Monday, July 12, 2010
「五條人」給基督徒音樂人的一條問題 - 古斌
「五條人」,一隊操廣東海豐話的廣州音樂組合,六月廿六日週六,一個下雨的晚上,就在林國璋牧師的邀請下,在基督教善樂堂搞了一場音樂會,出席者約六十人。兩小時的聚會,說是五條人「PK」(比拼)「一同堂」(善樂堂三位弟兄的組合),其實也沒有計分制,不過是交替表演,讓大家一同觀摩。
雖說「五條人」,也只有兩位成員,起初是五位的,但隊員「結婚生仔」去了,便留下兩人,但名字保留不變。成員之一阿茂說:「我們海豐跟你們香港一樣,說人是『一條』的。」時間到了,阿茂和仁科便踢著拖鞋,拿起結他和手風琴,走到台前,阿茂用普通話把第一首歌的故事說了一遍,便用海豐話唱出來。
要講五條人的特色,角度很多,當晚會後,便有朋友從民族音樂學的角度說了一遍。林牧師忽然點了我名字,我沒說幾句就回座,因為,我看到的是一條不易解決的神學問題。要說五條人有甚麼好?那是因為他們夠地道、也夠敏銳。在田間與老伯的一席談,就變成《李阿伯》;牙痛往蚊香廠找師傅摸門釘?就變成《夢想化工廠》。小人物的故事,透視大時代的無奈。當然,也別忘他們往往用上相當長的時間,彈奏「前奏」,這個前奏,就足以帶你「入戲」。
尋找教會音樂的創意枷鎖
反省基督徒音樂?讓題材更地道不就完事了嗎?不會的。不妨觀察,有一些音樂人,例如劉以達,才華洋溢,但一「轉台」搞福音詩歌,你會驚訝他怎麼「俗套」了?放棄了他的曲風,也放棄了他的敏銳。
曾在網台「葡萄樹傳媒」策劃了一個節目,找來劉港源和文恩澄主持,旁邊我就聽他們跟嘉賓暢談。不少歌手都大談他們怎樣熱愛音樂,音樂怎樣是他們的生命--只是,這些澎湃在甚麼佈道會的演出裡,就會馬上消聲匿跡。似乎,基督徒圈子有一些不成文的枷鎖,窒息你的創作,令你必須弱智、令音樂必須被矮化,它只餘下作為佈道會warm up的功能(襯托大牧出場!)。這時候,甚麼「流著音樂的血」?「算把啦」!
先不談音樂近乎侮辱自己的與佈道會結合,單單談敬拜音樂的風格本身。當聽著「一同堂」(且慢,這不代表他們差勁)的創作,敬拜音樂要給你甚麼?當「五條人」把他們的「喲呵嗨!」穿插在音樂裡(這叫吼大概源自民謠?),我想到一個字來形容敬拜音樂:無縫(seamless)。
「無縫」的追求,不是自聖樂已有嗎?我們有大條道理把音樂變得無瑕無疵,例如甚麼「將最好獻予主」云云。無瑕,即是「遮瑕」;人誰無瑕?對不對?那麼遮掩掉的是甚麼?是身體。我要指出的是:音樂的感染力,固然是人心靈的感染力,但它是用身體傳遞的,讓別人的身體承受自你身體而來的情感。我認識福音歌手鄧婉玲,有人說她的聲線有撫平人心靈的能力--留意,能力在哪裡?在於聲線,在於身體(不是那個樂譜)!當阿茂在「喲呵嗨!」的時候,當他眉頭深鎖的彈著前奏時,是甚麼感染我們?是那份認真。認真的臉容,就夠動人。
若有人教敬拜,是教你怎控制氣氛,其實,那是教你造作。想清楚!甚麼是敬拜?就是「將身體獻上」。不是「死唱爛唱」就是獻上,而是讓「身體」甘願為神而去給別人觸碰,身體不再留為己用,而是裝載聖靈的器皿,或怒吼或婉約。
天衣無縫≠道成肉身
我敢說,若基督徒音樂不能撫摸人心,那是因為它的神學出了嚴重錯誤:它忘記了道成肉身神學的音樂實踐。「道成肉身」的邏輯是「A中有x」(詳見筆者「信仰臨界II」專欄文章〈希奇,太少希奇〉,一一七八期)。A是神性,x是不神聖的「雜音」,這「雜音」剛好把神性(A)表彰,慈愛具象為恩典,公義具象為真理,充充滿滿的有恩典、有真理。
曾聽潮人牧師馬正遠(Jaeson Ma)說,神造音樂原本是用來敬拜祂,不過人僭奪來娛樂自己。這「音樂墮落論」在敬拜讚美圈有一定叫座力,據說,天使長路西弗執掌敬拜讚美,音樂原是給神聽,但祂墮落後把音樂帶來凡間,樂器便出現(有點像金莎朱古力落入凡間)。
這個神學好神聖,可惜,這不是基督教神學,它更像靈智主義,視受造界的享樂是一種墮落。基督教核心的道成肉身信仰,就是肯定「物質彰顯自己本質」作為神恩的表彰。當音樂撫摸人心、讓人心快慰,就像美酒為神所賜一樣,叫人得享美福,承認這是「恩典」就是敬拜!
當「五條人」帶著大家投入時,大家都笑了。為甚麼?那是「好玩」,音樂是好玩的!基督徒音樂好感性,好美麗,但不好玩。這不能用「他們肩負使命」來辯護,難道你說「五條人」沒有音樂使命?真正的原因是,他們不認識道成肉身,不知道那是幽默感的根基。我們可以笑,因為道成肉身就是上帝的幽默:神性昭彰,竟是凡人。
