“It seems to me a bizarre facet of humanity that we can form beliefs based on evidence-less speculation then ridicule others for their differing but also baseless beliefs. God exists or does not exist, neither of which is provable, so how can either side throw stones?”—L. Alexander Carlé
Is Post Dubstep Becoming a Victim of It's Own Success?
I was listening to a mix hailed as an introduction to post dubstep this morning and while I agree that it was indeed a decent introduction to the sound, a recurring theme started rearing its head that made me wonder if the sound was starting to lose the edge that made it great.
The theme that stood out was the chopped up vocal sample that was used so brilliantly in the sub-genre’s infancy by the likes of Burial and Scuba and through it’s development and rise in popularity (via Mount Kimbie, Joy Orbison, James Blake etc) now seemed to be ubiquitous. Whether it’s to the point of overuse, only time will tell, but while the CVS seems to be getting thrown through more and more tunes, some of the innovators are starting moving on. James Blake’s new album is as much about songwriting / full vocal tracks as it is about the track production. Mount Kimbie is still using the CVS to good effect, as is George Fitzgerald, but as more and more bandwagon jumpers throw their tunes into the ring, what will they do with their sound?
With the benefit of hindsight, some would argue that (Burial copycats notwithstanding) the root of this explosion in the use of the CVS would be the debut single Hyph Mngo from London producer Joy Orbison, which sent the newcomer from unknown to underground superstar in scenes ranging well beyond the walls of dubstep and gave the post dubstep sound a more commercial following. On the back of that success, the vocal snippets are being thrown through tunes like it’s going out of fashion, which it probably is…
I have often puzzled over how humans communicate with one another. If you think about it, who you are right now has been shaped, moulded, changed by your circumstances in life. Everything you have seen, done, heard, and thought about has influenced your paradigm, the way that you view the world. Nobody has seen the same set of experiences as you have, felt them to the extent that you have, so your paradigm is different to everybody elses. Now extrapolate that out across international borders and cultures, vastly different circumstances and world views shaping vastly different paradigms, and it’s a wonder that one person is able to make themselves understood by another at all.
If our paradigms are all different, then we interpret other peoples actions according our way of understanding. For example, if you cheat on your partner and all of a sudden they start acting strangely, not showing up home straight after work or what-have-you, your natural assumption would be that they are cheating on you. Cheating is a known factor to you. You would be unable to speculate that it was any of a number of things that you have no knowledge of or experience in. So your assumption that they are cheating is a projection of yourself onto them. The people that we like, we like because they display the traits that we recognise and admire in ourselves, while the people we dislike display the parts of ourselves that we would rather not recognise are a part of us. When they behave a certain way, it exposes that behaviour in ourselves which makes us uncomfortable.
The reality then, of how we communicate with one another is that we never truly do. All we can ever know of another person is what motives/beliefs/thoughts etc that we assign to them based on our observations of their behaviour. There is no way to objectively know another person, therefore all you really get to know is an extension of yourself. Your relationships with others are not about knowing other people at all, they are not about companionship, friendship, eros, they are about getting to know yourself. When you love somebody else, all you are doing is recognising the traits that you most admire in yourself appearing in the best volume and configuration in somebody else. Remember though, that the other person will mirror all the worst aspects of yourself as well…
So there is a thought for your Monday morning, you will never truly know another human being and everything you romanticise about love can be boiled down to humanity’s inherent narcissism.
“Before I was shot, I always thought that I was more half-there than all-there –- I always suspected that I was watching TV instead of living life. People sometimes say that the way things happen in movies is unreal, but actually it’s the way things happen in life that’s unreal. The movies make emotions look so strong and real, whereas when things really do happen to you, it’s like watching television –- you don’t feel anything. Right when I was being shot and ever since, I knew that I was watching television.”—Andy Warhol. (via dailymeh)
“Reality at every level from photons to philosophical fancies to the consciousness of living organisms was fluid. To break apart and confine this reality into separate categories created by the mind was foolish and futile, much like trying to capture a ray of light inside a dark wooden box. This urge to categorize was the true fall of man, the infinite became finite, good opposed evil, thoughts hardened into beliefs, one’s joys and discoveries became dreadful certainties, man became alienated from what he perceived as other ways and other things, and, ultimately, divided against himself, body and soul. Always seeking meaning, always making their lives safe and comfortable, human beings do not truly live.”—David Zindell from The Broken God (edited)