2017-2018 Programs by Discipline | Page 75 | Golden Skate

2017-2018 Programs by Discipline

Do you guys think that in Brazil when people decide to go samba dancing, they dance to Rolling Stones music?, and when people want to go salsa or bachata, they dance with Ed Sheeran's music?
Most Brazilians probably would be shaking their heads at the kind "samba" ice dancers are doing anyway... Even to my non-expert non-Brazilian eyes, the hip & upper body action exhibited by samba-dancing Brazilians vs. ice dancers trying to get level 4 on their not touching step sequence or their "rhumba" pattern... it's just two different worlds. Two very different mediums.

In other words, one could argue that somewhat whitewashed music choices fit "latin" ice dances actually better than more "authentic" latin pieces, because latin dances on ice don't have much "authentic" latin feel anyway (and therefore don't do justice to "authentic" latin music). To quote Papadakis:

Gabriella: I’m not a big fan of Latin for skating. I love Latin dances, I love watching Latin dances, on the floor. But on the ice… I think it’s such a different dynamic in the body that cannot really be translated on the ice, so it’s always gonna look kind of… cheap…
But different strokes for different folks.
 
OMG some of you are never happy. Most of the time the complaints are that the skaters are using a warhorse or the same 3 latin pieces and why oh why nothing new and creative?!? What's wrong with these choreographers (blah.blah blah). And now that some are using non-traditional creative program music, that's not good enough either. Stop trying to literally pick pieces apart and just let it be. Watch the dance and enjoy it (or not). I'm fairly sure V/M didn't say hey this song is possibly about devil worship..ooh let's skate that. :sarcasm:

I mean, yes it's good to interpret music more accurately by looking into it, but jeez! :palmf:

ETA: I for one am glad that some aren't adding onto the use of the same 4 Perez Prada pieces that will be beat like a dead horse this season. :slink:
Can we please get back on topic with music announcements now?!
 
I a little still can't believe we're arguing about this. But as an example from the nineteenth century: when the poet John Keats (a member of the Church of England as far as I can know) wrote odes "to Demeter" and "to Psyche" he was invoking pagan goddesses from the Greco-Roman pantheon. I'm pretty sure he wasn't literally worshipping them. No one would say these were "pagan" texts just because they adopted the point of view of an acolyte of a long-dead religion. He did have one reviewer from some London newspaper who described his 1815 Odes as "a pretty piece of paganism," but that dude has lived on in history as deeply, truly, not getting the point. I'm not comparing the Stones to Keats (as much as I love the Stones I don't think they deserve that much credit). But I am comparing the fallacy of unnecessary literalism in one case to the other.
 
People can write their theories of x,y and z, about the song being ironic, and it being about this that and the other, but none of this is textually supported. Beyond which, the reading of a sixties work as being of the level of a postmodern meme, isn't an interpretation of that time: people didn't do peace and love and be hippies ironically

There was plenty of postmodern/ironic art in the 1960s. The term was first used in the 1940s but really started to flourish in the 60s.

One example would be Andy Warhol, who designed some of the Rolling Stones' album covers. If you're going to make your case by association with artists you consider satanic, then associations with artists considered ironic should also be taken into account.
 
And if you actually breakdown the text of Sympathy for the Devil, you have the devil boasting of his deeds, while people woo-hoo in the background, all the while telling the audience that they know his name. And that is all that is there is. Any other interpretation is not textually based. And the actual structure of the piece is invocatory:the devil is telling us, as his audience, that we know his name: that we have him within us (and this is song written a time when people's heads were fried in acid, so the susceptibility of the audience was at its greatest). And that is why Don Mclean as a contemporary saw the Altamont Free Festival as having become a satanic rite, because of the way that song is written, and the reaction and actions of those attendant. People can draw comparisons between this song and proto-novels such as Paradise Lost, which are third person works of great structure, and obviously based in a Christian tradition, but Sympathy for the Devil isn't written in the third person, and doesn't have within it any form of Christianising structure. There are lots of works that have the devil depicted within them, and I am not in anyway arguing that the depiction of the devil makes a work Satanic. For example, Hotel California mentions the beast and describes what sounds like Satanic Ritual, and has been interpreted as being a depiction of the Church of Satan run by Lavey. Which is all fine, but the work is differently written, and you cannot argue that there is an invocatory aspect, or that it is a piece of Satanic Literature. Santana (who Virtue and Moir are also dancing too) claims that his music is given to him by an archangel Metatron, which some fundamentalists name as a daemon. But again, there is nothing in his work that i have heard, in terms of lyrical or musical form that means that I would label that Satanic. And as really these three co-contemporary works or artists that Virtue and Moir have chosen to skate to illustrate, there was a hell (pun) of a lot of this sort of thing going on in a completely non-ironic way at the time that Sympathy for Devil was written. And if I were to cite a more classical Literary reference (and a better one that Paradise Lost for a counter argument), I would cite William Blake's Marriage of Heaven and Hell, which places value on satanic energy but does so in way that is within a structure for good: William Blake also made the famous quote about Milton really being of the devil's party.

