my attention, then it's not good enough. You know the saying about putting lipstick on a pig? Yeah, it's still a pig.

My firmest belief about music is this. There are two types of people. Those that put music on. Those that listen. Listening requires stillness, a willingness to shut out all else, to expose yourself to it, to absorb it into yourself, music must connect. Switchfoot front man John Foreman penned the lyrics. "If we're adding to the noise, turn off this song". A bold statement, if it doesn't connect? then leave it.

SO, where is my landscape today? Well it too has evolved. I still eschew mainstream pop. My choice of artists has evolved somewhat, I now include Many classical pieces to my playlists. But there is one group I have recently fallen in love with that pushes all the right buttons for me.

Future of Forestry. The name comes from a C.S. Lewis poem. The group had a previous incarnation as "Something Like Silas". What can I say about the music? Multifaceted? Layered? Innovative? Yes all of these, but there is more. Artistry, thematic, a shifting landscape. No one album hints at or echoes another. Front man Eric Owyoung refuses to be tied down to a style, constantly changing instrumental emphasis. But there is something more to it, the most important of all. It engages. Sometimes you want to dance, to cry to stand on the top of a mountain and shout to the heavens of its magnificence. It breathes as if a life of its own. This music is topographical, it is contoured and multi featured, it takes you places, places you want to visit time and again. When you go there, you're less likely to be seduced by the latest new sensation, you're content to stay.

CONTENTMENT CONTINGENCY

Promises Promises.

 

Over the last few weeks I've seen some very bold promises being made.

One was on the door of a Fitness Studio in the city, the sign reads. "If fitness is your life, then happiness is your prize."

 

Another, that I found quite by chance was in the classifieds of a Sydney paper. it reads.

 

Psychic Reader.

Reunites lovers. Solves all problems.

 

And lastly from a toy that is supposed to resemble an iPhone. There is this promise in the instructions.

"Every function will bring eternal enjoyment."

 

Now I will concede that in the last example there is probably some problem with Chinese-English translation or syntax. However, a cursory glance at the above claims, and I think you'll see where I'm headed.

 

So what constitutes a promise? If we make a promise, surely, there is some expectation that it will be carried out, or, at the very least we have the capacity to fulfil it. What is the nature of a promise? A wedding vow, a promise of payment? The three promises I've cited above are empty promises. Because no amount of time at the Gym will make me happy, no one person can solve all my problems and no toy manufacturer can make me an eternal promise.

 

Lets look at them a bit deeper.

What constitutes happiness? My feelings? What if I'm unhappy (as so many people are) with my body shape? Endless comparison with manufactured ideals fuels my unhappiness. No exercise induced endorphin rush is going to keep me happy for very long. That is only a temporal promise, it cannot and will not last. What if, upon leaving the gym I step in dog droppings, or find a parking ticket on my car or it's got a flat tyre? My happiness is gone, do I rush back into the gym for a refill?

 

What about solving all my problems? Many of our problems are simply based on who we are, our circumstances and other people around us. How can any one person promise to fix that? These sort of problems more often than not, can only be addressed by myself, and the choices I make in seeking to resolve those issues. Are we so seduced and blinded by the notion of a magic genie granting us three wishes, or a happy ever after prince charming kiss that immediately dispels our woes? A big red ball will not make all your dreams come true. Anything that is not achievable through the application of effort is a fantasy.

 

What about this promise of eternal enjoyment? The temporal nature of our existence, cannot supply us with anything eternal. Because the person making the promise will die. The responsibility, for the fulfilment of the promise ends with them. The only real exception to that of course would be in the form of an inheritance, but even that is limited by time and available resources.

 

So instead, let's look at some real promises. Let's look at the promises of God.

Now these are many and varied so I'll just pick out a couple to illustrate my point.

Heb 6:13 reads "When God made his promise to Abraham, since there was no one greater for him to swear by, he swore by himself." NIV2011

What does this mean?

Simply this, that God has taken sole and complete responsibility for the fulfilment of his promise. In other words, he's laying his reputation on the line. If it doesn't happen, then God cannot be trusted. A similar thought is expressed in Psalm 23:3 "He guides me along the right paths for his names sake."

God again lays his own reputation on the line.

What about 2Cor 1:20 "For no matter how many promises God has made, they are Yes in Christ. And so through him the Amen is spoken by us to the glory of God."

So God through Jesus Christ, has given us the fulfilment of his promises, to which we now testify.

