I think what the article is trying to say is not that mistakes are glorious in and of themselves, but that glossy, precise perfection is boring. Thus, while an album comprised entirely of flaws, of poor material, and of technical errors would be bad; one without any of those would be tolerable, but boring. Some errors, the author is arguing, can make art more interesting.
I should note here that as a fan and collector of live music, this is particularly easily seen in live performance, where the virtue isn't perfect reproduction of album tracks, but transcending them in some way. Often that way is increased energy in them, or extended jams, or solos, but more than occasionally, the interest in live music is in the errors in it -- and how the artists recover and continue. (NOT necessarily major flaws -- "train wrecks" -- that cause entire pieces to stop. But a missed note here, or a flubbed lyric there.)
Certainly artists SHOULD strive for perfection, especially in the studio. The article, I think, is decrying an increasing intolerance of errors, and thus of what they feel is a human element, in modern music that's released professionally.
no subject
Date: 2009-11-15 03:41 pm (UTC)I should note here that as a fan and collector of live music, this is particularly easily seen in live performance, where the virtue isn't perfect reproduction of album tracks, but transcending them in some way. Often that way is increased energy in them, or extended jams, or solos, but more than occasionally, the interest in live music is in the errors in it -- and how the artists recover and continue. (NOT necessarily major flaws -- "train wrecks" -- that cause entire pieces to stop. But a missed note here, or a flubbed lyric there.)
Certainly artists SHOULD strive for perfection, especially in the studio. The article, I think, is decrying an increasing intolerance of errors, and thus of what they feel is a human element, in modern music that's released professionally.