First of all, just because Don McClean interpreted the Stones song as satanic doesn't mean that the Stones meant it to be that way. As humans,we all interpret things in our own way which may or may not be the way it was intended by the artist. So, siting someone else's interpretation as evidence doesn't add any weight to your argument at all. BTW, I've met Don McClean and you are definitely giving him too much credit.

Second, yes the song is listing off the deeds of the devil. But it is listing off things like the assassinations of the Kennedys which the majority of people felt were tragic and horrible. That isn't exactly the best method of attracting followers to your cause. And the background vocals are "who, who" not "woo, woo" as most people think. When I'm cheering someone on I don't usually shout "who who", but the song is asking if "you know my name" I think it is pretty safe to say that the background vocals are musical in nature and accent the rhythm.

Third, funny things happen during many, if not all, productions of Shakespeare's Scottish play leading to rumors that is was cursed by witches for revealing too much about them. Do you believe that too? And in that case, the curse was about punishing Shakespeare for revealing the "evil" not because he was supporting the evil. In conclusion, I again don't see how the coincidence of "something very funny happens" when the song is performed supports you argument in any way.

We all agree that V/M are not skating to this song because they think it is satanic, so maybe we should just move on now.
 
There was plenty of postmodern/ironic art in the 1960s. The term was first used in the 1940s but really started to flourish in the 60s.

One example would be Andy Warhol, who designed some of the Rolling Stones' album covers. If you're going to make your case by association with artists you consider satanic, then associations with artists considered ironic should also be taken into account.

Sticky Fingers (with the Warhol conceived cover) was completed in 1971. I stated that the distancing from Anger and Lavey happened in 1969 onwards, post Altemont. Yes, there was postmodern art in the Sixties, but the hippy counterculture was not part of that; and postmodern art has history that goes way back before the invention of the term.
 
I a little still can't believe we're arguing about this. But as an example from the nineteenth century: when the poet John Keats (a member of the Church of England as far as I can know) wrote odes "to Demeter" and "to Psyche" he was invoking pagan goddesses from the Greco-Roman pantheon. I'm pretty sure he wasn't literally worshipping them. No one would say these were "pagan" texts just because they adopted the point of view of an acolyte of a long-dead religion. He did have one reviewer from some London newspaper who described his 1815 Odes as "a pretty piece of paganism," but that dude has lived on in history as deeply, truly, not getting the point. I'm not comparing the Stones to Keats (as much as I love the Stones I don't think they deserve that much credit). But I am comparing the fallacy of unnecessary literalism in one case to the other.
T

But why compare the Stones to John Keats? Why not the Marquis de Sade, or any other writers that wrote works in a satanic spirit? Comparing the Stones to Milton and then John Keats, and going it was this case with them so it must be the case with the Stones, is a selective load of nonsense.
 
Sticky Fingers (with the Warhol conceived cover) was completed in 1971.

http://nypost.com/2015/06/06/so-about-that-rolling-stones-cover-whose-crotch-is-it-anyway/
In early 1969, Andy Warhol agreed to design an album cover for the Rolling Stones.

Yes, there was postmodern art in the Sixties, but the hippy counterculture was not part of that;

So? The Rolling Stones didn't exist wholly immersed in the hippy counterculture. And satanism was hardly a defining characteristic of that counterculture in any case.

