I think with many artists their story is closely linked with their art.
You can appreciate a single song with out knowing the story.
When you know the story, the whole catalog takes on added meaning.
This is more true for a Nina Simone, than for a Michael Jackson.
Total thread hijack.
Just finished reading Just Kids, Patti Smith's book about Robert Mapplethorpe.
There are a number of pop stars that I consider artist first.
Their approach to music comes from artist perspective. Music is the vehicle for artistic expression. For the artist painting or poetry could have been the vehicle just as well.
Joni Mitchell and Nina Simone are 2 artists who fit what I am trying to say.
They are less concerned with formal musical structure and more concerned with artistic expression.
I know I wasn't too clear there, but hopefully you catch my drift.
For some musicians much of the music they make is primarily for entertainment.
Aint That Peculiar can be enjoyed with out even knowing Marvin Gayes name.
Here My Dear is much more moving if you know the back story.
For Nina Simone most everything she sang was part of a larger story. Knowing that story will increase most peoples appreciation of her art, even if they still don't care for her singing or style.
I know a few probably won't like this read. But it contains some good insight into her life (IMO) and I found the article interesting and furthered my interest in her life.
And just for Batmon, includes some stuff about Michael Jackson!
Right. Sometimes a song is just a song. Sometimes it's a story. Sometimes it's more than that... Is art subjective?
Many times I listened to Nina Simone because of how it makes me feel and my own personal reasons and experiences. Once in a blue moon I'm actually curious as to how it made Simone feel or what she might have been thinking about when writing the song based on how something she performed made her feel.
I wouldn't put too much thought into why it doesn't move you or trying to convince anyone else why it shouldn't matter to them.
This is rhetorical, right? Everybody hears something different.
As someone who has had a few swings throughout life (call it bipolar if you like), I can say that the LAST thing I'd want anyone to do is judge my artistic expression through the filter of my mental state when the art was created. I'm with Batmon on this one I guess: the art has to stand on it's own two feet first, then u can fill in the blanks if you're so inclined. Knowing the historical context of the Spanish Civil War wrt Picasso's La Guernica is a for cry from knowing Picasso was suicidal when he painted it (which he wasn't, or maybe he was...I'm just saying)
I used to go to the museum and just look at the paintings.
Later I started reading the descriptions and found my appreciation was greatly deepened.
At my museum we don't have cards on the side of the artwork to explain shit. The art speaks for itself. That shit for old ladies that need a backstory to hold their hand. When u go to a restaurant you don't need the fuckin chefs life story to like if the food tastes good.
Yall are sensitive fans that use Simone's backstory to defend your opinions.
This is shit is flip side to cats who hatt on Artist X that did somethin social unacceptable.
There's thousands of songs of which I am blissfully unaware of the back story. And there is some that I know the back story of. Sometimes it's important to me personally and sometimes it's not. I dunno how it works, but DEFINITELY for me, reading a Simone biography deepened my already pretty intense fascination with her music. If that doesn't ring true for you, fine.... look at the paintings and pretend their context is meaningless. Derrida and Foucault may have something to say about that, but that's another discussion
I thought it was pretty good actually, but I agree with BD the pacing was a little slow. I also thought her daughter Lisa was a bit suspect. IMO. It looks like she had a love/hate relationship with Nina.
I thought it was pretty good, maybe for someone who knows more about her life it could seem basic. Not sure what I think of these recent docs that cobble together old interviews to create a type of 1st person narration.
I didn't think the pacing was necessarily slow, I think they did right in placing a lot of emphasis on her performances, it became a kind of character study in that way. No point in making a faster/flashier film if that doesn't fit her musical style.
great doc, highly recommended, but it's more about her as a private person than a musician and performer. i imagine it must have been hell growing up with her as a mother and andrew as her father.
Just finished watching the doc, and loved it. Highest recommendation.
I knew a bit about her, but not the kind of detail shared in the film. It was very heartbreaking seeing what she went through. Never got close to tears except near the end when she laments, **possible spoiler**...
with tears in her eyes, that she never became the first black female classical pianist.
Comments
You can appreciate a single song with out knowing the story.
When you know the story, the whole catalog takes on added meaning.
This is more true for a Nina Simone, than for a Michael Jackson.
Why?
I know I wasn't too clear there, but hopefully you catch my drift.
For some musicians much of the music they make is primarily for entertainment.
Aint That Peculiar can be enjoyed with out even knowing Marvin Gayes name.
Here My Dear is much more moving if you know the back story.
For Nina Simone most everything she sang was part of a larger story. Knowing that story will increase most peoples appreciation of her art, even if they still don't care for her singing or style.
At least that is the way it seems to me.
And just for Batmon, includes some stuff about Michael Jackson!
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/08/11/raised-voice
I call bullshit on knowing an artists back story when it comes to listening.
Than fan cult shit promotion steez.
I used to go to the museum and just look at the paintings.
Later I started reading the descriptions and found my appreciation was greatly deepened.
Many times I listened to Nina Simone because of how it makes me feel and my own personal reasons and experiences. Once in a blue moon I'm actually curious as to how it made Simone feel or what she might have been thinking about when writing the song based on how something she performed made her feel.
I wouldn't put too much thought into why it doesn't move you or trying to convince anyone else why it shouldn't matter to them.
This is rhetorical, right? Everybody hears something different.
As someone who has had a few swings throughout life (call it bipolar if you like), I can say that the LAST thing I'd want anyone to do is judge my artistic expression through the filter of my mental state when the art was created. I'm with Batmon on this one I guess: the art has to stand on it's own two feet first, then u can fill in the blanks if you're so inclined. Knowing the historical context of the Spanish Civil War wrt Picasso's La Guernica is a for cry from knowing Picasso was suicidal when he painted it (which he wasn't, or maybe he was...I'm just saying)
At my museum we don't have cards on the side of the artwork to explain shit. The art speaks for itself. That shit for old ladies that need a backstory to hold their hand. When u go to a restaurant you don't need the fuckin chefs life story to like if the food tastes good.
Yall are sensitive fans that use Simone's backstory to defend your opinions.
This is shit is flip side to cats who hatt on Artist X that did somethin social unacceptable.
I know how I enjoy art.
IAG
There's thousands of songs of which I am blissfully unaware of the back story. And there is some that I know the back story of. Sometimes it's important to me personally and sometimes it's not. I dunno how it works, but DEFINITELY for me, reading a Simone biography deepened my already pretty intense fascination with her music. If that doesn't ring true for you, fine.... look at the paintings and pretend their context is meaningless. Derrida and Foucault may have something to say about that, but that's another discussion
What does that even mean?!
I'll skip the biopic and czech the doc instead:
This a good look?
- spidey
I feel the same way about calling it a Nina Simone tribute as I do about calling some kid the next Sam Cooke.
Good cut though.
I fell asleep, but will finish it up sometime.
- Eggs
I didn't think the pacing was necessarily slow, I think they did right in placing a lot of emphasis on her performances, it became a kind of character study in that way. No point in making a faster/flashier film if that doesn't fit her musical style.
I knew a bit about her, but not the kind of detail shared in the film. It was very heartbreaking seeing what she went through. Never got close to tears except near the end when she laments, **possible spoiler**...
with tears in her eyes, that she never became the first black female classical pianist.
Again, great doc all the way through.
http://www.amazingnina.com/
True. I do need the chicken's life story. If the chicken wasn't happy and loved I just can't enjoy the meal.