Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Topic: Interpretation of an Amarok section, Just what is the Caveman doing?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
Ugo Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 5495
Joined: April 2000
Posted: Aug. 29 2010, 19:11

As some of you in here have learned by now, I do know Amarok by heart. There is not a single fragment of it that I cannot place into its proper context. Yet, after all of my repeated listenings of that mighty work [I think I've played at least 500-600 times, if not more!] I still cannot figure out what the meaning of some sections is supposed to be... of course, if there is a meaning! :D As the whole piece is supported by a story, many passages of which are closely related to the music, I guess Mike O. had in mind some sort of significance for every single bit of music included in Amarok. Yet there are some which still sound mysterious to me. For example, what is happening during the Hoover/Scot section, starting from 41:21? Is the bash-bash-bash-bash-bash-bash-bash at 42:08 justified by anything, or does it mean anything?

Another section which I have never been really able to understand, from a musical and developmental point of view, is towards the end of Mandolin Reprise 1, 2, 3. What is the Caveman (in his first appearance here in Amarok, long before Africa 1) supposed to be doing from 37:47 to 37:55? A fascinating reply, which someone (Korgscrew?) gave to me a long time ago on the IRC #mike_oldfield channel, was more or less as follows: "the machine which produces the music has broken down, and the Caveman is fixing it. At 38:39, you can hear that he succeeded." Well, this explanation may sound good. But, according to the story, the music is not produced by a machine. It is produced by a giant antropomorphic statue. So, is the Caveman actually repairing some sort of mechanism inside the statue, which allows it (he?) to produce music? What do you think?

Replies and comments are welcome and much appreciated. :)


--------------
Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian
Back to top
Profile PM 
nightspore Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 4770
Joined: Mar. 2008
Posted: Aug. 29 2010, 19:51

I'm not convinced Amarok is as intellectual as you seem to be saying, Ugo. The whole album has a devil-may-care, to-hell-with-rules feel; I get the impression Mr O sometimes just threw something in because he felt like it.
Back to top
Profile PM 
Milamber Offline




Group: Musicians
Posts: 2275
Joined: Feb. 2010
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 01:25

Quote (nightspore @ Aug. 30 2010, 09:51)
I get the impression Mr O sometimes just threw something in because he felt like it.

That sounds more like MFTB than Amarok.
Besides Nightspore is anyone that lucky it cant be an accident the hole thing works imo.

Ugo i always thought the bashing bit was frustration maybe at Branson or the label or life with the release coming next with the
lighter section followed by a short bit of silence with a haha thrown in (tongue in cheek perhaps) .

Still with Amarok people who do not like it are still quite happy to debate its merits or lack of.

Also personal taste defines what people like its not a case of getting it or not but im glad I do
:D
Back to top
Profile PM 
wiga Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 2113
Joined: Sep. 2008
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 05:44

Quote (Ugo @ Aug. 29 2010, 19:11)
What do you think?

I think you're reading too much into it. I don't think MO was that bothered really. He was on a spontaneous roll.


--------------
Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon.
Back to top
Profile PM 
nightspore Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 4770
Joined: Mar. 2008
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 07:23

Yes. For example, it's hard to see the sound of the cat's meow at the beginning fitting into any musical argument. It's just a bit of fun.
Back to top
Profile PM 
Sir Mustapha Offline




Group: Musicians
Posts: 2802
Joined: April 2003
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 11:45

Quote (milamber @ Aug. 30 2010, 01:25)
That sounds more like MFTB than Amarok.
Besides Nightspore is anyone that lucky it cant be an accident the hole thing works imo.

It's not a matter of being "accidental", but of being spontaneous and not stuck to a rigid structure or "meaning". I think Mike generally works better without restrictions, and Amarok is the ultimate culmination of that.

