Will.i.am song to blast out from Mars

Priori

So, it's come to this.

The first song Humanity broadcasts on another planet (a very significant cultural milestone if you ask me) and it's by this guy.

Of all the great musical works the human race has produced down the ages, it's a contemporary Rapper/Hip-Hop artist that gets the nod. Money talks I guess.

Please tell me I'm not the only person bothered by this...



[edit] On further reflection I'm not so bothered; there have been many songs "broadcasted" beyond our planet before this one (eg), so I've maybe over reacted a bit! And thanks astrofool, I'm sure I must be wrong about it being the first song being broadcast from another planet.

DrumSteve

Is there any way we can send him with it?

GalwayGuy2

Sorry, but his This is Love song is perfect for it.

The fields of Athenry wouldn't be a good one:P

Basq

In space, no-one can hear autotune..

Kenno90

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFks9A9TCF0

The only song that should be used is Ride Of The Valkyries.

Sykk

Priori wrote: »

Please tell me I'm not the only person bothered by this...

Probably not. But people are "bothered" by very stupid things way too often these days.

A rover weighing over 1 tonnes has landed on a planet with an average distance distance about 225 million km away from Earth. Why care what's sent back as broadcast testing..

Bipolar Joe

If they were gonna make it a recent song, I vote for "Around The World" by Daft Punk. I think the Martians would appreciate robots more, plus it'll make Curiosity feel like he has kin singin' to him.

FatherLen

any link op?

Tabnabs

This, if only for the very first line...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmVusVh4TRQ

mikom

Should have been this............ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJVPD5vrlrU&feature=player_embedded

Priori

Sykk wrote: »

Probably not. But people are "bothered" by very stupid things way too often these days.

You can trivialise it all you want - in fact, it's possible to trivialise almost anything of cultural significance if you reduce it to physical terms.

Priori

FatherLen wrote: »

any link op?

Here you go.

mikeym

Yawn.

astrofool

The beagle probe was meant to "blast out" a few notes by Blur when it landed on Mars. I'm sure music has been used before in verification tones between us and probes/satellites.

stateofflux

now those aliens definitely know the limited brain capability of humans and are on their way

mike65

Does earth really want war with Mars? :eek:

Colmustard

OP I agree surely something from Beethoven or Mozart or westlife.

I suppose its all about democratisation inclusiveness and popular support.

snubbleste

Will.i.am mentioned it two months ago

BrendaN_f

there's nothing about mozart's (or any artist's) music that makes it inherently better than william's. music is music, and that is the song that was chosen. no point trying to please some stiff with a stick up his ass

Bad Panda

We Gotta Get Out of this Place by The Animals would've been a bit more apt.

Madam_X

BrendaN_f wrote: »

there's nothing about mozart's (or any artist's) music that makes it inherently better than william's. music is music

Indeed. In the same way that there's nothing about Dickens' literature that makes it inherently better than the Twilight series. Shur books are books.

The album by X Factor winner Mat Cardle, and The Beatles' white album? Same thing really. Music is music.

ronan45

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bje_8Y7KUfM

Dave0301

Probably would have backfired.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZ_6wOe3tLM

dhmusic

BrendaN_f wrote: »

there's nothing about mozart's (or any artist's) music that makes it inherently better than william's. music is music, and that is the song that was chosen. no point trying to please some stiff with a stick up his ass

From a 100% deaf persons point of view.

It's junk food music with NASA attempting to appeal to the happy clapper type folk that make up the majority of humanity.

_Puma_

If will.I.am's song is played on Mars and there is no one around to hear it, is it still ****e ?!

SEPT 23 1989

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZS2-4-iUJ4

BrendaN_f

Madam_X wrote: »

Indeed. In the same way that there's nothing about Dickens' literature that makes it inherently better than the Twilight series. Shur books are books.

The album by X Factor winner Mat Cardle, and The Beatles' white album? Same thing really. Music is music.

depending on who you ask, some people would much prefer to read twilight than some dickens novel, and why not? not everybody enjoys the same things you do

dhmusic wrote: »

From a 100% deaf persons point of view.

It's junk food music with NASA attempting to appeal to the happy clapper type folk that make up the majority of humanity.

yeah, let's please the minority instead, THAT makes sense

Dravokivich

The theme tune to "Lost in Space" would of been quite fun. T'is a shame, seems geeks don't get nostalgic for geeky stuff these days.

Chuck Stone

He should be blasted with peas.

Mickeroo

could go two ways. either Aliens will see it as an act of war/insult and destroy us or they'll be terrified.

