25.2.08

The End

Something Jackie said today made me think back to when I read 1984. The main charecter in that book, near the end, was given a choice. He could do what he felt was right or he could escape the torture and live a relatively happy life. Of course my first reaction was to do the right thing. The moral high ground. But if your miserable then what use is it? For example, you always hear of the cases of the starving musician who abandons his art for comercial pop in order to pay his bills. He gets called a sell out and a traitor. But what use is good music if no one is going to hear it? And though he feels horrible about it at least theres food on his table, right? But then again, does that really make him happy? I don't know.

It hurts to set you free
But you'll never follow me

2 comments:

Adrian said...

Music is only what you make it to be, and if you have to make it a material experience, then you suck.

You have two choices: to buy albums (the high moral ground / true experience, or in comparison, being a starving musician) or pirating albums (feeling bad but getting the music).

However, in the story you speak of, the character would be living in the misery to save others. So its different.

My ideas aren't thought out. Like at all :

Adrian said...

The two halves of your post are irrelevant.

The first questions whether it is better to do what you believe in, or to do what will make you happy.

The second half (the starving musician half) is questioning whether it is better to do what you believe in, and feel miserable, or do what you don't believe in, but be able to survive, but still feel miserable in a different way.

Also, you said that good musicians make music for themselves, so the use of good music is only meant for himself. This voids the portion that says "what use is good music if no one is going to hear it?"