 

Now where does all this leave us? Do we continue to put our trust in man? Or are we willing to put our trust in God?

Man will fail us, and our fickle hearts will blame God because he didn't act in an instant at our behest.

The answer to the question is faith. There are many interpretations on what faith is or does. My simplest answer is that faith says, God is still God no matter what. Faith is attached to the nature and character of God, he cannot act independently of it. God cannot take a day off and stop being God. Faith is a choice, it is what maintains our belief and trust in God, it says your ways are higher than mine, I don't always understand them, but because I know who you are I will continue to trust you.

 

Because God cannot leave his promises unfulfilled. It is not in his nature or character to do that.

 

So, whose promises are you going to believe?

 

 

 



What Isaiah said about Miley

Isaiah 2 vs 22 reads. "Stop trusting in mere humans who have but a breath in their nostrils. Why hold them in esteem." NIV 2011.
Some years ago I heard a story about Frank Herbert, author of the "Dune" series. He posited the idea that, of the many U.S. presidents, Nixon was one of the best, and JFK one of the worst. His reasoning was this. Through Nixon, the American people learned, that the highest authority in the land could be challenged, be exposed in their corruption, held accountable and removed from office. In John F Kennedy, the people exalted him to god like status, and when he was assassinated the people fell with him. This was the original premise of the "Dune" trilogy. What happens, when a man becomes a god, and then fails?
The problem lies in this, man is not created to recieve worship. We are not intended to worship anything other than our creator God. The things we place before us in veneration, are the things that shape us. We take on their characteristics. If we exalt money as our ideal, that is what we become, it takes the place of highest importance, and our day to day life is therefore ruled by the rising and falling value of the dollar, and how much of it we own. Our self image and sense of worth therefore, is attached to what we have. Not to who we are.
Which brings us to Miley Cyrus. While I'm not about to defend what happened at the VMA. I am going to query our reaction to it. Why was there such outcry?
Let's start with Will Smith, or more specifically the Smith family. We all saw the picture of their cringing reaction. Well first off, who made the Smith family the guardians of our moral compass. Oh yes the kids are young, but given some past performances at previous VMA's, what were you expecting? Oh that's right, Hannah Montana. But she's all grown up now, I'll get to that in a minute. Will Smith, lets look at his career. First a hit single called "Get jiggy with it" whatever the heck that means. Isn't that loaded verbally, with as much sexual inuendo as a bit of "twerking" whatever the heck that is? What about Will's movies, an early role was in "Six degrees" in which he plays a gay/bisexual scam artist, playing upon peoples attachment to racial sensitivities and personality cult status. Now I'm not getting down on Will, far from it. I like a lot of the stuff he's done. Just not that movie. No doubt Will might say it was just a role, he was acting out a character. Well that's fine, we are generally smart enough to know, that the character is not you.
Now we get to the part where it all gets twisted. Miley Cyrus, is NOT Hannah Montana. Shocked? Apparently half of America was. What about the performance? Micheal Jackson made a career of crotch grabbing, and everybody still loves him right? Is she trying to be the new Madonna? Well do we need another? What about Kylie Minogue? That sweet lovable girl from neighbours, didn't she go this same route with her stage shows and lingerie adds? Nikki Webster, the sweet girl from the 2000 Olympics, who at 18 started posing for mens magazines? Lets add two more to the mix. Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears. Now we see the problem right? They came through Disney, Lindsay, Britney and now Miley. So we've been sold this image of sweet wholesomeness, a manufactured facade that these girls obviously want to break out from, and be themselves, except the pendulum swing is so violent.
But it's not confined to Disney, I'm not blaming them either. This happened in the world of Contemporary Christian Music as well. Amy Grant. A sweet wholesome girl that sang "El Shaddai" "Fathers Eyes" and more, then she grew up and got married. Then she changed, and I knew she was going to. Because she became a woman. She became a sexual being. Out went the conservative Amy and out came harder rock numbers and leopard print pants. For some this was just too much, she obviously was no longer a christian. For me this was when her music got better, much better. It had a real life edge to it. I loved it.
Back to Miley, wasn't her VMA performance just that? A persona, an act, it's what she's been doing for years. Wasn't it choreographed for her and rehearsed? None of her fellow performers were surprised by it. It wasn't a random brain explosion stage invasion. The real problem is this. It wasn't Hannah Montana.
Now, this is what Isaiah says to us. Why was our trust put in a fake persona? HANNAH MONTANA DOESN'T EXIST? Just the ideal that you worshipped. Well your idols have feet of clay. They are all too easily toppled. And when your idols topple. Or more accurately, when their true self and nature is revealed, so is ours. We don't like what we see. Someone once said. "Evil men do what good men dream about." Well on some levels that is true.
We don't like the truth when it is exposed in us. It's not Miley Cyrus that offends us, it is ourselves.

