ThomStratton.com

I have a degree in music. Not that I’ve done much with it, mind you. I was going to be a music teacher, but eventually realized there was more to that career path than to love performing and listening to music. I can easily understand what led me into that path, but I’ve not yet figured out why it’s been so easy to walk away. All I know is that I would be a much better musician today than I was in college.

But that’s neither here nor there. As part of my degree program we studied a lot of different kinds of music. One style I found briefly interesting is Minimalism, described briefly in wikipedia thusly:

Prominent features of the technique include consonant harmony, steady pulse (if not immobile drones), stasis or gradual transformation, and often reiteration of musical phrases or smaller units such as figures, motifs, and cells. It may include features such as additive process and phase shifting which leads to what has been termed phase music.

Minimalism was just one of the varied musical approaches explored by the Avant Garde movement. My music theory teacher covered minimalism, and we even tried our hands at it. I wasn’t terribly impressed. It didn’t create music that moved me, which is largely what I listen to music for. With one exception. Steve Reich’s “Electric Counterpoint” includes a third movement that provides elements of pop music appeal enough to be listenable. Whether that was his intention or not, I don’t know.

But while it’s by no means my most favorite piece of music, I do find myself drifting back to it on occasion. The static, repetitive nature of the piece ultimately provides the mechanism by which it evokes an emotional response. For me the first such moment comes when the bass finally drops, to use the modern vernacular. The second is when, after what seems interminable sameness (there may be subtle changes beneath it all, but I can’t make it out), Reich changes the key and mixes up the patterns simultaneously for the minimalist version of a body punch.

As I said, it’s a fun piece to me. I don’t expect many to like it. And, sadly, it’s probably one of the few listenable examples of the style.

But unlike many Avant Garde experiments, Minimalism did hang on enough to make its way into popular culture. It’s subtle, and it’s not always recognizable, but it’s there. One such oasis of minimalistic ideals is movie music. It’s a good match, really, as music in movies is meant to provide a mood without drawing attention to itself. Minimalism does that.

It’s also found a home in modern “Electronica”, which often in itself tries to set a mood and create a hypnotic ambience. There’s even a fairly well-known modern piece based on motifs (and perhaps actual samples) from Electronic Counterpoint. And of course, there are old chestnuts like “Tubular Bells”.

Granted, most composers and DJs probably don’t consciously try to incorporate Minimalism into their work. They may not even be aware of it.  The invention of looping equipment is perhaps an example of music taking unconscious steps in that direction. But the cross-pollenization of musical styles is not always conscious. The results are the same regardless of the path.

Anyway, here are a few examples of Minimalism and its derivatives, in case your interested. I start, of course, with my personal favorite:

We then move on to the modern, conscious derivation by Röyksopp:

I believe Jean Michel Jarre consciously used elements of Minimalism in his music, such as his Oxygene album. This track, Part 2, was used in the movie “Gallipoli”. His later album, “Waiting for Cousteau” employs it heavily in at least one track.

https://youtu.be/6Q00HQwO2Sg

And let’s not forget the theme from The Exorcist:

https://youtu.be/04EShclPAa0

Incidentally, there’s a lot more to Mike Oldfield’s composition Tubular Bells than just this piece. Search on YouTube some time.

Anyway, there’s my quick, pedantic tour of Minimalism, foisted upon you all just because today happened to be the day I got my Electric Counterpoint urge. I promise something else tomorrow!

As many of you know, Babylon 5 is one of my all-time favorite television series. And within that series G’kar is one of my favorite characters. His transformation as a character is truly stunning. Here’s a scene that helps mark the beginning of his transition away from who he was at the start of the series.

I was struck by the following line: “Everything out there has only one purpose: to distract us from ourselves, from what is truly important.”

I don’t know if J. Michael Straczynksi realized how profound he was, but in light of my personal system of beliefs, it’s incredibly so. The biggest challenge we face in life is remembering who we are and why we are here. We are under constant attack aimed at making us doubt who we are and what we can become, making us forget what is most important.

