Friday!

[dancerjodi]

Its Friday, whoot!

Last night's http://www.ominouscollective.net/ show was a lot of fun. It was nice seeing the lovely Badriya's two performances, she was great as always (I LOVED those Isis wings, and the accompanying dance!). I enjoyed these guys http://www.specimen37.com/ immensely (they definitely sounded like a Berklee Band, if you know what I mean) and I'd be up for catching them again at some point. It was my first time seeing (I know I know, I suck) http://www.sevensunlessdays.com/ and I enjoyed their set a lot. I also enjoyed http://www.newremorse.com/ , I just felt bad for the singer (he seemed a bit shy or nervous). I had to sneak out before Lucretia's Daggers performance, and I just wasn't into Optic Rose or Thylacine (I'll just leave it at that).

Its still interesting to me to compare gothish shows to rock/metalish shows. For the most part, musicians in the former school often seem to be playing music more to themselves and less to the audience (like, most people at last night's show didn't look out at the audience or perform in that sense to them - though there were exceptions). At a rock or metal show (you could lump ska and hardcore in there too) there is much more of that face to face interaction it seems. I wonder if that's due to the differing subject material, vibe of the music, more shyness of the players or what. In some ways, I felt like I was watching a band practice for some the acts rather than being at a show (does that make any sense)? I also acknowledge though that people like Frank Pino and Jet Randall skew my perceptions of what a lead singer should do in terms of how interactive and personally connective they are with the crowd. I've definitely seen goth artists do this, but it seems like the exception more than the norm . . .

Just some things to ponder :)

Comments

[silentq.livejournal.com]

Even with all the build up by Jutta about Optic Rose, I still found them freakin' disturbing. I think I was watching them to see what they did next and not actually listening to the music. :) The theremin like thing in the doll was neat from an engineering perspective, though.

Optic Rose

[dancer.livejournal.com]

"Even with all the build up by Jutta about Optic Rose, I still found them freakin' disturbing."

See, I usually like disturbing where there's a point to it (or some creativity or work beyond 'look at me being spooky'), like I'm a huge Dario Argento fan. That just seemed to be disturbing for disturbing's sake (or maybe I'm just too old, or not cool enough). Although, "art" is subjective and all . . .

"I think I was watching them to see what they did next and not actually listening to the music."

You called it music, that's so cute! ;) I know "music" is subjective too, but I just couldn't get into them because there wasn't much use of instruments, good or interesting singing or apparent effort in creating the electronic bits that were played. But, I said I wasn't going to say much about it so I'll bite my tongue now :)

"The theremin like thing in the doll was neat from an engineering perspective, though."

It was definitely cool! On the complete opposite end of the spectrum, at the end of my sappy, sentimental ballet routine (to the song "I hope you dance", in dedication to our old deceased teacher) we're all going to make a star formation (with the people in the back posed higher than those in the front). The house lights will drop, and we're going to each turn on our own light so that the star shows to the audience. The freaky doll light actually gave me some ideas on how to do that inside of some flowered wristlet thing, which is cool I guess! :)

Re: Optic Rose

[cris.livejournal.com]

See, I usually like disturbing where there's a point to it (or some creativity or work beyond 'look at me being spooky')

my (less charitable) impression was 'look at me listening to way too much Death in June!'

To quote Mr. Carvalho (whose readings I did like) -- "meh"