--------------
Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds.
Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
Ugo Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 5495
Joined: April 2000
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 18:02

We,, of course I may be reading too much into it - this is what you may expect from an Amarok addict. :) But I always felt that there are very strong relations between the music and the story (which, IIRC, was written after the music), so I think that there is very little in Amarok which was done just for the hell of it, as Nightspore says, or as pure fun. Even the Mandolin bit, which sounds just like pure fun the first time it comes around, gets meticulously de-constructed (and re-constructed) in the section I mentioned above, so it's clear that the actual music, some of which was born out of pure fun, is really treated very seriously by Mike all the way through Amarok. Maybe the only thing that's done for fun and nothing else in the whole work is the "'appy?" sample - as someone said in another thread, samplers were a new toy at the time and Mike just had some fun with it. But I think all the rest is absolutely not haphazard - it's cleverly constructed to look like chaos. And it's not true, I think, that there are no rules and there is no structure within Amarok - the very fact that some sections are repeated (and some of them aren't simply repeated, but they're repeated with variations!) to me is an indication that Mike had a clear construction of the whole thing in his mind from the outset, and he built it like a jigsaw puzzle, i.e. one piece here, one piece there, and at the end you get a full picture including various pieces that look similar to one another, yet they are different, and like in a real jigsaw puzzle every piece fits exactly where it is supposed to fit, and it can't fit anywhere else. Also, Amarok is not intellectual - I didn't say it is. But I don't think you can argue that there is total absence of construction and structure and planning and thinking in it, because all of those things are definitely there. As Shakespeare would have said, there is method in that madness. :)

@ Milamber: it's not the bashing itself that I find enigmatic, but the fact that it comes a very spooky atonal section. It sounds like the protagonist (whoever it is) is trapped somewhere and he can't find a way out, so he bashes his way out and he finally manages to escape that realm of atonality into the very tuneful "Boat" section. At least this is the way I interpret that bit. By the way, I received 5 replies and no one attempted to reply to my original question. Am I the only one, in the whole board, who cares? :D

@ nightspore: that's not supposed to be a cat's meow. That's supposed to be a starting signal, something like "let's get ready, now go!". Even if it's a descending tone (some have hypotized it's the guitar tuner) I have always perceived it that way.

@ wiga: if Mike was actually on a roll, as you say, he wouldn't have included within Amarok some pieces of music he originally recorded back in 1968, during the Sallyangie sessions, and which are reproduced almost verbatim. When you are on a roll, maybe you can remember a tune you wrote yesterday, but you definitely don't stop to think about a piece of music you composed and recorded 22 years ago, and, mostly, you don't take the trouble to re-play it almost exactly as you played it 22 years ago. Doing this is something that, at least IMHO, has to be planned. You cannot do it spontaneously.


--------------
Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian
Back to top
Profile PM 
Milamber Offline




Group: Musicians
Posts: 2275
Joined: Feb. 2010
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 18:46

Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Aug. 31 2010, 01:45)
Quote (milamber @ Aug. 30 2010, 01:25)
That sounds more like MFTB than Amarok.
Besides Nightspore is anyone that lucky it cant be an accident the hole thing works imo.

It's not a matter of being "accidental", but of being spontaneous and not stuck to a rigid structure or "meaning". I think Mike generally works better without restrictions, and Amarok is the ultimate culmination of that.

I agree Sir M, accident was probably not the right word to use there, spontaneous describes it better  .
Is it possible to have constructed planned spontaneity?

I do agree the Album has a "to hell with the rule feel" but not a devil may care one, the warning indicates to me Mike knew ahead of time how it would be received.

(Happy B'Day btw) .

Ugo I need some time to muse over your question Im off on a longish drive today will take said album with me .
Back to top
Profile PM 
Sir Mustapha Offline




Group: Musicians
Posts: 2802
Joined: April 2003
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 20:02

Quote (milamber @ Aug. 30 2010, 18:46)
Is it possible to have constructed planned spontaneity?

Spontaneity is always a complicated topic when it comes to making music in a recording studio. One could argue that there can't be any spontaneity whatsoever in such an environment, because recording music is an incredibly meticulous and painstaking process -- so everything is constructed and planned, even that incredibly soulful and inspired solo or vocal performance.