Dravokivich

Chuck Stone wrote: »

He should be blasted with peas.

Frozen?
Tinned?
Tinned in Tins?
Mushy?

Madam_X

BrendaN_f wrote: »

depending on who you ask, some people would much prefer to read twilight than some dickens novel, and why not?

Ah, fair enough... you're referring to personal preference, which is a different thing to what I thought you were saying - that Mozart's music and will.i.am's music are as good as each other, which would obviously be just an incredibly disingenuous and obtuse thing to say. But yes, will.i.am and Mozart are probably as popular as each other.

Duggy747

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBYjZTdrJlA

Cue Curiosity moving it's arms in beat with this.

Oh, and I hate Will I Am.

BrendaN_f

Madam_X wrote: »

Ah, fair enough... you're referring to personal preference, which is a different thing to what I thought you were saying - that Mozart's music and will.i.am's music are as good as each other, which would obviously be just an incredibly disingenuous and obtuse thing to say. But yes, will.i.am and Mozart are probably as popular as each other.

it's the same thing. there is no such thing as good or bad music, any standard that has been created is due to personal preference

Chuck Stone

Dravokivich wrote: »

Frozen?
Tinned?
Tinned in Tins?
Mushy?

Frozen cause they'll sting.

snausages

BrendaN_f wrote: »

depending on who you ask, some people would much prefer to read twilight than some dickens novel, and why not? not everybody enjoys the same things you do

Opinions are subjective, sure. But what the majority like to read/listen to really has no bearing on the music's intrinsic qualities which I think is the point that Madam_x was trying to make. You can't really place guys like Cormac McCarthy and James Joyce in the same league as Celia Ahern and that one who wrote the Twilight porn book.

ITS_A_BADGER

would have laughed my hole off if it was benny hillys theme blasted out with curiousity moving in time with it then some martians join in and start chasing the lunar rover about mars

BrendaN_f

snausages wrote: »

Opinions are subjective, sure. But what the majority like to read/listen to really has no bearing on the music's intrinsic qualities which I think is the point that Madam_x was trying to make. You can't really place guys like Cormac McCarthy and James Joyce in the same league as Celia Ahern and that one who wrote the Twilight porn book.

if that's the point she was trying to make, then we were arguing the same point i guess

it's not like with say the 100m sprint, where we can definitively say that Usain Bolt is the best, because there is a defined goal you can achieve to become the best (ie run the fastest)

i wouldn't put them in the same league, but some 15 year old girl might consider james joyce to be trash and twilight to be the pinnacle of literature. and unless there is a set of standards that clearly define what make a good book, nobody can say she's objectively wrong

later12

Who on Earth (quite literally) gets to decide that Mozart is superior to Will.I.Am?

Any "serious musicians" in classical music that I've ever spoken to seem to roll their eyes when Mozart gets a mention; in fact his works must partially be seen in his day as works of comedy.

Others, perhaps many amateur classical music fans, seem to assume a piece of music is more culturally or intellectually valid by virtue of having been composed by somebody who is (a) dead, (b) dead for the past 200 years (c) traditionally not enjoyed by some of the most energetic and creative people in modern life; shur what would they know about art, heh?

Give it a rest! There's enough arrogant hauteur in the duller human endeavours without bringing it into art or music as well.

And ITS_A_BADGER, I would love if they played the benny hill theme, it might at least show we have a sense of humour.

Pumpkinseeds

Maybe its a plot to make the aliens think the planet is a joke and not worth invading. Although if they really wanted to do that they could have used pretty much any song sung by Paul McCartney, just to be on the safe side. If If I were a potential alien invader and I heard Paul McCartney I'd certainly not bother landing on the planet let alone invading earth.:D

Madam_X

Nah, some material is objectively better quality than others, in terms of the talents and work that go into creating them. X Factor winner albums v Led Zeppelin for example. People who say they're the same... I'm sorry, but it looks like arguing for the sake of it. It also looks like this phenomenon I've noticed of people trying to show how unpretentious and non snobby they are. There isn't a need to go to those lengths. Plus, it is not remotely snobby to say Led Zeppelin were objectively better than X Factor winners. That is not the same as looking down on people, which is what snobbery is. Rushing to tell people they're snobs (when they're not) is actually another form of acting superior. Personal preference doesn't make a difference. I've never understood the appeal of REM for instance, but I still know they're better than Little Mix or whatever the ****.

