Tubular.net :: Mike Oldfield Forums Discussion, news, reviews, fan music, and more.
	Search :: Members :: Help :: Guidelines

Pages: (3) < 1 2 [3] > [ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

wiga Group: Members Posts: 2113 Joined: Sep. 2008 Posted: Oct. 17 2008, 11:59 Quote (nightspore @ Oct. 17 2008, 07:38) The feeling of possible or imminent loss is never far away in any of Mike's music In the early days when I listened to "Mont St Michel" an awful lot, I remember deciding that it would be the perfect piece of music at my funeral, and had all the elements that would comfort and and ease the grieving process for the multitude of mourners gathered to bid me farewell. Do comfort and heartache merge ? -------------- Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon. Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4770 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Oct. 17 2008, 19:30 Wiga, it's clear that Mike's music attracts people with similar emotional make-up. I had exactly the same thoughts as you with regard to "The Wind Chimes, Part 1". But I thought, what a pity I wouldn't be around to hear it! Back to top

trcanberra Group: Members Posts: 349 Joined: Jan. 2008 Posted: Oct. 19 2008, 02:18 Listened to the CD again last week - nice, calm and relaxing with some very pretty melodics.  Not 'easy listening' but a nice change of pace in the the body of work. As with a number of Mike's CDs, not my favourite, but glad he recorded it. Back to top

Jesse Group: Members Posts: 394 Joined: Aug. 2007 Posted: April 30 2009, 15:45 I was thinking about it once more. I disagree that Flowers of the forest get's bad because it has a climax. Without the climax it wouldn't work as well as it does now. There's nothing intellectual about it, musically it is easy as cake. But still I think it does contain an atmosphere that speaks to the soul, as I can guerantee you that it wouldn't work the same with different chords. I think there are various ways to listen to music: 1. a musictechnology way, where you listen to the complexity and enjoy the intellectual work of the song. 2. The emotional way, where you listen to what the song does to YOU. I think if you can excel at either of those, you can be called a genius. I'd say Voyager is the album that may be called brilliant in the second category. Perhaps Voyager contains songs we recognize/remember from a collective unconsious level. Back to top

wiga Group: Members Posts: 2113 Joined: Sep. 2008 Posted: Aug. 16 2011, 04:00 It's that time of the year AGAIN - when Voyager came out - 1996. Why do I have a photographic memory of that time and this album? It packs a poweful punch, and I would agree with Jesse that this is heart music - undefended and pure. The way it impacts on me is very... whoa, where's my intellectual defenses - because there's none here! It's all heart and emotion - and VERY nice, but also a bit uncomfortable. Love it. Mike at his best. -------------- Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon. Back to top

Jesse Group: Members Posts: 394 Joined: Aug. 2007 Posted: Sep. 18 2011, 15:28 I really like Mike's 90's...Amarok not so much (but still very good) but TB2, TSODE, TB3, Voyager... Then a few minor albums untill Mots came along Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Sep. 19 2011, 13:35 The one thing that bugs me about this "anti-intellectual" label is that it implies that intellectuality is something to be fought, to go against, as if "heart" and "mind" are deadly enemies, opposing forces that try to annihilate each other. I find, however, that the vast majority of the music I like accomplishes both sides and understand them as partners, as complimentary forces, that depend on each other to thrive. It's pointless for music (or art in general) to be "anti-intellectual" as much as it is pointless for a person to be anti-intellectual -- really, is there any benefit in acting dumb? Going for the heart is perfectly possible -- and in my opinion, much better -- when intellectuality is involved. Besides, the original post seems to be condemning not just "intellectuality", but effort, as if it's a bad thing to expect the artist to actually work on his art. Well, there is no art without work, without effort. The heart doesn't move the body all by itself -- if the whole body is not working well, the whole body suffers, isn't it? With art, it's exactly the same. I find it perfecly okay to like Voyager for what it is: an unpretentious, unambitious dabbling in Celtic music, and I don't think that is its flaw. I don't think, though, that lack of brains, effort or sweat is something to be proud of, but that's just me. -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

HR lover Group: Members Posts: 548 Joined: Sep. 2010 Posted: Sep. 19 2011, 16:04 Quote The one thing that bugs me about this "anti-intellectual" label is that it implies that intellectuality is something to be fought, to go against, as if "heart" and "mind" are deadly enemies, opposing forces that try to annihilate each other. I find, however, that the vast majority of the music I like accomplishes both sides and understand them as partners, as complimentary forces, that depend on each other to thrive. It's pointless for music (or art in general) to be "anti-intellectual" as much as it is pointless for a person to be anti-intellectual -- really, is there any benefit in acting dumb? Going for the heart is perfectly possible -- and in my opinion, much better -- when intellectuality is involved. Besides, the original post seems to be condemning not just "intellectuality", but effort, as if it's a bad thing to expect the artist to actually work on his art. Well, there is no art without work, without effort. The heart doesn't move the body all by itself -- if the whole body is not working well, the whole body suffers, isn't it? With art, it's exactly the same. I find it perfecly okay to like Voyager for what it is: an unpretentious, unambitious dabbling in Celtic music, and I don't think that is its flaw. I don't think, though, that lack of brains, effort or sweat is something to be proud of, but that's just me. I agree with you Sir Mustapha, but I must add that I deem all of Mike's works that I've listened to (I still haven't listened to either Guitars or MOTS) emotional works. For me there is not a Mike Oldfield album that isn't emotional. Quote The heart doesn't move the body all by itself -- if the whole body is not working well, the whole body suffers, isn't it? With art, it's exactly the same. That's why I don't like a lot of modern art, because a lot of it is meant to be taken intellectual whilst the intellectual notion behind it is often very simplistic. -------------- Neither a borrower nor a lender be, For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry. Back to top

Jesse Group: Members Posts: 394 Joined: Aug. 2007 Posted: Sep. 20 2011, 13:11 Well the original post is like 4 years old and even I found it a bit fluffy but my point was that dismissing a work purely because it is not complex seems odd to me. To be fair, I think there is music out there that just feels lazy and simple, looped because the artist had little time or mind to do it properly. I do not think Voyager falls under that because I think said tunes wouldn't work if they were further developped. They already feel 'right'. I guess each tune needs it's own complexity Back to top

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ] Pages: (3) < 1 2 [3] >

Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact


Mike Oldfield Tubular.net