在真理與真誠之間
敬拜音樂總是那麼完美,又怎容許單單為世情感到無奈?你太無奈又罵你沒仰望主、沒做好敬拜者!結果?一切都要在歌曲完結前「轉high」!這也很符合人想像的神聖:神聖不就是免於凡塵的覊絆嗎?只是,我們怎理解受苦節?我們又怎理解人生的中斷──死亡?全個世界都不過是一個逗號,不是句號。但我們的音樂就急於填上句號。這肯定是神學問題,不是單單觀摩就可以解決。
所以我寫了這文,而「五條人」給基督徒音樂人的一條問題,就是為甚麼聲稱擁有真理答案的基督教,總是不夠真誠赤祼?
(有關聚會由基督教善樂堂和琴〔Qin Music〕主辦,《時代論壇》及靈風書室協辦。文章分題為編者所加。)
第一一九三期.二○一○年七月十一日
|
雖說「五條人」,也只有兩位成員,起初是五位的,但隊員「結婚生仔」去了,便留下兩人,但名字保留不變。成員之一阿茂說:「我們海豐跟你們香港一樣,說人是『一條』的。」時間到了,阿茂和仁科便踢著拖鞋,拿起結他和手風琴,走到台前,阿茂用普通話把第一首歌的故事說了一遍,便用海豐話唱出來。
要講五條人的特色,角度很多,當晚會後,便有朋友從民族音樂學的角度說了一遍。林牧師忽然點了我名字,我沒說幾句就回座,因為,我看到的是一條不易解決的神學問題。要說五條人有甚麼好?那是因為他們夠地道、也夠敏銳。在田間與老伯的一席談,就變成《李阿伯》;牙痛往蚊香廠找師傅摸門釘?就變成《夢想化工廠》。小人物的故事,透視大時代的無奈。當然,也別忘他們往往用上相當長的時間,彈奏「前奏」,這個前奏,就足以帶你「入戲」。
尋找教會音樂的創意枷鎖
反省基督徒音樂?讓題材更地道不就完事了嗎?不會的。不妨觀察,有一些音樂人,例如劉以達,才華洋溢,但一「轉台」搞福音詩歌,你會驚訝他怎麼「俗套」了?放棄了他的曲風,也放棄了他的敏銳。
曾在網台「葡萄樹傳媒」策劃了一個節目,找來劉港源和文恩澄主持,旁邊我就聽他們跟嘉賓暢談。不少歌手都大談他們怎樣熱愛音樂,音樂怎樣是他們的生命--只是,這些澎湃在甚麼佈道會的演出裡,就會馬上消聲匿跡。似乎,基督徒圈子有一些不成文的枷鎖,窒息你的創作,令你必須弱智、令音樂必須被矮化,它只餘下作為佈道會warm up的功能(襯托大牧出場!)。這時候,甚麼「流著音樂的血」?「算把啦」!
先不談音樂近乎侮辱自己的與佈道會結合,單單談敬拜音樂的風格本身。當聽著「一同堂」(且慢,這不代表他們差勁)的創作,敬拜音樂要給你甚麼?當「五條人」把他們的「喲呵嗨!」穿插在音樂裡(這叫吼大概源自民謠?),我想到一個字來形容敬拜音樂:無縫(seamless)。
「無縫」的追求,不是自聖樂已有嗎?我們有大條道理把音樂變得無瑕無疵,例如甚麼「將最好獻予主」云云。無瑕,即是「遮瑕」;人誰無瑕?對不對?那麼遮掩掉的是甚麼?是身體。我要指出的是:音樂的感染力,固然是人心靈的感染力,但它是用身體傳遞的,讓別人的身體承受自你身體而來的情感。我認識福音歌手鄧婉玲,有人說她的聲線有撫平人心靈的能力--留意,能力在哪裡?在於聲線,在於身體(不是那個樂譜)!當阿茂在「喲呵嗨!」的時候,當他眉頭深鎖的彈著前奏時,是甚麼感染我們?是那份認真。認真的臉容,就夠動人。
若有人教敬拜,是教你怎控制氣氛,其實,那是教你造作。想清楚!甚麼是敬拜?就是「將身體獻上」。不是「死唱爛唱」就是獻上,而是讓「身體」甘願為神而去給別人觸碰,身體不再留為己用,而是裝載聖靈的器皿,或怒吼或婉約。
天衣無縫≠道成肉身
我敢說,若基督徒音樂不能撫摸人心,那是因為它的神學出了嚴重錯誤:它忘記了道成肉身神學的音樂實踐。「道成肉身」的邏輯是「A中有x」(詳見筆者「信仰臨界II」專欄文章〈希奇,太少希奇〉,一一七八期)。A是神性,x是不神聖的「雜音」,這「雜音」剛好把神性(A)表彰,慈愛具象為恩典,公義具象為真理,充充滿滿的有恩典、有真理。
曾聽潮人牧師馬正遠(Jaeson Ma)說,神造音樂原本是用來敬拜祂,不過人僭奪來娛樂自己。這「音樂墮落論」在敬拜讚美圈有一定叫座力,據說,天使長路西弗執掌敬拜讚美,音樂原是給神聽,但祂墮落後把音樂帶來凡間,樂器便出現(有點像金莎朱古力落入凡間)。
這個神學好神聖,可惜,這不是基督教神學,它更像靈智主義,視受造界的享樂是一種墮落。基督教核心的道成肉身信仰,就是肯定「物質彰顯自己本質」作為神恩的表彰。當音樂撫摸人心、讓人心快慰,就像美酒為神所賜一樣,叫人得享美福,承認這是「恩典」就是敬拜!