It is the creative drive, though, the "engine running", the motivation to create and write music that gives the spontaneity, though. Turning abstract ideas into finished compositions can be an absolutely formulaic and mechanic process (not necessarily producing bad music, though -- erudite composers usually worked with very strict formulae and rules), but it can be spontaneous and free. That, to me, is Amarok -- as well as Tubular Bells, Music from the Balcony and so on.

Didn't Mike explain his modus operandi for crafting music such as Amarok? He'd write down his ideas on strips of paper, then pull them out during sessions, record them and then think of ways of linking them together. Amarok is exactly that, but the stitching is so tight and creative that it's sometimes very hard to pull the pieces apart from the glue. Thing is, just because there is planning and construction doesn't mean the whole thing was calculated from the ground up, down to the microsecond; and seeing it that way may be the result of being so familiar with it: it's like watching static on the TV and then seeing geometric shapes in it -- pareidolia, as they'd call it. Even though Amarok is not random noise, the same principle works.

But it's all speculation: whether the whole album was carefully put together or not is something only Mike himself knows exactly. My conjecture, however, is that the album works as a patchwork: a delicate mix between control and chance. That's the beauty of it.


--------------
Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds.
Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com
Back to top
Profile PM WEB 
nightspore Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 4770
Joined: Mar. 2008
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 21:14

Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Aug. 30 2010, 11:45)
It's not a matter of being "accidental", but of being spontaneous and not stuck to a rigid structure or "meaning". I think Mike generally works better without restrictions, and Amarok is the ultimate culmination of that.

Yes, that's one of the reasons MotS doesn't work for me: he sounds too constrained by the rules of "classical" composition.
Back to top
Profile PM 
nightspore Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 4770
Joined: Mar. 2008
Posted: Aug. 30 2010, 21:22

Quote (Ugo @ Aug. 30 2010, 18:02)
to me is an indication that Mike had a clear construction of the whole thing in his mind from the outset, and he built it like a jigsaw puzzle, i.e. one piece here, one piece there, and at the end you get a full picture

I agree that that is the effect, but I doubt it was a completely conscious, intellectual process for him. By this stage of his career he had sufficient experience simply to write like that without thinking about it. I of course don't pretend to have the same talent as Mr O, andI work in a completely different field of the arts, but when I write now a lot of the structural details that previously I'd have had to concentrate on are now second nature.
Back to top
Profile PM 
wiga Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 2113
Joined: Sep. 2008
Posted: Aug. 31 2010, 04:01

Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Aug. 30 2010, 20:02)
It is the creative drive, though, the "engine running", the motivation to create and write music that gives the spontaneity, though. Turning abstract ideas into finished compositions can be an absolutely formulaic and mechanic process (not necessarily producing bad music, though -- erudite composers usually worked with very strict formulae and rules), but it can be spontaneous and free. That, to me, is Amarok

Get your Motor Running....Head out on the highway, looking for adventure, and whatever comes our way...is Amarok.

(Happy Birthday too)  ;)


--------------
Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon.
Back to top
Profile PM 
camarok Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: Jan. 2009
Posted: Aug. 31 2010, 04:52

Hi all.
Has anyone considered that we (the listener) are the statue.


--------------
What is understood.
Need not be discussed.
Back to top
Profile PM 
Ugo Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 5495
Joined: April 2000
Posted: Aug. 31 2010, 09:11

Quote (camarok @ Aug. 31 2010, 10:52)
Has anyone considered that we (the listener) are the statue.

I disagree completely. According to my own interpretation of the story, the statue represents both music in general and, more specifically, the music on the album Amarok, and maybe even the album itself. There are lots of reasons for me to view it like this, and if you wish, I'll list them here, even if I already listed them somewhere else. ;)

@ Wiga: that is a perfect summation of the journey that the two men in the story (who, to me, are Mike and William Murray) undertake to find the statue.

