....of music, reality, and manufacturing both
So, one of the things I really enjoy in life is music. according to my Last.fm profile, I listen to an average of 124 songs a day on my iPod or computer - considering I work a 9-hour day in the pharmacy, you get the idea of how high a priority I put on aural entertainment.
Anyway, my top three bands come from different genres of rock - Metallica covering thrash through to mainstream metal, Black Like Vengeance covering all of the "core" metal sub-genres and death metal, and last, but not least, is Paramore, who cover the pop-punk/rock angle.
Paramore is the reason for this blog, due to their recent split, and the nature of the reasons presented by the departing members, Josh and Zac Farro.
I understand the way all relationships ebb and flow, sometimes it's good, sometimes it's shit. You expect people to rub each other the wrong way, and eventually this can take a toll, with people leaving and all that.
What I don't understand is the way people hold on to shit that's festering - Josh's explanation for the departure from the band recalls events from the very founding of the band
You can read his explanation here
You can also see an video interview with the rest of the band here
So, on to why i would bother blogging about this, despite it being one of my favourite bands. What's the controversy - people fall apart all the time. It's a shame, but that's life.
The thing that has irked me about this since reading Josh's blog, are the many references back to the creation of the band, and his assertion that Paramore is nothing more than a manufactured band built around Hayley's ambitions.
I think Josh's real issue has been his ego (which is rightfully well-endowed - he's a great musician) being unable to deal with Hayley gaining a lot of the limelight.
He refers to the fact that Hayley is the only member of the band with a record contract; that he has been treated as a musician-for-hire, and that basically his band was hijacked to be a vehicle for Hayley.
I think Josh might need a dose of reality - he could start by watching some fantasy in the form of That Thing You Do!.
The music industry is an industry. Bands are commodities. Talent is what gets you access to the ground floor of that commodity, but marketability is the key to success in this industry. While the band members are all talented, Hayley is unique to a certain degree - certainly within the band, but also in the industry - she's a young woman (who started in the band at 14) with an exceptional singing voice. In addition, she has her own talent in writing some great lyrics.
If I was in a band where I was just another white-bread musician with skillz and talentz, and another member of the band had some exceptional factor about them that gained the band some notice for reasons other than the music, I'd not be getting all pissy about the situation.
Why? because being exception in a shit band gets no-one nowhere.
Paramore is a good band, and the Farro brothers made a contribution that cannot be overlooked. If the only thing worth noting about the band was the redhead chick singing the lyrics, they'd have gone no where after their first single.
I can't decide yet whether Josh has been a hypocrite in leaving the band then complaining about old issues - has he been reaping the benefits of Hayley's marketability and "suffering" in silence all these years? Is it really a matter of his religious beliefs overcoming his comfort levels when Hayley refers to "The Truth Never Set Me Free"?
It's a hard thing to decide, given the lack of communication, but I really have to come down on the side of hypocrisy. If he wasn't happy with Paramore gaining success thanks to them noticing the chick singing, why not leave after 1 album? why wait until 3 albums and a whole bunch of world tours? He may not be a millionaire, but he's gotten some bank from the last 6 years.
On to a further point - what makes a manufactured band? Josh suggested that Paramore is manufactured because the record company signed Hayley then kept her band members around to make it seem more authentic. Is this manufacturing a band? Why not just market Hayley as a singer that writes her own lyrics to catchy punk songs written by session musicians? It'd cost roughly the same, and could have arguably created a juggernaut if the fans liked what they heard. Hell, look at P!nk - this is probably the way she would have been presented to the world
Did the band have creative control? It would seem so - there's been no mention of interference in the writing process, other than the usual inter-band disagreements you'd expect.
Is the band "real" - well - they aren't milli vanilli, they aren't the Backstreet Boys. They met each other long before a record deal was offered.
Even if they were, why would it matter - if the music sounds great (which a lot of people agree on), then who cares who's pulling the strings.