I listen to anything which sounds good to me - I like songs by Kylie Minogue and songs by The Velvet Underground. I'm not going to be disingenuous enough to say though that they're as good as each other. And the fact I like them both doesn't change this. People can like whom they like but others can also say what they listen to is shyte if they want.

snausages

BrendaN_f wrote: »

if that's the point she was trying to make, then we were arguing the same point i guess

it's not like with say the 100m sprint, where we can definitively say that Usain Bolt is the best, because there is a defined goal you can achieve to become the best (ie run the fastest)

i wouldn't put them in the same league, but some 15 year old girl might consider james joyce to be trash and twilight to be the pinnacle of literature. and unless there is a set of standards that clearly define what make a good book, nobody can say she's objectively wrong

You can be objective about it though, there is a concrete set of standards to judge a book by. Timelessness is one. Dubliners is over 100 years old yet it's still as culturally relevant to people all around the world today as it was back when it was originally published.

I wouldn't trust a 15 year old Twilight fan to have the knowledge of what makes a book great compared with a critic or an academic. That's not me being snobbish or anything, I just place greater stock in the opinions of the guys who read the most and write the most about reading. Call it elitism if you want, but it's good to have guys like this who make sure that the really good stuff isn't forgotten

later12

Madam_X wrote: »

Nah, some material is objectively better quality than others, in terms of the talents and work that go into creating them. X Factor winner albums v Led Zeppelin for example.

Plus, it is not remotely snobby to say Led Zeppelin were objectively better than X Factor winners.

Objectively better?

Since this is objective, it ought to be somehow measurable by disinterested observers; how on Earth do you measure which piece is of greater artistic or cultural merit

Priori

later12 wrote: »

Who on Earth (quite literally) gets to decide that Mozart is superior to Will.I.Am?

Any "serious musicians" in classical music that I've ever spoken to seem to roll their eyes when Mozart gets a mention; in fact his works must partially be seen in his day as works of comedy.

Others, perhaps many amateur classical music fans, seem to assume a piece of music is more culturally or intellectually valid by virtue of having been composed by somebody who is (a) dead, (b) dead for the past 200 years (c) traditionally not enjoyed by some of the most energetic and creative people in modern life; shur what would they know about art, heh?

Give it a rest! There's enough arrogant hauteur in the duller human endeavours without bringing it into art or music as well.

And ITS_A_BADGER, I would love if they played the benny hill theme, it might at least show we have a sense of humour.

Your post is well put.

Referring to Mozart in the above way, however, could well be seen as cleverly veiled "arrogant hauteur". Mozart was an extremely gifted individual, and yes, he composed many comical works. I'm not a big fan of his music myself, but saying "Who on Earth (quite literally) gets to decide that Mozart is superior to Will.I.Am?" - I feel this is just another way of saying "Oh, silly human beings, when will you learn that one piece of music is never truly better than another?".

Of course, these relativistic standpoints always refute themselves when logically picked apart. They are often as arrogant as arrogance gets.

Priori

later12 wrote: »

Since this is objective, it ought to be somehow measurable by disinterested observers

That's not what objectivity is.

later12

Priori wrote: »

- I feel this is just another way of saying "Oh, silly human beings, when will you learn that one piece of music is never truly better than another?".

Of course, these relativistic standpoints always refute themselves when logically picked apart. They are often as arrogant as arrogance gets.

But I have lots of opinions on which music is better than which other music; I have lots of opinions on which books are better written in relation to other books, and which movies were better made relative to their (I would say) inferior counterparts.

There is no problem in holding an opinion on these things. That's what can make art so controversial & interesting. But I have no intention of pushing my views on others as some sort of objective, universal truth. The latter is a problem, not the subjective preferences we all hold.

Gummy Panda

They should have used:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2bYJQFQMs8

It could be used to activate the final five in the alien fleet.

Madam_X

Where does this relativity stuff end? I mean, those magazines like Take A Break (which I buy and read but which are just silly fluff, and people who think they're shyte are not snobs) and books by George Orwell... shur they're all just words on pages like. Same thing really.

Priori

later12 wrote: »

There is no problem in holding an opinion on these things. That's what can make art so controversial & interesting. But I have no intention of pushing my views on others as some sort of objective, universal truth. The latter is a problem, not the subjective preferences we all hold.

+ 1

Completely agree.

(In starting this thread, I really wasn't making any attempt to express anything other than my opinion, and I don't believe I pushed anything on anyone as an objective, universal truth)

Archeron

The chances of anything coming from Mars, are a million to one they said....
Mooooowwhooaaaaa.
The chances of anything coming from Mars, are a million to one......but still...they came......

That choice would have confused everybody.