The RUSH thread got me to thinking. We all are impacted by great creative works. Plays, books, music, art, movies.

What kind of work had the greatest impact --as in not yet topped by something else?

For me it's really a tie between great music and live theatre. Movies are powerful, but somehow don't quite stick with me like these two art forms do. Books are probably next on the list.

We will generally listen to great music over and over. This is true for nearly everybody. It's not so true for movies, theatre, books, etc...

Is music the most powerful of our means of expression? What say you?

I'm inclined to agree with you regarding music. Not so much for live theatre. Books and movies tie for second.

Live music for sure for me. Either as a listener or participant.

> What kind of work had the greatest impact

In what sense? I'm of the opinion that some types of artistic media work are better suited to making certain types of impressions.

For instance, when I was in high school, I was listening to a lot of punk rock that tried to tackle a variety of socio-political themes. At the time, I thought that was great. As I got older, that punk rock didn't sound so great any more because I came to realize that the subject matter that they tried to deal with was too complicated to do it justice in a three minute song. Thus, the punk rockers hit a limit of what their medium could accomplish.

To make an intellectual impact, the message that these guys were trying to put across really needed a more long-form presentation, such as a novel, a movie, or the theater.

Wnen it comes to music I would have to say Queen.

As for film there are certain films that no matter what else I am doing if these movies are on television I become transfixed by them because of the memories they bring back from younger times. Specifically: One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest, Apocalypse Now and Francis Ford Coppola's wifes Hearts of Darkness documentary. Testament, and By Dawn's Early Night
http://imdb.com/title/tt0099197/. Oh and as a wrestling fan I like to Hurt People. And the classic supercards of wrestlings early days like the early Starcades, WrestleMania III, the first Clash of the Champions.

As for literature what is that?

Music: Dr Teeth and the All Star Muppet Band
TV: My Mother The Car
Movies: Plan 9 from Outer Space
Books: Pop Up Elmo.
Theater: A Million and One Mimes Trapped in a Box
Art: Paint by numbers, Mona Lisa

It is definitely music for me, i'm a musicaholic. But one group that stands out above all others, the one constant I can always count on to take me to a better place, Pink Floyd. Either Roger Waters or David Gilmore is fine with me with two of my favorite's being "The Wall" and "A Momentary Lapse of Reason".

Timeless Music

PS....I have "By Dawns Early Light" on DVD....great movie.

Alfredo: Or, they could make an album focused on a topic. Get it done in pieces, tie it together with common story and theme elements across the tracks.

(tough to do though simply excellent when it happens!)

Ok, so there is a case for music being the most powerful one.

And powerful is used loosely here. I mean generally, that medium that one could not live without. Can't think of any other way to nail it down.

So, why then?

For me it seems to be what's left to the mind, though that seems to leave theatre out. Maybe it's more like detailed emotional content. Not sure...

For me, radio has a the most impact, and by extension, music and spoken word. Back in the 70's, my Mom and I used to listen to all the old radio shows after dinner on KEX...it was our ritual. Lights off, no talking, just listening and allowing "theatre of the mind" to happen. I was in 2nd or 3rd grade and saw the action clearly in my mind's eye. I'm not as enthralled by the visual aspect of films or theatre, although I enjoy both. Just don't feel immersed...it's like dreams that you just watch as compared to lucid dreaming.

Yep.

That works for me too. I love radio theatre. Growing up and hearing a replay of "war of the worlds", various radio shows, sometimes just stories being read was powerful stuff for a kid.

Did you ever read the Tolkien books? That movie just NAILED the visuals for me. Watched with friends and we all were pointing and talking about places and things we recognized. It was as if we had all been there before.

Of course, we had in our own theatre of the mind!

I think that work is likely the best example of what movies could do, if we worked really hard on them.

Maybe we just are not good enough at movies? That movie is a shining example, but maybe it's just a nice fit, given our current tech understanding and our ability to realize the art form.

With sounds, it's really possible to make most any sound. We can make better sounds than our perception allows us to appreciate, mix them, tell stories and convey emotions with them.

Same for words.

This really isn't true for movies. I can hear a sound and mistake it for the real world. Words can take me to places where I can experience everything as if I were there.

Movies only show me a picture of that. I've not seen much in the way of video that just blended like sounds do. I've had a few movies take me to a place though. Pretty damn immersive, but also pretty rare that it happens too.

And a great story, performed in theatre, is always good! With that art form, it's more about watching the people try to be somebody, somewhere and get it right, far more than it is the story.

When they do, it's immersive --and I think that's really an important concept. It's also exposing people, for who they are too, and I think that's something that does not appeal to everyone, thus the lower level of general interest in theatre.

