On Artchat Podcast today we talked about the nature of the podcast itself. What is it exactly and what is its purpose? Steve gave some context by describing three different types of podcasts he listens to, which vary from the very produced on-demand style; to the flexible time, still somewhat produced on-demand types; to the anything goes style, inspired, in Steve's case, by the Gilmor Gang.
The discussion was sparked by a specific question, should we be recording the tedious process of getting everyone connected? Isn't it boring for listeners? Who listens anyway?
To me, what "artists" make and present for public consumption should be carefully wrought. To me, it is not enough to put a frame or book covers or the open-close of a broad/podcast around just anything. ACP is not "art", but if it is a product of some kind that we are making available to listeners, should it not be something more than casual talk recorded with every kind of sound mishap remaining? Most of the regulars felt that we can do without the tedious process of connecting. Steve wants to leave room for the listener. He does not like art that leaves him out. I understand his point of view on one hand, and yet am wary of an attitude lazy students used to express. When I would ask about the point of a story, which, to me, was the organizing principle, some would say, I wanted the reader to figure it out for himself.
On the other hand, some works of "art" can be overwrought. I felt that way reading Sebastian Barry's On Cannan's Side, which was recommended to me by a couple of good friends whose taste I respect. But..so contrived, so mannered! I did not believe Lily's voice but heard the author and his efforts at making original phrases. I admired the original phrases at first, but then I felt I was being attacked by them.