We are so much more than the labels others would put on us. We are so much more than we even realize ourselves. Our potential is bounded only by ourselves, by what we allow others to impose, and by what distractions we entertain.

We can learn much from silence.

I’m curious about proper etiquette in a situation at work. There is a gentleman in another department who, apart from occasional encounters in the breakroom or mens room I’ve never met and do not know his name. This gentleman seems a rather pleasant, jovial fellow, as he is frequently heard whistling in the foyer and the bathroom. He is particularly fond of “If I Only Had a Brain” from The Wizard of Oz.

Here’s my conundrum: He whistles everything except the part that is actually performed by a whistle in the song. It practically cries out for that part to be added.

So here’s my question: Is it acceptable to insert oneself uninvited into someone else’s impromptu public performance? He’s quite good, and I absolutely itch to join in and at the very least insert the missing part. But I’m afraid this might be a social faux pas. What do you think?

— Would-Be Wasatch Whistler

There’s plenty out there to get depressed about (or stay depressed about). Instead I want to look for things to celebrate. For example:

– The son of a friend of mine has been released from the Army after having served his stint, including about a year in Afghanistan.

– My daughter got into Honors Choir at school, and just completed a rather good concert.

– The daughter of a friend of mine won a regional Japanese Speech contest.

– My older son becomes a deacon this next weekend.

– My mother recently turned 80.

– Our local pro baseball team’s stadium ranked 8th in the top 10 baseball parks in the USA, as determined by Better Homes and Gardens magazine. (It is a really nice stadium with a great view!)

What things are going on in your life worth celebrating? Drop me a comment, if you’d like!

Y’know, I’m getting a little tired of all the negative crud going on right now. I need some cuteness in my life. If you do too, watch on…

…to make a movie.

Recently I stumbled across a series of mini documentaries on the making of Star Wars Episodes I, II and III on youtube (search on “Star Wars webisode”). I shouldn’t have been surprised, because making movies has much in common with staging plays, but it really struck me just how many pieces have to go together to make a movie. Considering all the moving parts, it’s amazing that movies even get made, let alone are enjoyable to watch when they’re finished. And Star Wars movies add at least a dozen extra levels of complexity.

George Lucas took (and continues to take) a lot of criticism for the Star Wars prequels. I’ve certainly lent my voice to it. But after having watched a large number of these webisodes I’m more inclined to be quiet. I never felt they were as bad as some people do, but then this is the Age of the Perpetual Rage. I suspect J. J. Abrams is in for his share of rage on Episode VII, even if he knocks it out of the park.

I think what most people missed from the prequels is the fun. Though they certainly had their serious moments, the IV-VI installments were a lot of fun. And, largely from the limitations of the period, they were cleaner films. I do think Lucas overdid the look of the prequels. There was simply too much to take in in many scenes. As a result of the twenty year gap there is a very distinct difference in the feel of the two sets of movies which might have been considerably less had they been made closer together.

I believe Abrams is correct to go back to the more sparse feel for the next movies. Even in the trailers for VII I can see him giving in to the temptation to give you too much to look at. It’s easy to do.

But I digress. I don’t think the prequels were intended to be “more of the same”, frankly. They represented the descent into darkness, not the climb out. And you get a much different feel watching a film about the Titanic than you do about the Memphis Belle, partly because you know what’s going to happen to the Titanic going in, while you had every reason to believe the Memphis Belle was going to make it home…somehow. Likewise, we knew Luke, Han and the gang were going to somehow defeat Vader and the Emperor. Somehow. With the prequels we knew that everything was going to fall apart. Totally different arc, totally different feel.

The prequels are not “feel-good” movies.

And I think, ultimately, that’s where much of the criticism comes from. We wanted more Star Wars fun. We got Star Wars Downer. We wanted Han Solo’s banter. We got Jar-Jar Binks. Sorry, but while I enjoyed the job the actors did, not one of them has Harrison Ford’s charm and comic timing–nor his character to work with. I used to be more down on young Anakin. Then I had eight year old boys of my own, and I realize now that Lucas and Jake Lloyd came a lot closer than we give them credit for.

