Why ed prefers Cream to Clapton






I prefer Cream to Clapton as the former had the psychedelic spirit, which, in its aesthetic sense, attempt to go beyond the realms of the norm and popular. 


Cream, amongst others of that era, had it.  Clapton, thereafter, didn't.  He was sucked into the pop and mundane - ‘You look wonderful tonight’....what kind of soppy whiny crap is that, compared to ‘mind-expanding, Tales of Brave Ulysses’.  The former just focuses on the microcosm of reality - romantic relationships, infatuation, etc, - whereas the latter takes on the microcosm of reality and renders its boundaries elastic.  I suppose when the 'hippie' era passed away, it's spirit took refuge in myself.

To be suckered into 'fanhood' is to become a victim of the times, as opposed to having discerning taste when it comes to a choice between times.Hence, i'm no fan of no band, only the spirit of a worthwhile era.   That (psychedelic) spirit always exists, but it doesn't rest permanently on anyone.  It's like a butterfly that flits from one petal to another, and the true artist chases it wherever it wanders, and s/he's not distracted by where it lands but where it goes.   And in that, the chaser becomes the butterfly itself.  S/he becomes psychedelia herself.  To be suckered into 'fanhood' is to become a victim of the times, as opposed to having discerning taste when it comes to a choice between times.

If you think about it, the way psychedelic artists developed after the psychedelic era, and through them, how their ‘fans’ just followed them and undeveloped along with them, these ‘artistes’ underdeveloped their fans enough for them to not have the spirit to love their past works as much as their present.

So when ‘Cream’ came back to the Royal Albert Hall in 2005 to do the stuff they did back in the 1968 - a year before the ed took a mid-day flight into planet earth via the wormhole of the universal spirit of femininity - you could say that they were actually doing a ‘cover version’ of another band, because they weren’t now, as they were then. 




ed



0 thoughts:

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Blogger Template by Clairvo