Monday
Rather a glum morning. Greek was interminable for a second time. I was determined to behave this year, which is why I've spent the summer brushing up on my Greek already. Alas, we're now crawling through a bad textbook at the speed of a striking Myrka. This is the problem with doing the work pre-lecture - you've probably already covered everything in the lecture itself. At least skipping homework keeps you on your toes in class!
So sitting there for an hour made me rather stressed and fractious, and I came out to discover I'd failed to get into either of the two music groups I'd auditioned for. I'm not exactly disappointed, because that would imply I expected to get into either. I'm obviously not one of the top 15 singers in the university, nor the best jazz pianist. Instead, I might define myself as irritated. Nothing should be a competition, really - music especially not. Passing an exam means nothing more than you know how to pass an exam - it's a talent like everything else. I've never taken a music audition in my life, precicely because I don't believe in them. I wish I was Tim Roth. He refuses to do auditions because he is bad at them, and QT only talked him into doing a read through for Reservoir Dogs after the pair had spent the entire day in the pub and had gone home with a crate. Unfortunatly, he's Tim Roth and he knows people will cast him anyway on the grounds of his previous work. Can I play? Sort of. But I bring with me no better qualifications than I enjoy performing as part as a group. Don't let them tell you at uni you can try something new - I've been a choirgirl all my life and have been rejected from a rock-pop club because I can stay in tune, but can't sing (there is a distinction. Calypso can sing but not stay in tune). I presume the Jazz band didn't want me because I'm incompetant at playing under pressure, in front of other people and in time. Which is triply frustrating, as all these things are things that must be practiced. I can't learn to be a great performer unless I'm given a chance to perform. In short, all the reasons I wanted to try something new are the same reasons I can't.
Maybe bitter would be the best way of describing it, because I can never bring anything more concrete than my passion to music when compared to anyone who truly knows what they're doing. It is one area where my lack of ambition is going to always trip me up. Take it this way: I'm better at origami than most people you know, but compared to origami masters I have a long long way to go. Yet I'm content where I am and have no desire to be much better. I only desire to be good as far as it gives me enjoyment to do so. And the same goes for Latin, and film studies
and for music too. When it ceases to be fun, it ceases to have any point. Grades, names and standards in the eyes of the world mean nothing. Unfortunately, music is an area which seems to be competitive even in the amateur world. Which is a shame, because all I really want is a group of people to play music with - even a bunch of incompetants would do me fine. Kings does have one free-for-all choir, but it clashes with the film department's Film Noir series on a Monday evening, leaving me with an unpleasant choice, and this beyond anything else has made me irritable. I don't want to give up either one of those for the other.
Which brings us back to Tim Roth, and his movie Legend of 1900. It's like porn for pianists - a paper thin plot which exists only to string together extended scenes of thrilling keyboard antics. Friend 4 suggested I watch it pre-audition as inspiration - which turned out to be pretty good advice, although probably not how she meant it. I'm fairly sure the idea was I'd go and play that piano so hard the strings would get red hot enough to light a cigarette from. Not, in fact, what happened. But what would 1900 say? "Fuck jazz". Damn straight.
So I'm gonna start my own band, featuring everyone who wants to join, and we will make noise.
I've also watched my first Charlie Chaplin - Modern Times. My overall reaction is a bit of "meh". In terms of the physical stunts, Chaplin is obviously a marvellous comedian, but I didn't find myself laughing out loud more than once or twice. Still, I liked the iconic moment he is dragged into the belly of the machine, and I keep thinking of the shot of the sheep which opens the film every time I go onto the tube. I'm also intrigued by the use of sound - because but for a few moments, this is still a silent movie. Was that a stylistic choice by the silent comedian, or was the film in production as sound was invented and they thought they better add some token bits to pull audiences in. Certainly you can tell this could only have been the early years of sound. In particular, the scene where the new invention is presented to the Boss not by the salesmen, but by a record player they have brought with them. This indicates to me that they were not yet confident in matching sound and picture, so this was the easiest way to do a sustained dialogue scene. But do correct me, that's only a theory. I think it's another case of the thing that started the Thing being superseded by the things that copied it. Modern comedies owe a lot to Chaplin's pratfalls, but they also do visual gags, wordplay, jokes crude and clever e.t.c.
Last night we did a double bill, starting with Tideland. I love that film. It's still disturbing on a second watch, but also still beautiful and marvellous - and I like it enough for it to get on my Official Favourite Films list. Which is nice, because I'm getting increasingly apprehensive for Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus. I should probably have more faith in my favourite directors. Film two was But I'm a Cheerleader, a mildly subversive teen flick about a girl sent to a de-Gay camp because her parents think she is a lesbian. Of course, this is the worst thing they could possibly do (think the sex addicts class in Blades of Glory), and the huge comedic possibilities in the situation are happily exploited. Our heroes were dressed in blue or pink, and made to chop wood or hoover carpets to persuade them back to "normality". There was something very queasy in the design and style, though the underlying plot is nothing you won't recognise. It was slightly spoilt for me by the knowledge that they actually do this to people - it seemed quite trivialised - and my overall reaction was to become quite depressed. I do tend to have problems with parody, however - like Galaxy Quest's Thermians, I tend to take most films at face value. I got genuinely worried for the characters during Carry On up the Khyber too. I know that's not the point, but I can't help but care. Also, very puzzled by presence of Julie Delpy as a random extra in a club. The film was made in 1999. Was this before she got famous, or was this a deliberate favour for a friend or something?
PS - I'm listening to Space One, as recommended by Tydar, Prince of Cats at the Geek Soc Quiz. It is marvellous! A concept album of sci fi franchises, as explained by lowest denominator operatic space prog. One in particular is really exciting, and one I know I will be screaming the lyrics of when I'm actually allowed to know what they are, instead of blocking them out with Plato and Xenophon. Damn spoilers. Damn, damn spoilers.
So, today's quiz - look up the lyrics on this website
And try and work out what they all are. I definitely know 5 (Master of Darkness, Eye of Ra, Perfect Survivor, Intergalactic Space Crusaders and Starchild), and could have a very good guess at Sandrider and Songs of the Ocean. Not sure about Set Your Controls or High Moon. High Moon in particular is bothering me, because it is so detailed and I know it'd be obvious if I did know. So in the comments, tell me which you have guessed but only tell me what the song titles are. I'm still enjoying mulling on the identity of the ones I haven't got. If you need a clue, look at the wallpapers in the downloads section - although frustratingly, only the ones I know seem obvious. So, beat my total of 7/9. For bonus points, work out Spaced Out and Inseperable Enemies from the bonus disk, neither of which I recognise.
Comments (0)