當「五條人」帶著大家投入時,大家都笑了。為甚麼?那是「好玩」,音樂是好玩的!基督徒音樂好感性,好美麗,但不好玩。這不能用「他們肩負使命」來辯護,難道你說「五條人」沒有音樂使命?真正的原因是,他們不認識道成肉身,不知道那是幽默感的根基。我們可以笑,因為道成肉身就是上帝的幽默:神性昭彰,竟是凡人。
在真理與真誠之間
敬拜音樂總是那麼完美,又怎容許單單為世情感到無奈?你太無奈又罵你沒仰望主、沒做好敬拜者!結果?一切都要在歌曲完結前「轉high」!這也很符合人想像的神聖:神聖不就是免於凡塵的覊絆嗎?只是,我們怎理解受苦節?我們又怎理解人生的中斷──死亡?全個世界都不過是一個逗號,不是句號。但我們的音樂就急於填上句號。這肯定是神學問題,不是單單觀摩就可以解決。
所以我寫了這文,而「五條人」給基督徒音樂人的一條問題,就是為甚麼聲稱擁有真理答案的基督教,總是不夠真誠赤祼?
(有關聚會由基督教善樂堂和琴〔Qin Music〕主辦,《時代論壇》及靈風書室協辦。文章分題為編者所加。)
第一一九三期.二○一○年七月十一日
Labels: Christian faith, Christian Times, Gospel, The Chimes, 精緻文化
|
淺談現代詩歌 - 西伯
這十年來,詩歌創作可以說是多姿多采的。簡單總括來說,是百花齊放,屬健康的現象。換上另一角度看,歌曲多了,當中自然總會出現一些次等甚至不合格的作品,也屬正常。
古老詩歌才好?
不要一味以為「古老詩歌」才有水準,現在的每況愈下。沒錯,由拜占庭時代起,創作人不是音樂家就是神學家,但他們都是人,也有失手的時候。欠佳的作品自然被淘汰,好的便成為經典。多得馬丁路德、加爾文等人的改革,令當時原是平民創作的「當代流行詩歌」,可以登陸教會聖堂中。天下無新事,今天亦然。隨著神學觀的改變、教會年輕人的訴求、文化的改變、音樂製作科技平民化、作曲填詞大眾化,教會音樂也平民起來。今日,經過這十多年來很多音樂機構及音樂人的推動,教會普遍已經接受了這一代的「現代詩歌」。許多的教會,即使大堂崇拜仍舊以傳統詩歌(其實是源於馬丁路德時代未被淘汰的經典詩歌)為主,用不著這些現代詩歌,小組、團契、佈道場合,或者青少年崇拜都會樂意採用。
記得我事奉初期,教會還是有很多「反對」聲音──對這一代詩歌還是有所保留,甚至帶點「批判」,大家對「接待」這些詩歌,都較為謹慎。今天大家的態度開放了、接納度大了──當一般「平民百姓」都相對地容易公開發表自己的作品,當一般崇拜主席都渴求或被要求領唱新歌;有供有求之下,自然會有大量新歌湧入教會。大家可以從唱片架上看到這個事實:十年前大概只有很小量的個人創作,今天,以個人名義推出之唱片之數量已直迫幾間音樂機構出品的總和,甚至有超越之勢。
為詩歌把關
普遍人都認為這是好事平常事,個人卻不敢完全認同,因為我感到詩歌的「把關人」似乎都放鬆了手。「一首多人喜愛的詩歌的影響力遠比我講一堂道大!」一位名牧曾經這樣分享。一個牧者的信息最多都是影響著哪小撮聽眾;相對而言,一首受歡迎的歌曲卻可以重覆地在三、五百間教會裡不同的聚會內唱詠著!好影響,當然要感恩,壞的呢?
良莠不齊、水準參差是自然、外圍的現象,教會控制不了。從創作人角度看,我當然希望我的歌曲可以進入教會大堂,但,以教育及牧養角度看,我寧願教會升高選歌的門檻,寧願教會保留多少「批判」的眼光,繼而提昇會友對詩歌的辨識與欣賞能力。這樣,更多的詩歌會被淘汰,更多的創作人會意識到自己需要提升自己的創作質素。最終,這對創作人及教會,都是好的。
(共享詩歌十週年呈獻「西說詩詞」第一篇。適逢共享詩歌協會十週年,總幹事西伯與你一同回顧十年來香港的基督教音樂發展。)
第一一九三期.二○一○年七月十一日
|
古老詩歌才好?
不要一味以為「古老詩歌」才有水準,現在的每況愈下。沒錯,由拜占庭時代起,創作人不是音樂家就是神學家,但他們都是人,也有失手的時候。欠佳的作品自然被淘汰,好的便成為經典。多得馬丁路德、加爾文等人的改革,令當時原是平民創作的「當代流行詩歌」,可以登陸教會聖堂中。天下無新事,今天亦然。隨著神學觀的改變、教會年輕人的訴求、文化的改變、音樂製作科技平民化、作曲填詞大眾化,教會音樂也平民起來。今日,經過這十多年來很多音樂機構及音樂人的推動,教會普遍已經接受了這一代的「現代詩歌」。許多的教會,即使大堂崇拜仍舊以傳統詩歌(其實是源於馬丁路德時代未被淘汰的經典詩歌)為主,用不著這些現代詩歌,小組、團契、佈道場合,或者青少年崇拜都會樂意採用。
