I'm trying to reach you through Mobility because the e-mail I sent you
bounced.
I just wanted to say I really appreciate the updates for the Moby
Discography
you send me :) Keep 'em coming!
kind regards,
Bart
- -------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to majordomo@xmission.com
with the line "unsubscribe mobility" in the body.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 06:57:18 EST
From: Bijou75@aol.com
Subject: Re: (mobility) Play neophytes...
- --part1_fe.aba729.278b051e_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 01/08/2001 5:17:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
cbourke1@bigred.unl.edu writes:
>> Personally I attribute the success, as carrie probably does, to word of
mouth. But that still doesn't answer the main issue, WHY PLAY? Why not
EIW? Why not AR? Why not the score of other albums he's done for the last
15 aught years? Perhaps these questions will never be answered. <<
Probably the only way to know with any degree of certainty is to do some good
market research, something I doubt Mute or V2 are likely to do, and even if
they did, hopefully it would have no bearing on Moby's future recordings; it
would merely satisfy the curiosity of people like us, and that doesn't really
justify the expense. So it's left to us to speculate.
So, why not AR? Well, granted I wasn't around then, but from what I gather
not even Moby's fans were quite sure what to make of that one. And EIW was
released before electronica, for lack of a better term, had really become
accepted. Back then there was a certain stigma attached to it; I think your
average pop listener thought of dance music as being rather "gay" or nerdy.
That's changed, with the "electronica explosion" of '96-'97; although it
never quite lived up to the hype it garnered as "the next big thing," I think
it did open a lot of people's minds, or at least expose them to something new
and different.
You're right, though... I don't think Play really fits into any one category,
not even electronica. And maybe that's what people like about it-- it's
different and refreshing. Personally there's something about Play that
speaks to me... it's nearly impossible to define what that quality is; it's
ineffable, something that can only be understood when it's felt. I hesitate
to use the term "spiritual," as it's such a loaded word, but it really is
what seems most appropriate. I remember excitedly composing an e-mail to a
friend after I'd heard the album for the first time; in that letter I
described Play as "capturing the beauty of creation," and while that is a
highly subjective description, I think it may be help explain the album's
popularity. There's something about it people connect to, something they're
longing for. I am very, very picky about the records I buy, but even so,
Play moves me in a way few albums ever have.
But back to being coldly factual.. Moby's visibility did increase with this
album, although it's still a question as to which came first, the chicken or
the egg. But people have been able to see him on MTV and MTV2, as well as on
tour, and I think the notoriety caused by the commercial licensing of the
songs on Play have contributed as well. I'm not referring to people hearing
the songs in commercials, but rather to the stir it all caused. It aroused
people's curiosity, perhaps made them notice the songs more than they
otherwise would have.
All factors considered, however-- word of mouth, commercial licensing,
visibility, personal connection-- I think the first is most important,
followed by the last, with visibility and licensing, respectively, bringing
up the rear. This is far from scientific, however-- it's just my opinion.
- --Carrie
- --part1_fe.aba729.278b051e_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 01/08/2001 5:17:24 AM Eastern Standard Time, <BR>cbourke1@bigred.unl.edu writes:
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>>> Personally I attribute the success, as carrie probably does, to word of
<BR>mouth. But that still doesn't answer the main issue, WHY PLAY? Why not
<BR>EIW? Why not AR? Why not the score of other albums he's done for the last
<BR>15 aught years? Perhaps these questions will never be answered. <<
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>Probably the only way to know with any degree of certainty is to do some good <BR>market research, something I doubt Mute or V2 are likely to do, and even if <BR>they did, hopefully it would have no bearing on Moby's future recordings; it <BR>would merely satisfy the curiosity of people like us, and that doesn't really <BR>justify the expense. So it's left to us to speculate.
<BR>
<BR>So, why not AR? Well, granted I wasn't around then, but from what I gather <BR>not even Moby's fans were quite sure what to make of that one. And EIW was <BR>released before electronica, for lack of a better term, had really become <BR>accepted. Back then there was a certain stigma attached to it; I think your <BR>average pop listener thought of dance music as being rather "gay" or nerdy. <BR>That's changed, with the "electronica explosion" of '96-'97; although it <BR>never quite lived up to the hype it garnered as "the next big thing," I think <BR>it did open a lot of people's minds, or at least expose them to something new <BR>and different.
<BR>
<BR>You're right, though... I don't think Play really fits into any one category, <BR>not even electronica. And maybe that's what people like about it-- it's <BR>different and refreshing. Personally there's something about Play that <BR>speaks to me... it's nearly impossible to define what that quality is; it's <BR>ineffable, something that can only be understood when it's felt. I hesitate <BR>to use the term "spiritual," as it's such a loaded word, but it really is <BR>what seems most appropriate. I remember excitedly composing an e-mail to a <BR>friend after I'd heard the album for the first time; in that letter I <BR>described Play as "capturing the beauty of creation," and while that is a <BR>highly subjective description, I think it may be help explain the album's <BR>popularity. There's something about it people connect to, something they're <BR>longing for. I am very, very picky about the records I buy, but even so, <BR>Play moves me !
in a way few albums ever have.
<BR>
<BR>But back to being coldly factual.. Moby's visibility did increase with this <BR>album, although it's still a question as to which came first, the chicken or <BR>the egg. But people have been able to see him on MTV and MTV2, as well as on <BR>tour, and I think the notoriety caused by the commercial licensing of the <BR>songs on Play have contributed as well. I'm not referring to people hearing <BR>the songs in commercials, but rather to the stir it all caused. It aroused <BR>people's curiosity, perhaps made them notice the songs more than they <BR>otherwise would have.
<BR>
<BR>All factors considered, however-- word of mouth, commercial licensing, <BR>visibility, personal connection-- I think the first is most important, <BR>followed by the last, with visibility and licensing, respectively, bringing <BR>up the rear. This is far from scientific, however-- it's just my opinion.
<BR>
<BR>--Carrie</FONT></HTML>
- --part1_fe.aba729.278b051e_boundary--
- -------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to majordomo@xmission.com
with the line "unsubscribe mobility" in the body.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 08:38:16 -0500
From: "courtney colonna" <c_colonna@hotmail.com>
Subject: (mobility) moby in urb mag.
this may have been mentioned before, but i've been on vacation from work
over the holidays, and rather than wading through hundreds of mobility
emails (that are probably more of the same pointless oneliners back and
forth between a few people), i just deleted them all. (what the HELL is
going on here...isn't there a chat room or something for these people??)
anyway...there's a nice interview with moby in the newest issue of urb mag
(the 10th anniversary issue). he talks about his "anti-dance music"
comments that he made years back. they also printed a letter that he wrote
to the magazine in 1996. i think there are 3 different covers for the
magazine. a picture of moby from 1991 (he had hair) is one of them. (i've
only seen the de la soul cover, though.) there are also other mentions of