Pull them harder I say.
So, one of the things I really enjoy in life is music. according to my Last.fm profile, I listen to an average of 124 songs a day on my iPod or computer - considering I work a 9-hour day in the pharmacy, you get the idea of how high a priority I put on aural entertainment.
Anyway, my top three bands come from different genres of rock - Metallica covering thrash through to mainstream metal, Black Like Vengeance covering all of the "core" metal sub-genres and death metal, and last, but not least, is Paramore, who cover the pop-punk/rock angle.
Paramore is the reason for this blog, due to their recent split, and the nature of the reasons presented by the departing members, Josh and Zac Farro.
I understand the way all relationships ebb and flow, sometimes it's good, sometimes it's shit. You expect people to rub each other the wrong way, and eventually this can take a toll, with people leaving and all that.
What I don't understand is the way people hold on to shit that's festering - Josh's explanation for the departure from the band recalls events from the very founding of the band
You can read his explanation here
You can also see an video interview with the rest of the band here
So, on to why i would bother blogging about this, despite it being one of my favourite bands. What's the controversy - people fall apart all the time. It's a shame, but that's life.
The thing that has irked me about this since reading Josh's blog, are the many references back to the creation of the band, and his assertion that Paramore is nothing more than a manufactured band built around Hayley's ambitions.
I think Josh's real issue has been his ego (which is rightfully well-endowed - he's a great musician) being unable to deal with Hayley gaining a lot of the limelight.
He refers to the fact that Hayley is the only member of the band with a record contract; that he has been treated as a musician-for-hire, and that basically his band was hijacked to be a vehicle for Hayley.
I think Josh might need a dose of reality - he could start by watching some fantasy in the form of That Thing You Do!.
The music industry is an industry. Bands are commodities. Talent is what gets you access to the ground floor of that commodity, but marketability is the key to success in this industry. While the band members are all talented, Hayley is unique to a certain degree - certainly within the band, but also in the industry - she's a young woman (who started in the band at 14) with an exceptional singing voice. In addition, she has her own talent in writing some great lyrics.
If I was in a band where I was just another white-bread musician with skillz and talentz, and another member of the band had some exceptional factor about them that gained the band some notice for reasons other than the music, I'd not be getting all pissy about the situation.
Why? because being exception in a shit band gets no-one nowhere.
Paramore is a good band, and the Farro brothers made a contribution that cannot be overlooked. If the only thing worth noting about the band was the redhead chick singing the lyrics, they'd have gone no where after their first single.
I can't decide yet whether Josh has been a hypocrite in leaving the band then complaining about old issues - has he been reaping the benefits of Hayley's marketability and "suffering" in silence all these years? Is it really a matter of his religious beliefs overcoming his comfort levels when Hayley refers to "The Truth Never Set Me Free"?
It's a hard thing to decide, given the lack of communication, but I really have to come down on the side of hypocrisy. If he wasn't happy with Paramore gaining success thanks to them noticing the chick singing, why not leave after 1 album? why wait until 3 albums and a whole bunch of world tours? He may not be a millionaire, but he's gotten some bank from the last 6 years.
On to a further point - what makes a manufactured band? Josh suggested that Paramore is manufactured because the record company signed Hayley then kept her band members around to make it seem more authentic. Is this manufacturing a band? Why not just market Hayley as a singer that writes her own lyrics to catchy punk songs written by session musicians? It'd cost roughly the same, and could have arguably created a juggernaut if the fans liked what they heard. Hell, look at P!nk - this is probably the way she would have been presented to the world
Did the band have creative control? It would seem so - there's been no mention of interference in the writing process, other than the usual inter-band disagreements you'd expect.
Is the band "real" - well - they aren't milli vanilli, they aren't the Backstreet Boys. They met each other long before a record deal was offered.
Even if they were, why would it matter - if the music sounds great (which a lot of people agree on), then who cares who's pulling the strings.
Pull them harder I say.