記得我事奉初期,教會還是有很多「反對」聲音──對這一代詩歌還是有所保留,甚至帶點「批判」,大家對「接待」這些詩歌,都較為謹慎。今天大家的態度開放了、接納度大了──當一般「平民百姓」都相對地容易公開發表自己的作品,當一般崇拜主席都渴求或被要求領唱新歌;有供有求之下,自然會有大量新歌湧入教會。大家可以從唱片架上看到這個事實:十年前大概只有很小量的個人創作,今天,以個人名義推出之唱片之數量已直迫幾間音樂機構出品的總和,甚至有超越之勢。
為詩歌把關
普遍人都認為這是好事平常事,個人卻不敢完全認同,因為我感到詩歌的「把關人」似乎都放鬆了手。「一首多人喜愛的詩歌的影響力遠比我講一堂道大!」一位名牧曾經這樣分享。一個牧者的信息最多都是影響著哪小撮聽眾;相對而言,一首受歡迎的歌曲卻可以重覆地在三、五百間教會裡不同的聚會內唱詠著!好影響,當然要感恩,壞的呢?
良莠不齊、水準參差是自然、外圍的現象,教會控制不了。從創作人角度看,我當然希望我的歌曲可以進入教會大堂,但,以教育及牧養角度看,我寧願教會升高選歌的門檻,寧願教會保留多少「批判」的眼光,繼而提昇會友對詩歌的辨識與欣賞能力。這樣,更多的詩歌會被淘汰,更多的創作人會意識到自己需要提升自己的創作質素。最終,這對創作人及教會,都是好的。
(共享詩歌十週年呈獻「西說詩詞」第一篇。適逢共享詩歌協會十週年,總幹事西伯與你一同回顧十年來香港的基督教音樂發展。)
第一一九三期.二○一○年七月十一日
Labels: Christian faith, Christian Times, Gospel, 精緻文化
|
2 good pieces on Christian Times!
I recently read two very good pieces on Christian Times about HK's gospel/Christian music, one written by 西伯 and one written by 古斌. Both are well-written and enlightening. I share a lot of what they say about Christian music, especially in the arena of praise and worship!
Please enjoy!!
|
Please enjoy!!
Labels: Christian faith, Christian Times, Gospel, 精緻文化
|
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
你詐肚痛去廁所排長龍, 詐詐諦做工夫詐肚痛
Newly restored classic "Tommy Dorsey Orchestra starring Warren Covington" released by Fidelity Sound Archives. Highly recommended if you like Cuban flavors from old black and white Cantonese movies with 鄧寄塵 and 鄭君錦 or Wong Kar Wai films.
|
Labels: big band, Cuban sounds, Fidelity Sound Archives, 精緻文化, 鄧寄塵, 鄭君錦
|
Monday, February 01, 2010
Part 2: 有線電視《拉近文化》藝星主角: 鍾氏兄弟
Part 2 福音兩兄弟幾好聽 wor... 有d感動tim :P
Please view the clip here.
|
Please view the clip here.
Labels: Cable TV, Carmen Tsang, Henry Chung, Roger Chung, The Chimes, 曾美華, 精緻文化, 鍾一匡, 鐘聲
|
Thursday, December 31, 2009
10 Hippest Music Phenomena in 2009
1. Mininoise 迷你噪音《多麼美好》

