Aug 6, 2008

It is a sad day..

Over the last 3/4 years, Burial stunned the music world with some beautiful music. His self titled album and the follow up "Untrue" were very well received by music lovers worldwide. His ghostly soundscapes and beats from a distant future have a mysteriousness that appeals to many, including myself. "I'm a lowkey person and I just want to make some tunes" is what Burial says on his blog. Therefor he chose not to reveal his identity to the world. It's about the music, not the person on the cover of a magazine.

Our generation has grown up in a society that is very visually oriented. From the 50s onwards, music started to be accompanied by images of the artists. The introduction of TV music shows and music magazines boosted the visual aspect of music even more, making it as important as the music itself. In the 70s and 80s, labels and media discovered that mediocre artists could do well with a great visual presentation. Although the rise of electronic music raised a slight problem for the music media initially, as these new musicians were not performing on stage, in this millennium we've caught up and electronic artists are now presented in the same way as their 80s rock counterparts were. Image is everything.

Burial has said more than once that he feels connected to those areas of the music world that remain anonymous and image-less: the white labels, pirate radio, illegal raves. But the success of "Untrue" and a Mercury Music Prize nomination made the press and some of the fans eager for images.

Under the moniker of "investigative journalism", the ridiculous speculations by Gordon Smart of tabloid The Sun about Burial's identity went over the top. Burial posted a blog revealing his name and his face, bringing the silliness to an end, before someone decides to sell a picture of him to the newspaper.

Although Burial made his own move at the right time, I still think it's a sad day. It still feels like the need for an image won, and music lost, or should I say The Sun won, and music lost.

I already knew who Burial was from the start. Not his name, his face, or if he has a cool hat or not. But by listening to the music. Music tells you much more about the person than any amount of pictures could ever do. I can't say that I'm not interested to see an artist's face, but i don't need it to enjoy the music. In Burial's case I really did not need it at all. Can't wait for the next album.

5 comments:

Shutta-77 said...

true story there, respect

pixelbeat said...

Totally true. I do respect the artist more than ever. Burial has become a very important part, not only for the dubstep scene (if there is such thing*), but for the music environment itself.

I didn't realize that I feel the same way, man. It's a sad story. Hope Burial keep his humble but huge musical endeavor.

Talented people against massive stupidity.

* Let me refer to scene as a musical movement but not as a cultural whatever, that magazines and media try to put this beautiful music style into.

Sorry for my shitty english. Big ups from Argentina.

pressure said...

Im not very romantic about stuff like this , I have never cared about the identity of the people who make the music I like , for me at the end of the day all i want to hear is good tunes and i don't think it would matter if burial had a hump on his back and looked like chunk off of the goonies(that would be cool though).I don't think its the end of the world that he revealed himself or i don't feel any disgust at what the sun has done.
I do find it quiet amusing that they would try go to such lengths to figure out who he is :D
its not like he will stop making tunes or it will change his sound.
although it was a nice touch not knowing who he was but at the end of the day i still dont know who he is .. hes just a picture to me.
and i have MET enough producers in my time to know that a lot of them are boring eejits and they shattered all illusions of the kind of people they would be while i was judging them by the music they made.

Chasten said...

Yep, totally agree on that one.. Personally someone should be judged on his music, not his face..

magda o said...

So is that mean that if you make shit music you're a shitty person? I must have a long ladder to climb. ;oP

Just kidding.

I agree with you on the Burial hoopla. I never really thought about what he looked like (although i suspected as much that the drawing on the record cover was him) and when all this started to blow up, I only then thought about his lack of 'face time'.

It reminded me of how much impact moving music can have without the 'image is everything' context that so much music relies on... I think dnb is pretty faceless still, but that's probably one of the few genres left, and I think it is that facelessness that attributes to its unaccessbility. At least one aspect of it.

The time when dnb was big, we had a face like Bukem gracing CD covers, DJ Rap or Goldie. Even if goldie or bukem are around, they aren't such flashes in the media, and there may be a myriad of reasons, but dnb's connotations lie in fairly dark room, boy's club, not hipster (thank god!), dutty drums and bass sometimes without an easy rhythm to get drunk to, etc etc.

I don't even know what Danny Breaks, M-Beat or Acen look like and some of their shit is my favorite of all time.

Thanks for letting me rant.

magda