Re: PUFFyisms

["Thomas W¿hni" <hovard@online.no>]

I see Puff daddy has been mentioned as a bad example  of people who use 
samples
exstensively. That his music is not art , that it is theft etc. etc. 
I think it`s inportant to see the big picture here , and that is what 
ballpark the artist is playing in. He isn`t shooting for the same goal as 
musicians like those on this list is.

He is comercial by intent. He tries to show the audience a good time and 
lets that be a guiding aestetic in his creative choices. We can see that 
in his videos , his clothes and interviews AND his sampling sources. And 
there is nothing wrong with this. It`s just the opposite of the "weird is 
great" lines of thought often demonstrated on this list. 

When he samples a "golden oldie" like the Police it serves his purpose of 
pleasing the audience. It can be defended from his musical standpoint of 
giving his audience a good time. And it works; when people hear Summers 
guitar-riff pumping out from the speakers they  might not know what or who 
it was who played it originally , but they can feel the that they`ve heard 
it before. The "I`ve heard this before" -factor is important in music , 
Beethoven knew this , Fripp knows this , and by gum Puff knows it 
too........... 

The only point that matters to me is this:  did the Police get payed when 
he used their song? If they did than GO PUFFY GO PUFFY GO PUFFY.  :-)

Yours , Thomas



Feel free to check out my web-site:
http://www.geocities.com/Eureka/Promenade/1628/