香港本土的草根民謠樂隊《迷你噪音》,最近出版了首張CD《多麼美好》,以樸實而富質感的民謠聲音,灌錄了多首曾在街頭傳唱,伴隨我們一起抗爭的謠曲,把憤怒與苦澀化為美的力量。
在他們的歌裡,有臨屋區小孩和公共屋邨居民的生活盼願,老工人的淡然回眸,性工作者的日記殘章,對葬身建築工地的工人的思念,與工人家屬同哭的心,社會異議者的羞怯情歌,與及二十年前的廣場酷熱。
《迷你噪音》成員:
老B (唱、結他)
陳偉發 (低音結他、結他、和音)
劉子斌 (手風琴)
黃仁逵 (ukulele、結他)
Edmund Leung (鼓)
2. Mimi Lo @ The Big Voice
3. Yao Lee & 忠實原音

4. Rebecca Pan & Her Indies (Not Undies)

5. 福音歌
6. The resurgence of "Super"!

7. Khalil frenzy!

8. Ah Lam!!
9. 【無聲谷讚佛曲】 願烱法師

10. CMCD001
|

香港本土的草根民謠樂隊《迷你噪音》,最近出版了首張CD《多麼美好》,以樸實而富質感的民謠聲音,灌錄了多首曾在街頭傳唱,伴隨我們一起抗爭的謠曲,把憤怒與苦澀化為美的力量。
在他們的歌裡,有臨屋區小孩和公共屋邨居民的生活盼願,老工人的淡然回眸,性工作者的日記殘章,對葬身建築工地的工人的思念,與工人家屬同哭的心,社會異議者的羞怯情歌,與及二十年前的廣場酷熱。
《迷你噪音》成員:
老B (唱、結他)
陳偉發 (低音結他、結他、和音)
劉子斌 (手風琴)
黃仁逵 (ukulele、結他)
Edmund Leung (鼓)
2. Mimi Lo @ The Big Voice
3. Yao Lee & 忠實原音

4. Rebecca Pan & Her Indies (Not Undies)

5. 福音歌
6. The resurgence of "Super"!

7. Khalil frenzy!

8. Ah Lam!!
9. 【無聲谷讚佛曲】 願烱法師

10. CMCD001
Labels: Best of 2009, 精緻文化
|
Happy new year, folks!
Sharing with you a great piece from Jason Chan@CBN. Love it!
Original post can be found here.
精你個選
2009年12月18日 星期五
文:Jason Chan〈前[V]音樂總監、現任職視博恩(香港)新媒體企劃〉

每逢年終,君皆見唱片店內必定樹立不少中外精選專輯,原因有兩:
甲:每個年頭,唱片公司都定下該年目標營業額,如果那年各專輯生生性性的話,自然就可過骨了事,不然就要拔出上方寶劍,為旗下當紅歌手推出低吃又大件雙CD單碟價的精選專輯,美其名集體見證歌手多年努力,實呈免紅油追數而已,盡最後人事為業績心肺復蘇!
乙:唱片公司上下生物都不過是血肉之驅,踩足一年都要放假回氣,這些免行台打牌吃飯宣傳,銷量自動波的精選碟正好提供黃金放假機會,所以如果你眼眉夠通且透,不難察覺,洋人精選專輯會集中在聖誕前出爐,咱們黃皮膚的超值合輯則在新正頭恭喜發財!
故此,今年推出精選專輯的各功能組別有:
音魂不散仙人組:Bee Gees、Michael Jackson、Jackson 5、Nirvana、Enya (sorry,雖她還健在,但在我心中,她已上了神台,有怪莫怪!)
黃金吸水外星組:Madonna、Britney Spears、Janet Jackson、Foo Fighters、Snow Patrol
好馬都吃回頭組:鄭伊健、張智霖
舊相好追擊組(此乃歌手轉會推出新專輯時,舊唱片公司借勢分一杯羮的掟煲費):古巨基、楊千樺
嘩!有幾精選有幾精選,要幾熱鬧有幾熱鬧!實行大家買得開心,唱片公司就袋得安心!
音樂,畢竟對很多人而言,都是一盤生意,一堆銀碼!
你呢,數算過去一年,你的生活精選專輯如何?
得過且過,無驚無險又過一年?
還是…
為主而活,打死罷就?
銷量其次、交帳要緊!
共勉之!
|
Original post can be found here.
精你個選
2009年12月18日 星期五
文:Jason Chan〈前[V]音樂總監、現任職視博恩(香港)新媒體企劃〉

每逢年終,君皆見唱片店內必定樹立不少中外精選專輯,原因有兩:
甲:每個年頭,唱片公司都定下該年目標營業額,如果那年各專輯生生性性的話,自然就可過骨了事,不然就要拔出上方寶劍,為旗下當紅歌手推出低吃又大件雙CD單碟價的精選專輯,美其名集體見證歌手多年努力,實呈免紅油追數而已,盡最後人事為業績心肺復蘇!
乙:唱片公司上下生物都不過是血肉之驅,踩足一年都要放假回氣,這些免行台打牌吃飯宣傳,銷量自動波的精選碟正好提供黃金放假機會,所以如果你眼眉夠通且透,不難察覺,洋人精選專輯會集中在聖誕前出爐,咱們黃皮膚的超值合輯則在新正頭恭喜發財!
故此,今年推出精選專輯的各功能組別有:
音魂不散仙人組:Bee Gees、Michael Jackson、Jackson 5、Nirvana、Enya (sorry,雖她還健在,但在我心中,她已上了神台,有怪莫怪!)
黃金吸水外星組:Madonna、Britney Spears、Janet Jackson、Foo Fighters、Snow Patrol
好馬都吃回頭組:鄭伊健、張智霖
舊相好追擊組(此乃歌手轉會推出新專輯時,舊唱片公司借勢分一杯羮的掟煲費):古巨基、楊千樺
嘩!有幾精選有幾精選,要幾熱鬧有幾熱鬧!實行大家買得開心,唱片公司就袋得安心!
音樂,畢竟對很多人而言,都是一盤生意,一堆銀碼!
你呢,數算過去一年,你的生活精選專輯如何?
得過且過,無驚無險又過一年?
還是…
為主而活,打死罷就?
銷量其次、交帳要緊!
共勉之!
Labels: 1 Music Box, 1G Music, CBN Hong Kong, Christian faith, Jason Chan, 精緻文化
|
Friday, December 04, 2009
From 有線電視《拉近文化》- 爵士與藍調 4 : 藍調口琴

爵士與藍調 4 : 藍調口琴
簡單一個「口琴」,充滿藍調靈魂,加上木結他的合奏,一彈一奏,盡顯美國南部鄉村藍調的魅力。《拉近文化》介紹最後一集藍調,節目將邀請香港著名藍調口琴家-鍾一匡,一同分享藍調音樂,深入感受「藍調口琴」帶出的哀怨纏綿。
To watch, please click here.
Labels: authentic blues, blues, blues harmonica, Edward Chun, Henry Chung, 精緻文化, 鍾一匡
|
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
From kleeworkshop: 惟有開放的人生態度,才能留有空間,讓人能聆聽、觀察!
Just want to share an excerpt from one of the always thoughtful entries of kleeworkshop. Very insightful!
For an even better effect, please read the entire entry here.
一種開放人生態度,其實也提醒我們,人生不是只有黑與白,信仰也不只是一堆招式,彷彿照辦煮碗就能天下無敵。想起金庸小說《笑傲江湖》,華山派太師叔風清揚傳授令狐沖「獨孤九劍」,最重要不是死記招式,甚至不是各招融會貫通;最高是出手無招,臨場按對手弱點出招。「根本無招,如何可破?」在令狐沖眼前出現了一個生平未見、造夢也想不到的新天地。由此,他出劍能料敵先機,戰勝「萬里獨行」田伯光的快刀。
出手無招,要求是一份創造力。惟有開放的人生態度,才能留有空間,讓人能聆聽、觀察,對準處境需要創造招式,那怕看起來笨拙,卻是有功效的。
這些日子,我在你們身上看到很多美好素質,深信這是上帝在你們中間的恩典。看到大家對事奉的投入,所花力氣好像比我那年代的少團導師有過之而無不及;看見大家認真投入信仰,讓我感動。但同時,我又看到理想與現實的落差:我們追求生命改變,嘗試努力處理生命裡的重要問題,卻每每舉步為艱,容易落在期望與失望循環中。
這時,我想到傳道書這經文。無疑,追求百尺竿頭、更進一步的志氣是不可少,但也要面對人生很多「未必」如願的現實。這不是消極,而是一種開放的人生,以致我們能適當時候放自己一馬、放別人一馬,甚至容許自己有時「交行貨」。
開放的人生,更重要是留下空間,給上帝工作,相信聖靈會帶領我們,在限制中,能對準處境,創造新招,不用一味以快打快,疲於奔命。
|
For an even better effect, please read the entire entry here.
一種開放人生態度,其實也提醒我們,人生不是只有黑與白,信仰也不只是一堆招式,彷彿照辦煮碗就能天下無敵。想起金庸小說《笑傲江湖》,華山派太師叔風清揚傳授令狐沖「獨孤九劍」,最重要不是死記招式,甚至不是各招融會貫通;最高是出手無招,臨場按對手弱點出招。「根本無招,如何可破?」在令狐沖眼前出現了一個生平未見、造夢也想不到的新天地。由此,他出劍能料敵先機,戰勝「萬里獨行」田伯光的快刀。
出手無招,要求是一份創造力。惟有開放的人生態度,才能留有空間,讓人能聆聽、觀察,對準處境需要創造招式,那怕看起來笨拙,卻是有功效的。
這些日子,我在你們身上看到很多美好素質,深信這是上帝在你們中間的恩典。看到大家對事奉的投入,所花力氣好像比我那年代的少團導師有過之而無不及;看見大家認真投入信仰,讓我感動。但同時,我又看到理想與現實的落差:我們追求生命改變,嘗試努力處理生命裡的重要問題,卻每每舉步為艱,容易落在期望與失望循環中。
這時,我想到傳道書這經文。無疑,追求百尺竿頭、更進一步的志氣是不可少,但也要面對人生很多「未必」如願的現實。這不是消極,而是一種開放的人生,以致我們能適當時候放自己一馬、放別人一馬,甚至容許自己有時「交行貨」。
開放的人生,更重要是留下空間,給上帝工作,相信聖靈會帶領我們,在限制中,能對準處境,創造新招,不用一味以快打快,疲於奔命。
Labels: kleeworkshop, 精緻文化
|
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
More comments on The Chimes
From jetty:
鍾氏兄弟《鐘聲 The Chimes》 香港製造的福音唱片,試聽一次就已經被精良的製作打動,有誠意,必買之選
From swok:
昨天(27/7)在尖沙咀HMV排行Chart 5,買了一隻HK110-
今天開聲,有新意,挑開說教語句,仍是不可多得的CD,有感情,熱誠,清新,部份歌詞有意思。錄音接近天碟質素。可喜。
連Bonus Track 14首歌有9至10首都喜愛,男女合唱者尤佳。
From Frisbee (mainland China):
发现这张专辑的时候,我正泡着方便米粉,眼睛盯着电脑,思索着为什么它最近总是无故‘当机’...也不知道什么时候电视被我打开了,说实话6、7点的样子,不是新闻就是动画,我总也提不起兴趣,巧了,那天peal恰恰就放了这一首mv-钟声...
一向对于歌曲的选择,凭借着第一感觉,而第一感觉无非凭着对某曲调的喜爱,而这次先吸引我的是歌词...‘多一分钟听听闹市声音 觉得自己真的渺小...’然后是mv的暗色画面,最后才注意到主唱的功力...
每一种语言,形成了文字,有了属于自己的发音特点,那就一定有属于自己的调子,‘白话’不是觉得不好听,只是对于我这个北方人来说,有时候讲起来难免生硬,广东这地方本属岭南,广东人也和广东话一样给人一种生猛感觉,所以他们吃得特别杂,就连老鼠据说也要尝尝鲜...话扯得有点远,本来这是我第一次介绍一张‘白话’专辑,总觉得用这个开头总也算不跑题...anyway有机会大家听一下,真的蛮不错!
|
鍾氏兄弟《鐘聲 The Chimes》 香港製造的福音唱片,試聽一次就已經被精良的製作打動,有誠意,必買之選
From swok:
昨天(27/7)在尖沙咀HMV排行Chart 5,買了一隻HK110-
今天開聲,有新意,挑開說教語句,仍是不可多得的CD,有感情,熱誠,清新,部份歌詞有意思。錄音接近天碟質素。可喜。
連Bonus Track 14首歌有9至10首都喜愛,男女合唱者尤佳。
From Frisbee (mainland China):
发现这张专辑的时候,我正泡着方便米粉,眼睛盯着电脑,思索着为什么它最近总是无故‘当机’...也不知道什么时候电视被我打开了,说实话6、7点的样子,不是新闻就是动画,我总也提不起兴趣,巧了,那天peal恰恰就放了这一首mv-钟声...
一向对于歌曲的选择,凭借着第一感觉,而第一感觉无非凭着对某曲调的喜爱,而这次先吸引我的是歌词...‘多一分钟听听闹市声音 觉得自己真的渺小...’然后是mv的暗色画面,最后才注意到主唱的功力...
每一种语言,形成了文字,有了属于自己的发音特点,那就一定有属于自己的调子,‘白话’不是觉得不好听,只是对于我这个北方人来说,有时候讲起来难免生硬,广东这地方本属岭南,广东人也和广东话一样给人一种生猛感觉,所以他们吃得特别杂,就连老鼠据说也要尝尝鲜...话扯得有点远,本来这是我第一次介绍一张‘白话’专辑,总觉得用这个开头总也算不跑题...anyway有机会大家听一下,真的蛮不错!
Labels: The Chimes, 精緻文化, 鐘聲
|
Saturday, May 12, 2007
What message does the CUSP incident send us?
I know it's exam season, but I feel I should give me two cents to the continuing CUSP 《中大學生報》 saga. Ironically, if this incident happened in the UK or the US, it would not merit any attention, let alone the half-baked media discussion these days. The reason why this topic has become the "talk of the town" is precisely because it's happening in Hong Kong, a so-called "modern" metropolitan that is wrapped in social conservatism and backwardness.
This incident can be analyzed from a few angles. While I'm not endorsing the way the CUSP editorial board framed some of the questions in the "sex survey," I do not think many of the critics actually read the March issue in question. I hereby excerpt the original online version of the questionnaire, and I urge you to determine whether these questions appeal to the prurient interests of the average reader, or in fact attempt to increase of awareness of the lack of meaningful sexual dialogue on campus.
The line is somehow blurred with the arguable suggestions of incest and bestiality; yet several factors tend to support that the newspaper did not have ill intentions to begin with. First, the font of the survey is small (as it is in the printed version) and the words are extremely condensed. Photos are few and far between (other than the two almost black and white pictures of dull objects shown). If the newspaper intended this discussion to be outrageous, it would have at least made the fonts larger and included photos of naked women or men.
Second, only 4 out of the 14 questions raised in the survey are borderline "pornographic" or "obscene." At best, an argument can be made to say these questions are "distasteful." In fact, I wholeheartedly dispute the choice of words and the manner in which these questions are asked, but there is nothing fundamentally wrong with asking them, especially from an academic perspective.
When Alfred Kinsey conducted his research on human sexual behavior, he raised even more outrageous questions to his target audience. And he was funded by the Rockfeller Institute on his scholastic and scientific study of sexuality, giving rise to the two influential bestsellers Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in 1953. (Note: these books were published almost 60 years ago. Let me remind you we live in the year 2007!)
I was appalled by the media's reaction to the CUSP incident, as some of the mainstream newspapers made this a public outcry, some 2 months after the survey's first publication in March 2007. According to many of the CU students, when the March issue first came out, virtually no one paid attention to the page in question. Accordingly, the CU administration did not take any action then (simply because it did not know about it).
A week after the public outcry in May 2007, the CU administration decided to take action, albeit a much delayed and unnecessary one, to ban the CUSP from further publication and threaten to sanction the 12 editorial staff of the newspaper (including possible expel from CU). Frankly, I was even more appalled by CU's actions, as they amount to trample on the freedom of speech and academic freedom of CU.
Eric Hoffer once said, "The central task of education is to implant a will and facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people." Bill Beattie proclaimed, "The aim of education should be to teach us rather how to think, than what to think - rather to improve our minds, so as to enable us to think for ourselves, than to load the memory with the thoughts of other men."
What the CU administration did was just the opposite - it stifled opinion rather than accepted it. The college campus is the ideal place to encourage intellectual discourse and free flow of information. The university should have the generosity to embrace rebellious thoughts and groundbreaking ideas. Unfortunately, the CU administration chose the cowardly way out, i.e. to exert parental pressure over the defenseless students and threaten to expel them just before the final examination period. If there were any "disgrace" to CU's reputation, it by all means came from CU's handling of the situation.
Incidentally, the method CU employed is exactly a mirror image of the SAR Administration since 1997. It all looked uncannily familiar. Above all, the CUSP incident is a wake-up call to Hong Kong people. Its impact is twofold. First, it reminds us that as a people, we are backward and old-fashioned and still afraid to talk about sex openly. Second, the government's prosecution of dissenting opinion in the society has descended to the academic environment. If we let this happen, students will soon be afraid to voice their opinions, and that will be an end to the freedom of education.
So what kind of world do we want our children to live in? A place where we can freely discuss our thoughts or one that resembles the old East Germany? Should we ban books like Camus' Caligula and all Victoria literature that contains incestuous themes? Or should we openly admit that incest is a societal problem that must be dealt with positively?
If CUSP did one thing wrong this time, it was the editors' lack of taste in phrasing the questions. Thus, in addition to literature, humanity studies and other scholarly pursuits, all Hong Kong Universities should start the curriculum of "The Art of Precision," (精緻文化) a term invented and made popular by the late Taiwanese media tycoon 張繼高. The Art of Precision focuses on the art of living with exquisite taste and style. It ranges from how to listen to Beethoven Symphony No. 9 to how to sip wine in an elegant manner. Most of all, it emphasizes that a good sense of humor can put an end to all superfluous human conflicts. If the editors of CUSP took a course in that subject, I could guarantee that this debacle would never have occurred.
If any of the institutions needed a lecturer in "The Art of Precision," I would gladly donate my time and expertise.
|
This incident can be analyzed from a few angles. While I'm not endorsing the way the CUSP editorial board framed some of the questions in the "sex survey," I do not think many of the critics actually read the March issue in question. I hereby excerpt the original online version of the questionnaire, and I urge you to determine whether these questions appeal to the prurient interests of the average reader, or in fact attempt to increase of awareness of the lack of meaningful sexual dialogue on campus.
The line is somehow blurred with the arguable suggestions of incest and bestiality; yet several factors tend to support that the newspaper did not have ill intentions to begin with. First, the font of the survey is small (as it is in the printed version) and the words are extremely condensed. Photos are few and far between (other than the two almost black and white pictures of dull objects shown). If the newspaper intended this discussion to be outrageous, it would have at least made the fonts larger and included photos of naked women or men.
Second, only 4 out of the 14 questions raised in the survey are borderline "pornographic" or "obscene." At best, an argument can be made to say these questions are "distasteful." In fact, I wholeheartedly dispute the choice of words and the manner in which these questions are asked, but there is nothing fundamentally wrong with asking them, especially from an academic perspective.
I was appalled by the media's reaction to the CUSP incident, as some of the mainstream newspapers made this a public outcry, some 2 months after the survey's first publication in March 2007. According to many of the CU students, when the March issue first came out, virtually no one paid attention to the page in question. Accordingly, the CU administration did not take any action then (simply because it did not know about it).
A week after the public outcry in May 2007, the CU administration decided to take action, albeit a much delayed and unnecessary one, to ban the CUSP from further publication and threaten to sanction the 12 editorial staff of the newspaper (including possible expel from CU). Frankly, I was even more appalled by CU's actions, as they amount to trample on the freedom of speech and academic freedom of CU.
Eric Hoffer once said, "The central task of education is to implant a will and facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people." Bill Beattie proclaimed, "The aim of education should be to teach us rather how to think, than what to think - rather to improve our minds, so as to enable us to think for ourselves, than to load the memory with the thoughts of other men."
What the CU administration did was just the opposite - it stifled opinion rather than accepted it. The college campus is the ideal place to encourage intellectual discourse and free flow of information. The university should have the generosity to embrace rebellious thoughts and groundbreaking ideas. Unfortunately, the CU administration chose the cowardly way out, i.e. to exert parental pressure over the defenseless students and threaten to expel them just before the final examination period. If there were any "disgrace" to CU's reputation, it by all means came from CU's handling of the situation.
Incidentally, the method CU employed is exactly a mirror image of the SAR Administration since 1997. It all looked uncannily familiar. Above all, the CUSP incident is a wake-up call to Hong Kong people. Its impact is twofold. First, it reminds us that as a people, we are backward and old-fashioned and still afraid to talk about sex openly. Second, the government's prosecution of dissenting opinion in the society has descended to the academic environment. If we let this happen, students will soon be afraid to voice their opinions, and that will be an end to the freedom of education.
So what kind of world do we want our children to live in? A place where we can freely discuss our thoughts or one that resembles the old East Germany? Should we ban books like Camus' Caligula and all Victoria literature that contains incestuous themes? Or should we openly admit that incest is a societal problem that must be dealt with positively?
If CUSP did one thing wrong this time, it was the editors' lack of taste in phrasing the questions. Thus, in addition to literature, humanity studies and other scholarly pursuits, all Hong Kong Universities should start the curriculum of "The Art of Precision," (精緻文化) a term invented and made popular by the late Taiwanese media tycoon 張繼高. The Art of Precision focuses on the art of living with exquisite taste and style. It ranges from how to listen to Beethoven Symphony No. 9 to how to sip wine in an elegant manner. Most of all, it emphasizes that a good sense of humor can put an end to all superfluous human conflicts. If the editors of CUSP took a course in that subject, I could guarantee that this debacle would never have occurred.
If any of the institutions needed a lecturer in "The Art of Precision," I would gladly donate my time and expertise.
Labels: 《中大學生報》, Alfred Kinsey, CUSP, The Art of Precision, 張繼高, 精緻文化
|