Jeremy wrote:

] I think there is a message in here about the evolution of our
] interaction with media. Popular music is a dominant cultural
] currency, but in an age in which spending an hour just
] listening to an entire album (without simultaneously running,
] driving, eating, playing, or otherwise) seems like an
] exceptional commitment, the individual "track" has become the
] denomination of choice. When an outstanding five minute song
] needs a sub-four minute "radio edit" in order to even compete
] for airtime, we are collectively suffering from a serious case
] of attention deficit disorder, coupled with a "super size!"
] programmer mentality that selects two mediocre-but-short
] tracks over one great-but-"long" track.
]
] Music used to be an event, not a product. For the iPod
] generation, music as Art is being increasingly devalued, even
] as it becomes pervasive to the point of ubiquity.

LOL! Oh you sooo hit the spot my friend! This is a SERIOUS issue, the commoditization of art. And even for people who are very art friendly and supportive, it's an issue. You cannot unplug yourself completely from the world around you. As little as I watch teevee (I TiVo everything except hockey games), and I listen to no radio except Vanderbilt's college station or NPR - but I was bowled over a few weeks ago when I listen to an entire album all the way through, non-stop, in a darkened room, by myself.

Not only was the experience deeply spiritual by its content and context, but I realized at the end that just the method of this experience was something that was foreign and almost anachronistic. I felt like I had just sailed an ocean or made my own tools or something. It was incredible.

But that leads us to the world at large, which is probably not even in a position to understand the huge change that has occured. It's so easy to produce 'art' now that it's diluted its value, almost to irrelevancy. This goes part and parcel with several other trends that I've noticed over the last few years, but it's basically the over commoditization of everything.

There is nothing rare these days. Nothing shocking. Nothing provocative. Any time something happens, or someone creates something, everyone knows. Instantly. Whenever something is even moderatly innovative, it's copied and branched so fast and so deeply as to render the original explorations moot. And this constant loud hum is what has caused everyone to not notice when something truly provocative does happen. Because it sounds/looks/tastes just like everything else that is happening.

In some ways this is great, because as a person who appreciates art and creativity, it allows me the greatest amount of choice and exposure for very little investment (of both time and money). But it never really sinks in as an effect of injesting it. Sure, I'm hearing new and interesting things all the time. Some of which stick in my head. But I'm never really given the time for it to transform my consciousness or impact me in a meaningful way, because I'm onto something else too quickly.

Which brings me to an ultimate conclusion: what if you really can have anything you want, anytime, anywhere? What if you really could have every song, movie, book, performance - instantly at your fingertips, all the time? Would that be better or worse than not having that capability? For my entire life, I have wished for this ability, but when I really think about it - sometimes it was the lack of exposure; the lack of acessability - that made something truly valuable. Sometimes it was having to imagine(!) what something would've sounded/looked/felt like that helped me to create things for myself. Maybe that's better?

RE: Social discrimination by iTunes playlist | Wired News