Ultimately I think Lucas’ main crime was allowing us all to age. Episodes I – III were received by my kids with the same wide-eyed enthusiasm as IV – VI were by me. But I aged in between, and I somehow thought Lucas would make a movie for the adult me. He didn’t. Phantom Menace, especially, was for the seven-year-old me, and I’d moved on. My kids got it, and in watching it with them, I finally got it.

Is Lucas a great director? No. I don’t think he thinks he is, either. He’s a great movie-maker, though. His vision of the Star Wars universe stands for all time. People want to play in his universe. Of all the criticism I’ve heard about the movies, I’ve never once heard that Episodes I – III didn’t “feel” like Star Wars. People complain about the acting, the dialogue, and the directing, but I’ve never heard anyone say “I thought Geonosis was a lousy setting” or “those space ships looked fake.”

Because ultimately, that’s where Lucas’ talent lies: picking the best people for the various jobs, and then keeping them all in line with the same vision. The webisodes bring that out repeatedly. His people do fantastic work, and he’s there constantly nudging and shaping. The depth and breadth of his vision is amazing. If I could world-build half as well as he does I’d be most of the way to being a successful author.

Lucas also takes a lot of heat for trying to milk more money out of Star Wars, that he didn’t have to make the prequels and only did it for money. That may be true–he is, after all, a Hollywood director/producer, and money means being able to finance his projects himself, which in turn means control over his work. Why wouldn’t he want more money? But considering that he waited twenty years to come back around to the “cash cow” seems a little less cynical to me than the mere five years between LotR:The Return of the King and beginning production on The Hobbit, and certainly less profit-driven than the decision to turn The Hobbit from two into three movies so that we could get the numerous bloated, over-the-top, laugh-(or yawn-) inducing action sequences we got.

Of the two directors who produced three movies, then went back and did three prequels, I know which one I’m the more disappointed with, and it’s not Lucas.

It’s also interesting that Lucas decided to hand off the Star Wars universe to someone else. One could say that was motivated by money, too, since he did walk away with a fair chunk o’ change, but I can see how he may actually have walked away from an even bigger check. The first of The Hobbit movies made nearly a billion dollars just at the box office, not even remotely including the merchandising. Lucas could have easily made more than $4 billion off more Star Wars had he wanted to.

Instead, we’re on countdown to see what J.J. Abrams can do. I’m reservedly optimistic. What we’ve seen so far looks very good. But what we saw of Phantom Menace did, too. The same with Abrams’ Star Trek reboot, which I didn’t like. They key in Abrams’ favor may be that this will not be a reboot, but an extension of what we already know. Yes, I know, it’s overriding much of the extended universe already out there. I can live with that. How much of all the Star Trek books and other extensions were ever acknowledged or leveraged, or were outright contradicted, by The Next Generation, Deep Space Nine, or Voyager?

I hope Abrams knocks it out of the park. I’d love to have some more fun in the Star Wars universe. But at the same time I’ve decided I’m going to stop complaining that Lucas gave us more of the universe to play in just because it didn’t feel quite right. There was a lot to love about the prequels. I’d much rather have them than not. The lightsaber fighting in Phantom Menace, for example, was worth the price of admission by itself.

I suppose it could be argued that if I have to see everything that went on behind the scenes in order to appreciate a movie there might have been something wrong with that movie. Perhaps. But learning how they make blood sausage, as interesting as that may be, won’t make me want to try blood sausage again. I think I mainly am impressed by just how much work went into making things not be noticed. Regardless of how you feel about the prequels, if you like Star Wars specifically or movie-making in general, the webisodes are interesting watching.

It’s Presidential Candidate Season again, evidently. Time to swear off Facebook for the next two years. Few are talking directly about candidates yet, but the political posts are increasing already. Tribal warfare is on the rise. Mass “otherings” are in the making. Single-issue voters are girding their loins for battle.

I’m not sure I can take another round of this. Can we make a mirror Facebook where all political posts are automatically forwarded so that those who care can go there to read them and leave the rest of us alone?

No?

Please, Zuck? I might even be willing to pay for that one.