There was a whole wide world out there with all sorts of influences. You can't just pick one thing that was going on at the time and declare that was the only possible source of meaning for a work created at that time.

and postmodern art has history that goes way back before the invention of the term.

Very true.
 
T

But why compare the Stones to John Keats? Why not the Marquis de Sade, or any other writers that wrote works in a satanic spirit? Comparing the Stones to Milton and then John Keats, and going it was this case with them so it must be the case with the Stones, is a selective load of nonsense.

Have you read Marquis de Sade? Perversion yes... and fine, I haven't read his entire output... after one book I was good for life.... and I don't know how I read it all... but never ever did I think about a satanic spirit... it's just sex... all kinds of sex... especially everything that could be shocking to most people.... as far as i know... sex and satan are two different things
 
OMG some of you are never happy. Most of the time the complaints are that the skaters are using a warhorse or the same 3 latin pieces and why oh why nothing new and creative?!? What's wrong with these choreographers (blah.blah blah). And now that some are using non-traditional creative program music, that's not good enough either. Stop trying to literally pick pieces apart and just let it be. Watch the dance and enjoy it (or not). I'm fairly sure V/M didn't say hey this song is possibly about devil worship..ooh let's skate that. :sarcasm:

I mean, yes it's good to interpret music more accurately by looking into it, but jeez! :palmf:

ETA: I for one am glad that some aren't adding onto the use of the same 4 Perez Prada pieces that will be beat like a dead horse this season. :slink:
Can we please get back on topic with music announcements now?!

Funnily enough, I haven't seen too many top ice dancers name Perez Prado as their choices as of yet, but it's still very early and a lot of music needs to be announced.
 
Have you read Marquis de Sade? Perversion yes... and fine, I haven't read his entire output... after one book I was good for life.... and I don't know how I read it all... but never ever did I think about a satanic spirit... it's just sex... all kinds of sex... especially everything that could be shocking to most people.... as far as i know... sex and satan are two different things

Yes I've read quite a lot of the Marquis de Sade; but a long time ago. But i think you are confusing the depiction of satan or satan-worship with a book that is written in a satanic spirt. There's various underlying anti-moral suggestions to his work; that make it more than just extreme erotica. You probably read 120 days of whatnot? Justine and Juliette for example are more works designed to make explicit the underlying intent. The endless permutations of debauched sex are quite the least interesting thing about his work.

Plus, this whole discussion of whether Sympathy for the Devil is a satanic work began when I said as an off the cuff remark that I was surprised that V and M with their wholesome image were dancing to that. To which someone replied, but they did Carmen which was sex on ice. I then explained my comment, because I don't conflate sex with unwholesomeness. Hence the ensuing discussion of satanic art..........and what constitutes satanic art and whether Sympathy for the Devil falls under that category.

But the actual mentioning of the Marquis de Sade wasn't to do with an argument as to whether his work is Satanic or not; it's to do with the correlation between an artist's art and their life. The point made was that you can argue that there is none by citing authors that have no correlation, but you can also argue that there a correlation by citing authors that do have that in their life. And Sade did behave in real life (but not to the quite frankly ludicrous extremes of his literature) in a way that correlated with his writing.
 
People need to check out Alaine Chartrand's Instagram story now on their mobile devices. Tons of videos including Piper/Paul's SD and Virtue/Moir's FD. Looking at V/M's FD, I may have to rethink my 17 year-old hatred of tango de roxanne. It's that compelling.

ETA: Desktop friendly link of V/M here: https://dreamofawonderfullife.tumblr.com/
 
Funnily enough, I haven't seen too many top ice dancers name Perez Prado as their choices as of yet, but it's still very early and a lot of music needs to be announced.

Well the Shibs are at least, and TBH that wasn't really the point, which was the same freaking Latin music over and over. Perez was just used as an example of one thats been overused in past.
 
Well the Shibs are at least, and TBH that wasn't really the point, which was the same freaking Latin music over and over. Perez was just used as an example of one thats been overused in past.

well, but it easy to be different in the latin rhythms when you are chosing something not latin. Ypu may believe it or not, but there are different music among Latin music, but I suppose it is easier to adapt the music you already know to the Latin rhythm requirements than to research and find for Latin music different from the one that has already been used.
 
Back
Top