i was very amused today when, after i read a third or so of what was an exceptionally long impromptu blog response in class, my professor responded by saying "ben, you're so prolific" in a bemused sort of voice.
one of the things that is a unifying factor among most of my favorite artists and writers, etc. is that they are characterized as "prolific". this isn't widely considered a positive thing, especially in the music industry, which largely prizes polished product and reproduction of said product (well, it is an industry after all). but i respect an artist (on principle) who will write and record and release 50 songs a year, even if 25 or so of them aren't necessarily that great, more than i do for a band of guys who take five years to write and record 13 perfectly-crafted songs. there's just something great, inspiring, and rabid about artists who just can't stop working, and who are more concerned with the process than the product (again, not a very Western sentiment). it's just confusing to me to see that sort of drive be chided and mocked instead of supported and nurtured.
people are dirty and fucked up and they hurt each other and then they die and rot and turn into dirt. so what? get over it. people who can accept that and keep looking for the good anyway are deserve so much more respect than people who just cover up the parts they don't like, make the shiny parts shiner, and live like they're the ones driving. you're not driving. you're on the bus. what the fuck ever.
anyway, it was amusing that even in the environment of the class today i heard the word "prolific" as not entirely positive. but it made me happy nonetheless. it's definitely an appellation i can be proud of, even if it makes me more of a weirdo. i guess if i'm prolific i don't know how to be anything else, so i'm sort of stuck with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment