I Hate the term “Self Expression” and "Style" as an Excuse for Bad Form: Music and Performance

Style, is a mode of expression. It describes clothes, art and music genres, writing and speaking, and performance.

Styles are preferences; it's a set of aesthetics, tendencies and predispositions which lead to certain results. Surrealists differ from realists to impressionists, ballroom is different from ballet and jazz is different from heavy metal, Karate is different from Kung fu, FMA is different from English Longsword fighting. The resulting styles differ based on the circumstances that lead to their development, culture, resources, social pressures etc.

This issue on style is so big that I've decided to tackle it in three parts. This one is on music and performance because it irks me the most these days (the excuses on style that is).

Okay I said music and performance but my brain is itching to tackle performance first especially dance. Ah dance, it is such a broad discipline, there's the ever strict and form intensive ballet to the highly energetic moves of hip hop and break dancing.  And reality shows have tried to encompass this broad variety by giving an outlet to various kinds of dancers, and an opportunity to show everybody else that there are different forms of dance.

Okay, first of all dancing is a mode of self expression. While there are techniques and steps to follow, it is not performed the same way twice unless choreographed and even then variation exists. It's a living art form, emotions and rapport between dancer and partner and audience affect the performance. And dancers (I mean live, eat, breathe dance kind of people, that silly jig on your uncle's birthday when your mom forced you to doesn't count) express their heart through their movement. When done with an honesty of performance and self expression everyone feels what you're doing. And people are moved by the performance.

So, why do so many people think they can dance when many sure as hell can't? Self expression is one thing but convulsing like a tazed perpetrator is not dance. Oh please don't say you were just Krumping. Krumping is a discipline in itself (and I can't Krump, but I know what a convulsion looks like) and if you are Krumping it is intentional.

And intent – ah that's the key word, intent is what makes what you're doing self expression. Expression is an outward manifestation of what one experiences inside. If you didn't intend to do that and you're just riding a nervous tick, or suffering from a grand mal seizure don't call it you're style of dancing. To call it your style of dancing would require you to do more than one step of the dance.

For example, don't say you dance like Michael Jackson if all you can do is grab your crotch. If that were the case then many baseball pitchers can claim that. Don't say you're a break dancer just because you can do a single hand handstand. Don't say you're a ballroom dancer just because you slow danced in the prom. More importantly if you're a one trick pony, don't say that's just the way you like it.

If it's a matter of like then you have to show yourself to be able to do things you don't like.

This brings us to music, like dance the musician (live, eat, drink...you get the idea) expresses himself through his music. His feelings and thoughts can be made known by his playing or singing.

People who do covers and nothing else can be very technically excellent but unless you make your own music (even a cool jam will do you don't need a record label to call it your music, or rearrange other compositions at least) you're just the musical equivalent of an art forger.

There's more to music than hitting the high notes (for singers) or getting that riff or that drum beat or that baseline. There must be variety, intensity and most of all purpose. Like dance, if all you know is one song, play around with three chords or have only one adlib, you're not a musician.

People who actually learned to play and sing in a structured manner (note I didn't say schooled). Know the basics that lead up to the good stuff. There's understanding of music principles why this note comes together with this one and why we do this rhythm and not that one.

To simply scream and say one is imitating Chester Bennington of Linkin Park displays his ignorance of what kind of screaming is required to sing rock music and screamo songs. To sing until you break glass is not what defines Mariah Carrey (she has outstanding low notes too). To thump your chest does not make you Celine Dion and having buck teeth and being gay does not make you Freddie Mercury.

The people mentioned above have more range and what they are known for in their hits. Their other songs can show you that they can do fast slow, high and low, smooth and wild. They break the rules of singing because they know when to break it and how to break it. To follow them requires the understanding they gained. Robbing the rich does not make you Robin Hood. Robbing the rich and giving it to the poor, being loved by the poor and being hated by the corrupt that you rob from because they actually stole the money you're stealing from them as well. That makes you Robin Hood. The green tights and bow just won't cut it (he probably didn't wear green anyway).

On the performance side, I just had to put this in, there are so called dancers/performers following an irritating practice these days and that is splicing several  musical tracks in one song. I don't mean medleys I love medleys. I mean performance who play two measures of one song, stick in a beatbox sound and shift to an entirely new and usually disjoint song. Intro guitar riff for Black and White by Micheal Jackson awwww, scratch scratch...laser sounds, cut in Insomia by Craig David. It's soooo irritating!

It was a novelty at first but everyone else has done it into more and more ridiculous proportions. At first it was like a medley of two songs or one song spliced between two halves of the same song. Usually it was shown to contrast dance steps and to showcase what the performers can do.

But these days performers don't have the creativity to craft their choreography into a story to match the music. That is part of the dancer's discipline

Rather they pick and choose cool sounds to augment their lame steps. Everyone with free audio mixing software volunteers to splice MP3 for their crew. And the beatbox noise is evidence that the sound mixers don't have the skill or the patience to cut and splice the music seamlessly. It's one sensory assault after another.

To qualify as self expression, the one expressing must have knowledge of the rules and the style he is breaking or making his own. Picasso could make realistic paintings, he later chose to paint his way. Artists can make cartoons but not all cartoonists are artists.

If the wrong way is the only way you know how to do it then you're not self expressing you don't know squat.

I Hate the Mindset That New Means Better.

I miss the romance of old school technology. Some things that were pretty straightforward get complicated by features.

Features, cram our everyday gadgets from cellphones to digicams to software.


Case in point, digicams: I admire the photographer who still has the instinct to look though the viewfinder of an SLR camera. I admire the photographer who understands, shutter speed, f-stop, ISO/ASA ratings and point of infinity. Leaning back with an arched back to view an LCD screen to me is so counterintuitive. Don't get me wrong I love digicams, they have taken the unnecessary expense of film and developing out of the equation. You get to view your pictures before you print them and immediately see the results of the shot.


But some cameras have done away with the viewfinder altogether. Sometimes I really need a steady shot in low lighting and I don't want to use the flash. Photographers know that the face acts as a tripod when using a camera and it's easier to brace for a shot. But without the viewfinder, holding cameras at arms length becomes a chore. Sure some cameras have anti-jitter features to steady the shot. But that I believe is an example of superfluous tech.

Just to show you how lazy has made us let me ask you this. What use is the eject button on your remote? I know what it does. Again, why is it on the remote? Does that actually eject the disc and set it in its case and file it? No. After it automatically opens you still stand up approach your player and take the disc. Sony was smart enough to take the eject button out of the remote. And that educated me into, "They're right that button doesn't need to be in the remote since you approach the player anyway."


Tape, I miss tape. I miss audio tape, old tapes, tapes that you can store shabbily for 20 years and still faithfully make music despite their age. CDs on the other hand are the most fragile of objects, a scratch renders your songs unlistenable. Format is a fast paced game, MP3, WMA, DVD-r, DVD+R sheesh it's hard to keep up. But tape, good old magnetic tape, play and dub away.


Tapes are a good long term medium between Vinyl (also prone to scratching and broken needles) and CDs (sensitive to vibrations) but hey the tape is a technological has been now. As music players go higher and higher in the storage category people will keep thinking that 12 songs in a cassette simply isn't enough music.


Mimeograph, argh no one seems to make them anymore. It's now the digital age so you get digital copiers that does what the mimeograph cannot. But hey, the mimeograph can run on hand power. In third world countries prone to power failure (or voices of the underground) it's still fast cheap and reliable. It can use old diesel engine oil as ink. How's that for consumables?

Mimeograph is the partner of the dot-matrix (impact) printer, that sturdy little workhorse that can print as much as you can give it. Of course it's low-res and not much good for pictures but for miles and miles of text it has little issues regarding broken parts, getting out of commission because of paper jams and it works with carbon and carbonized paper.


Still one of my greatest peeves is the move from Microsoft Office 2003 to the 2007 format. First time I saw it I was thinking "What the heck is all this crap!" I didn't know where everything was. And everyone kept sending files in the new incomprehensible docx (unless you were one of the proud owners of the 2007 - 2010 version). 

I've been using that interface for more than 15 years and then all of a sudden things aren't where they used to be. Not even the option to revert it to the old mode. Well the saving grace was that 2007 preserved the time honored hotkeys. Ha! Score one more for old school!

If I don't know where to point the mouse, then don't need to use it. Something many in this point and click generation have no idea how to use. Provided you know what they are, hot keys can be done on the fly without your fingers leaving the key board and stop to click your mouse or touchpad. All you do is tag-type-tag. The tag happens works as fast as capitalizing your letters instead of, type..highlight..look for the button..click, remove highlight.

Another thing I did was look for a 2007 update patch for my 2003. Ha that did it. I no longer needed to upgrade (at least not for now) my office and yet I can read and save in the 2007 format (which I don't since 2007 reads 2003 automatically anyway). So I had the layout I wanted and yet stay in the loop.

On another computer I,m familiarizing myself with the 2007 version. And it still saves in the 97-2003 format (I set it that way) as a courtesy to the people I share files with me who may have not yet upgraded.

But what has happened? Why are they fixing what ain't broke?


Manufacturers seem to be cramming more and more features to create a timed obselence from the things we buy. I have a feeling that RnD labs actually figure out dozens of applications for new technology but release them in trickles so we keep coming back for more. Evil conspiracy theory? Hardly.

That thing that you want for Christmas and been saving up for months becomes yesterday's news come March. And you suddenly envy the guy who's been envying you when you got your cool gadget becomes the guy you envy, simply because his doodad has a few hundred gigabytes more storage, a few megahertz more speed, a quarter of an inch larger screen 300 grams lighter and has Blue ray as opposed to your now obsolete HD-DVD. Like they couldn't cram all that in 6 months ago?

This is an update of an older blog post of mine. I believe this is a rant belongs to this blog.

I Hate Know-it-alls That Don’t Know-it-at-all. (on the Manila Hostage Crisis of 2010)

The Philippines is a democracy patterned after the United States. It has three branches of government the Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary. The Legislative branch makes the laws, the Executive branch approves the law, the Judiciary branch enforces the law.

That is basic civics. This is an oft forgotten fact when one criticizes any president in office. As much as the president wants to do things, he cannot make laws except those he declares by Executive orders and those orders do not rival powers of the legislative body. Yes he has powers to veto any law, and make recommendations, but he cannot write the laws.

In running the day today functions of positions in government like those handled by his cabinet, he does not inspect their work day by day like a principal checks lesson plans. He assigned these secretaries to work with a level of autonomy so that he can focus on the most pressing matters that require him to preside over (thus the word President). You ask who holds the officials accountable?  The ombudsman.

What people ought to realize is that the President is not the end all and be all of the country. When bridges collapse who works on it? Public works, not the president. When an epidemic breaks out who do you gonna call? The Germ Busters at the Department of Health. Not the President. Unjust labor practices? Department of Labor. Not the President. Kidnapped daughter of a rich politician? Call the police (why is there any other recourse?) and not the President.

How many people did you vote into office this year? I’m sure there were more names after Benigno Aquino III.

Three words people: Chain of command. In any organization and in government, the local official closest to the scene handles it first. It escalates as it leaves his jurisdiction and goes to higher authorities in which the President is the last person to pass the buck to.

With regards to the hostage taking of the 8 Chinese tourists in Manila, that operational mess was not the president’s fault, not the president’s fault, not the president’s fault. Even if the president was (dare I say it?) Gloria, it still wouldn’t be her fault. The president, is not a qualified police negotiator or SWAT operative. At most he can give the order to fire or ceasefire but does he have the training to determine that?

What can the president do then? What he has already done. Play the diplomat and apologize to the people of Hong Kong. Order inquiries and investigations.  Do the cliché thing and form a task force to investigate. But it will not be the president’s job to scour the crime scene, dust for prints, make a psychological profile of the deceased. If he did that he would be a cop not the president. What else do people want from him when they tell him to do his job?

I’m not being political, I didn’t even vote for the guy. But just because CNN cameras and Chinese tourists in the bus at Quirino Grandstand made the incident “International” it didn’t require the UN security council to resolve the incident. Granted, the cops were lousy at their jobs, but nonetheless it was their job not the president’s. They messed up negotiations and the neutralization of the perp. But it was THEIR job that they messed up not the president’s. If you want to point fingers point to the cops. The president was nowhere near the crime scene and it wasn’t his job to be there.

Tekken for a Ride

Hasn’t Hollywood learned yet? Game to movie, anime to movie, comic to movie, book to movie adaptations become popular because of the fans. Of course Hollywood knows enough to pick up the story with enough following and capitalize on the name. And then we, the fans, are betrayed.

Fans stay glued to their sets because of something intrinsic, something quintessential and that thing has to be captured before anything else, before artistic license, before creative expression. That is the least anyone taking on an adaptation should do to respect the work and the fans. Anything less is an insult.

Tekken, that game series from NAMCO that started in 1994 (1995 for the Playstation) had a continuing story line of father to son struggles (not just for the Mishimas). Story lines and fighting styles have been part of why Tekken has such a following; it’s part of the quintessential thing that we’ve come to love about Tekken.

These things have been taken away from the fans, Marshall Law has lost his Jeet Kune Do, Paul Phoenix did not even appear in the movie, just a passing mention, Kazuya’s gloves were worn by Jin and came from Steve. Jin’s game rival Hwoarang was nowhere in sight. These changes just threw what I liked about Tekken out of whack. It felt as bad as seeing Batman’s nipples. The only thing so Tekken about it is Heihachi’s hair.

Over the years such “creative license” has ruined many good titles like the Mario Brothers (no mushrooms, and fireflowers), Disneyfied fairytales (Hera is not supposed to be a good mom to Hercules), Shumacher Batmans (no Bat-credit cards please and why was Bane stupid and minor?), and Dragonball Evolution (the Kamehameha is not an airbending technique!!! Goku can use it in space for crying out loud).

We need more film makers who are actual fans of the work they are adapting. See LOTR, the Chris Donner Superman, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (the first one) the Chris Nolan Batmans, Narnia (one of the few things Disney did right) and the A-Team, they were made by people who know what it means to be a fan and will feel disappointed as a fan if things go bad.

Tekken (and other games) need players, Anime franchises need Otaku, novels need readers. We don’t need fashion challenged, spaced out, surreal artistes, who can’t dream up their own creative work and so mess up another’s and put their “personal mark” on the movie ahead of the intended image by the person who made it lovable in the first place, the author.