@ Milamber: Amarok (the piece of music rather than the album) does have some rules. They're not clearly visible, OK, but they're there. The clearest of those rules is the fact that it has at least 3 or 4 musical themes running all the way through it. Having a theme, just one, is by itself a rule, i.e. "play a piece of music once, then repeat it, then repeat it with some changes" - that's a rule. :) Another one is to have the most powerful climax at the very end of the work. If Mike wanted to have a "to-hell-with-rules" feel on Amarok, he wouldn't have respected what is one of the most common rules of musical composition, e.g. by having the most powerful climax halfway through the work (say, at 35 minutes) and not at the end.


--------------
Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian
Back to top
Profile PM 
nightspore Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 4770
Joined: Mar. 2008
Posted: Aug. 31 2010, 11:00

Quote (Ugo @ Aug. 31 2010, 09:11)
If Mike wanted to have a "to-hell-with-rules" feel on Amarok, he wouldn't have respected what is one of the most common rules of musical composition, e.g. by having the most powerful climax halfway through the work (say, at 35 minutes) and not at the end.

To me, the most powerful climax is the tubular bells section around the 50 minute mark; everything after that is an anticlimax. And the Thatcher section underlines, to the point of tearing holes in the paper, that parts of Amarok are there just for the hell of it.

To be fair, I think Beethoven's ninth ends on an anti-climax, too; it should have ended with the melody everyone knows and loves, dammit!
Back to top
Profile PM 
Milamber Offline




Group: Musicians
Posts: 2275
Joined: Feb. 2010
Posted: Sep. 01 2010, 03:30

Ugo due to how passionate we are about this album I should have been more clear.

I was speaking " to hell with the rules" from Virgins point of view didn't they already want a TBII or something they could market easier.
And Mike went against this by creating a piece of music they could not cut a single from ,even staying away from the established formula of a side 1 long play and side 2 group of more conventional songs.

I don't know if thats what NS meant as well maybe he will tell us? ;)
Back to top
Profile PM 
nightspore Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 4770
Joined: Mar. 2008
Posted: Sep. 01 2010, 07:06

Quote (milamber @ Sep. 01 2010, 03:30)
I don't know if thats what NS meant as well maybe he will tell us? ;)

I meant in a broader sense. It would be easier if we were talking about structured classical music, where a person who said "to hell with rules" might suddenly jettison sonata form, or lapse into atonality, or whatever. But popular music by definition is basically free-form anyway. So what I meant really is that Mike said "to hell with rules" such as are implied by the style of his earlier works. The introduction of passages of pure noise into Amarok counts as "to hell with rules" in this sense. The noises are even more "pointless" than in "Music from the Balcony",where the jungle noises fit in perfectly with the theme of the piece. I'm not saying that they're not fun or enjoyable - I think they are - but they don't form part of any musical argument. The Thatcher passage could easily have been replaced with a parody of someone else without affecting the feel of the piece.
Back to top
Profile PM 
wiga Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 2113
Joined: Sep. 2008
Posted: Sep. 01 2010, 07:34

Quote (Ugo @ Aug. 30 2010, 18:02)
so it's clear that the actual music, some of which was born out of pure fun, is really treated very seriously by Mike all the way through Amarok.

With Amarok Mike reminds me of 'Columbo.'  There's like a second order irony at work - a matter of not taking quite so seriously the inevitable seriousness with which they go about their business. As in life, this approach gets the best results.


--------------
Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon.
Back to top
Profile PM 
Milamber Offline




Group: Musicians
Posts: 2275
Joined: Feb. 2010
Posted: Sep. 01 2010, 07:40

Quote (wiga @ Sep. 01 2010, 21:34)
With Amarok Mike reminds me of 'Columbo.'

Get the Faulk outa here :laugh:  :laugh:

Sorry Wiga couldn't resist that one :D
Back to top
Profile PM 
wiga Offline




Group: Members
Posts: 2113
Joined: Sep. 2008
Posted: Sep. 01 2010, 08:21

:cool: That's him - my hero !!

--------------
Barn's burnt down - now I can see the moon.
Back to top
Profile PM 
58 replies since Aug. 29 2010, 19:11 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >






Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact

Mike Oldfield Tubular.net
Mike Oldfield Tubular.net