Music is immersive and it comes essentially for free! Being somewhere, or doing something, can be completely changed by music. That's not so true of a book or a play.

Hearing who people are, through music, is cake as well. Just hits home on all levels.

Movies consume too much. Either one is watching, or one just isn't. Not sure what to do with that, but I think it's important.

Again, the spoken word --audio in general, just can happen and be a part of things, in the moment, THERE and real. In fact, I'm not really so sure it can be any other way.

This is like the seeing a word / vs reading it bit. Music / sound in general just gets inside, like a window to the mind.

I think I have to bump books up above movies. Often I really don't like readings of books though, unless somebody is doing it live, where I can see them. Packs more punch that way.

When somebody reads aloud, and they are there with you, you get to know something about them at the same time you are getting the story.

I used to like recordings of story readings as a kid. Now it's not so cool. Don't fully understand why that is.

Lucid dreaming... powerful stuff. If somebody were to develop some regular means to trigger this, I think I would be all over it. Those experiences are real --so real, their impact is felt forever afterword, just as some real life experience of similar caliber is.

"the one constant I can always count on to take me to a better place, Pink Floyd."

I agree that several Pink Floyd albums can take one to a better place easily (as well as albums from Brian Eno, Tim Story, Jon Mark, Robert Roach, Tony O'Connor, Richard Bone and others) while for film, its not quite so. However, there are a few films that can do the trick, and one is "2001 A Space Odyssey."

"action clearly in my mind's eye."

This is something Bill Shonely excelled at. I dare say that many a Blazer game was far more entertaining on the radio than actually experienced in person.

I think it has as much to do with the pot as anything else.

Books...as an only child, books and radio have been constant companions for me since I learned how to work 'em I read the Tolkien books in 7th or 8th, then again when I got the Zeppelin connection (DUH...I'm a little slow on the uptake sometimes) and again, as the movies came along. Ditto the visuals compared to the book. The Harry Potter movies, too.

I love Pink Floyd. When Syd Barrett passed away, I broke out "Wish you were here" and played it at what you guys refer to as a nice volume, in the dark, just let it wash over me. It took on a whole new meaning in the new context that he would never be there now. Just doing a little research in something on the Rush thread, I noticed that Syd experienced synesthesia too, along with a bevy of other creative folks we all respect and admire.

Bill S. really understands the power of radio and the pictures we create while listening along. The best always make you feel like you're right there with them, no matter the format, and that they are speaking with you, the listener, personally. I am in awe of those who can make me feel that way, especially without benefit of eye contact and other body language. Conversely, I love to turn off the volume when news folks and politicians are on TV and just watch them...see if I get the feel behind the words.

I guess we can distill the theatre/movie thing down to this:

If you watch an actor's perfomance and can't picture ANYBODY else in that role...the role resonates with the actor and vice versa, and like you said, the exposure is tangible, it's ON. If that criteria is not met, no deal.

Maybe that's why books and other forms we control in our imaginations are so powerful for us. We ARE the characters: it's our vision, and our understanding of the context, and how we assemble the various parts. Right down to the voices we give them...or don't. How did Gollum SOUND when you read his words?

.....I used to like recordings of story readings as a kid.....

A few years back, NPR ran an hour long program called radio reader out of the U of Mich. loved it, but depending on the book, it could be a real tune out. you either loved it or hated it. Problem was you also had to tune in the same time every night... believe it was on KUOW from 9-10pm or 10-11. definitely NOT something that would work on commercial radio, but still think there is a place for radio drama. Local station runs Twilight Zone on sat night. Refreshing Change of pace from the usual national talk pap. Now if they would just drop Rush and Savage and concentrate on talking some LOCAL issues. Now that Phil Hendrie is back, this station dropped Rolleye James and went with Phil. While I appreciate his abilities, I get tired of his stuff in a hurry. For a national program, he makes too many So-cal references for me, though I am sure the generic listener that is targeted doesn't mind.

And once again I wandered off of the topic path only to fall into the tangle of blackberry brambles.

Nothing wrong with national programming, it's cost effective when spread over hundreds of stations. certainly professional and a much bigger pop than joe local. The downside is you lose the local connection. Joe local voice probably has the same issues with the city and county that I have. And if the urge strikes we can discuss Hillary's hair and Romney's teeth. Meanwhile Rush can't and doesn't relate to our new mandatory leash law, and why county council imposed the sales tax increase even though we voted it down. And while I can call either about he national candidates shortcomings or strengths, I have the better chance to air my opinion on Joe Local's show, rather than
Dr. Laurarush Savagedrudge....

I still think the only way to increase revenue within a market is to emphasize you local focus and hit the local business man! too many stations chasing the decreasing national and regional accounts. Those used to be the gravy. now they seem to be the main course to too many clusters!