Intentional.

I've been thinking about this word a lot the last couple of days. What does it mean to be intentional. Early in July I had a conversation with  a young guy from Queensland. We were at Hillsong Conference and I was asking him about his first experience of the conference. His reply was along the lines that, even though he knew the music etc and a lot else about it, he was now seeing first hand how it all worked. His comment stuck with me. "Everything is intentional." I can tell you from my numerous years at Hillsong Conference, most of them spent serving or volunteering in some capacity. That every thing is done with intent, it is thought out and planned beforehand. From the production values, crowd movement, everything, even something as mundane as putting a pamphlet or brochure on a seat. It is thought out first.
So thinking this week, about what it means to be intentional, actually caused me a few problems. So occupied with these thoughts, that I wasn't really focusing on my work. Which led to a few errors, predictable and avoidable. I was being un-intentional. Ironic huh!
So what does it mean to be intentional?
What does it mean for my writing. Do I write with intent or do I just write when the mood takes me? In the case of a novel I'm currently writing, (probably more of a novella).  Do I just do as Stephen King does and just flog it out, let it flow, and then tidy it up in the edits? Reading a book on writing, it occured to me that I needed to write profiles for my major characters, and, because the world of the story is fictional, I had to write it's character as well. Why? Because I didn't know my characters, well I did sort of, but I need to know them, in order to tell their stories, it also helps me to tell you, the reader, who they are.
Actually, I realised, it's research. If I'm going to write something, I need to know who and what I'm writing about.
Now, I can begin to write intentionally.
A lot of people say "oh I'd love to write a book one day" well they have to start. They have to be intentional.
Just having a bit of a plan, that won't do it. Having a bit of a go, that doesn't cut it either. You have to commit to the process, see it through to completion, and make sure it's the best you're capable of.
It's the same with everything in life really, you don't try marriage, you don't just have a go, try it and see, run it up the flagpole and see who salutes it.
As a wise man once said "do, or do not, there is no try" (Mr Myagee, Karate Kid).
We can't live life without resolve, without commitment, unfocused, going where the mood or the breeze takes us. No, our course must be set. Our direction focussed. Yes there is a certain amount of adventure and discovery in life, but adventures should be planned, or they turn into rescues. Discovery should have a purpose attached to it. If it doesn't add something to us then it's just entertainment, we've discovered nothing.
So to live with intention, to have a sense of purpose and destiny, that's the key. Otherwise we're just doing things to fill the gaps and fight off boredom. I'd rather not write my bucket list just yet, I've got too much to do.

Getting it right

A few days ago I was about to post a review of the movie Pacific Rim. It's just as well I didn't, because I had it wrong. I had forgotten the golden rule of non-fiction writing. Do your Research.
The importance of this was highlighted to me again just today. When friends started posting a horrendously erronious, online report, of the Wellington tremor on the weekend. That's Wellington New Zealand by the way.

The report appeared in an online publication, guardianlv.com it placed all the towns mentioned in Australia, and even quoted a source, a newspaper, that doesn't even exist. Very poor journalism.
After realising their woeful gaffe the publication issued an apology and correction, but decided to keep the article visible in the name of "journalistic integrity".

You can imagine the howls of derision that erupted, not just in the comments section, but also from myself, almost.

I was all ready to go on the attack. Especially after I read through some of their website, I was baying for blood. And it would be so easy to do, to pull someone down in my veil of smug superiority.

 But then I took time to think about it, which is always a good idea.

Journalistic integrity. That's a big claim, in light of the inaccuracies that were posted as "news".
But they were right. They owned their mistake, not afraid to let it remain for the world to see, swallow a bit of humble pie and say "yep, we got this so wrong". That takes guts.
So good on you guardianlv.com you showed integrity.
And thank you for reminding me, that the research, is so important.

If you're interested here's a link to the article.
http://guardianlv.com/2013/07/severe-earthquake-strikes-australia/

Why not add a word of encouragement to the comments section. At least they owned up to it, which is more than a lot of print journalists are willing to do.