Wednesday, May 21, 2008

who cares how ignorant bliss is?

The title is a line from "How Little It Matters, How Little We Know" (Words & Music by Carolyn Leigh & Phillip Springer; Recorded by Frank Sinatra in 1956). The song talks about chemistry - the lab coat and bubbling liquids kind - right alongside romance. People didn't seem to think that was odd. Most people know the song "Swinging on a Star" (Words & Music by Jimmy Van Heusen; recorded by Bing Crosby in 1944, but I like Tony Bennet's version best). The song admonishes that if you don't like to go to school you may grow up to be a mule, apparently a rebuke to a whining child at the Crosby dinner table - which of course has it's own oddities to imagine now. Swinging on a Star also talks about bringing back moonbeams in a jar, a reference to the space program and the possibility of being an astronaut if you live right and make good choices. These songs, and many from this generation of songwriters and "crooners" were considered very challenging to societal norms for presenting their ideas in such a casual way. That little element of romance and that suave attitude of being upward moving in society were enough to make them seem slightly irksome to many. But they were not telling people to screw their friends, go for the bucks any way they could or live for today and nothing else.

Am I not in touch with new music enough to find more mindful thoughts in today's music? I hear way too much of the Disney output thanks to having an adolescent daughter. There is surely no good advice being doled out there. It's harmless in part, irreverent in the bad, directionless way for some parts and generally mindless for the vast part. I know pop music isn't talking about living a good life and thinking about your future mindfully. I still listen to a lot of the music of my college days. There is some intelligence in it to be sure. But it all seems soured, cynical. Any talk about the future is negative and there is no room for advice other than "get yours". That sounded more genuine at some point. But now it seems like a cop out. There are problems. There always will be. Shouldn't some portion of art discuss how to get on with life, how to live as best as one may?

Music, literature and poetry in the West has always been an odd thing. Chaucer and Shakespeare wrote to the common people of their times. Chaucer was practically a comic book writer. But they always told well rounded stories and had things to say about all aspects of life. Of course, we only know they existed because their work happened to survive. Were the "indy" playwrights, authors and musicians with this same cutting edge we'll never know? Without knowing, can we say that its more cynical now than it was before? It seems at least the most popular and enduring tales were at least well rounded. Future generations will have to puzzle over us. It seems that everything from our time and many years before will all endure. Everything has been recorded, cataloged, indexed and stored for what will be tantamount to forever compared to things prior to 1950 or so.

Of course, it's hard to ignore the role of religion in art through the ages. If all I wanted to find was some kind of advice in art, then the Christian industry in the US today could provide that by the bucketful. It was just the other day, right here in NJ not even an hour from my house, that I saw a car with so many Christian rock bumper stickers that it barely showed the brake lights. And walking from the PATH train yesterday I saw three different Christian books being advertised in the heart of midtown. And one need only visit the Met or listen to Bach to see how much religion has been in the mind of the artist since the start of recorded history in the West. But I'm looking for something else. I'm not seeking preaching. Shakespeare advising other people of his day is more on the mark. One person to another with no presumption of divine force.

What is the function of art? Does that question even make sense? If art serves nothing, then is it worthwhile? Or is art like so much else and simply needs balance to be in harmony with the world? Should there always be room for Frank Sinatra and Kurt Colbain? Has the passing of shared mores resulted in the passing of art treading on that ground as well? If it's all relative, does that mean artists can't grasp on well enough to depict any of it? I'm left feeling like it's just me - but I don't have evidence for that either. Does this amount to yelling at the wind saying "it was better in my day!" But it didn't really seem better in my day. I had more bliss, but I didn't realize what was making me happy. Youth is an elixir, to be sure. And since it's colorless, tasteless and odorless one doesn't even realize how quickly and deeply it's being drunk. It makes the cynicism seem wise and the mundane seem cool. It may also make the mindful seem boring or long-winded. C'est la art? Maybe I should ask a poet to re-write this.

No comments: