Originally posted by 1979onwards:
I think I am the blond, Roman-nosed gentleman referred to in the opening post who took some pictures on my mobile. I was near the dancing guys who were singing along and getting happily animated (good on them). I apologise if anyone was upset by me taking photos but I didn't think it was such a big deal.
No need to apologise at all. I should be the one apologising if I have caused you any offence.
My comments were an observation, exacerbated by the fact that this was my first gig in six years and I guess mobile technology has come a long way in that time. I was struck just how few people did NOT either take photos, make videos or (as I think the chap on the far left by the stage was doing) making sound recordings.
If you want an extreme view on all this check out Robert Fripp's diary on
www.dgmlive.com where he regularly expounds at length on the subject. His view is that even a single person taking a photo or bootlegging a concert destroys that concert for him (the performer) and the rest of the audience. I don't subscribe entirely to that view but I now begin to understand where he's coming from. The very best concerts can leave the audience feeling like they participated in a shared experience which included both them and the performers (for me a gig by The Pogues in 1987 was the nearest I ever came to that.) These days it must be harder and harder for anything like that to happen if half of the audience are little more than mobile recording units more interested in a grainy 640x480 snapshot than participating in the gig (as Fripp says, the audience is
at least as important as the performer for determining whether a gig is a success or not.)
Mind you, if anyone does have a recording of the gig...
