On Murray Gold and the BBC National Orchestra of Wales

I'm sure most people (if not everyone) knows that my favourite show is Doctor Who. For those who don't know what it's about it's about space and time travel across the universe in a blue box, that's bigger on the inside.

I'd normally be happy to go on endlessly, I do have a specific goal in mind though: the music. I'm a classical junkie, same applies to those movie soundtracks. This brings me to my attempt: I shall attempt to critique an album from the Doctor Who Series.

There are the Series's Albums avalable on iTunes; and each contains most of the music featured on that particular Series. The Album in question, is the first one I fell in love with. The Doctor Who - Series 3 (Original Television Soundtrack) contains 28 tracks, about an hour or so long.

The first track "All the Strange Strange Creatures (The Trailer Music)" effectively sums up that Series. Bombastic, expansive, firey and the lack of a better term, epic. I like how Gold uses all the segments of the orchestra.

The second track is titled "Martha's Theme". Martha Jones played by Freema Agyeman, is the Tenth Doctor's second compion. (the first being Rose Tyler) Martha's Theme is waltz-ey, and its overall mood fits Martha perfectly: somber, uplifting and empowering.

Aside from the first two tracks, the ones that really define the series, are found in the last three episdoes of the Series. The main track is the mildly creepy "The Master Vainglorious". The Master is the Doctor's nemesis; his archenemy. (one of them)

The Master Vainglorious plays heavily on his source of his insanity: the neverending drumbeat. Four taps; 1234, 1234, 1234, 1234. Throughout the track you hear the beat.

Another key track is "Martha Triumphant", after the Paradox Machine is destroyed (it was capable of maintaining the paradox of the Futurekind killing their ancestors: the human race), and the Master stopped; you hear it playing when Martha leaves the Doctor.

I'll have to stop here, it's getting to wibbly-wobbly, I don't want to blow a hole in 2/3rds of the known universe. More to come!

The Role of Music?

      How does music fit in with Western culture? It's easy enough to assume that our culture is heavily immersed in music, you can see that most people have some sort portable music player. Music has become commonplace in our minds, it's intoxicating. While music has became so common place, I think that many people don't really consider why it is so seemingly necessary.

A typical answer (I agree as well), I imagine would be simply: it would be boring. Music has been part of our species all throughout time; from back in the primordial days, through the Medieval Ages, through war, famine, plague, peace and prosperity.

What are the benefits of having music in our lives? What do we gain? What is it that only music can offer that nothing else can?

Music is an art. Different from visual arts (painting, sculpting, etc), music is an auditory art. We hear music; feel it if it's loud enough. Visual art is universal in humanity, and so is music. What is it that seperates music from a painting?
If you ignore the difference in media (canvas to violin, clay to drums, etc), in essence, there is next to no difference. I believe that the only difference between those two art forms is how "much" people can interpret them. I believe that visual arts are more open to interpretation than music.
For example, in a written song (usually) has a clear intent in it's composition ("I'm better than her/him, "go out with me instead", "slap me with a shovel", etc); whereas an oil on canvas is much more to interpretation. (especially nowadays; all those modern art movements)

Does music tap into that deep, primordial part of ourselves? Do we ritualize ourselves in the rhythm, tone, pitch and beat of music?

Of course with that being said, I'm listening to Yo-Yo Ma's Bach: The Cello Suites. Music, go figure. Whether or not there are benefits to listening to music, there is something undeniable: music is deep within our various cultures and civilizations.

The Olympic Problem?

The Olympics, who hasn't seen them; or at least a few events? There are two kinds of Olympic Games: Summer and Winter. They alternate every two years, from different cities across the world. As we know, the most recent was here in Canada; Vancouver to be precise. The next Olympic Games will be held in London, Great Britain, 2012.

No words can describe the excitement I feel during the Opening Ceremonies, and during the Events. However, from what I heard from various news sites, (CBC, BBC for example) "It has also been revealed that surface-to-air missiles could be deployed at six sites during the games."-(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17891223) I understand the need for security in such an internationally public event; however, I do not understand why surface-to-air missiles are needed in a heavily populated civilian area.

I was outraged when I heard about the security measures for the 2012 Olympics. In the highly unlikely event that the missiles are needed, what about the aftermath? Consider this: there are multiple explosions in a major metropolitan area; what about the shrapnel and ricochet?

Grr. I have always believed that fighting violence with violence is never the answer. If such defence mechanisms are necessary, could they not station such systems just outside of London? Somewhere the resulting damage would not be so serious.