Little Triste x White Silas - florida heat
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 лют 2023
- I’ve never wanted to go to california
I’ve got my sunburnt paradise here in my bed
And i tell you if it’s heaven that you’re looking for then
First i’m gonna have to warn ya
Cause once you get a taste you’re never ever gonna wanna ever eat again
And i (x7)
Feel the heat on me
You’re the most damn beautiful thing that i’ve ever seen
I’ve never wanted to go to california
I’d rather stay here with you and forget that i need sleep
Cause in this florida heat, i get a little crazy
With your blood in my mouth and my vision getting hazy
I still see, you’re the best thing to ever happen to me
It’s almost sick the way you snuck your way inside me
Spreading like a fever till you take over everything i am
#ethelcain
Florida Heat was the first song I ever heard from her back in 2018 and I was instantly hooked. I’m 29 years old and in all of my life, time spent listening to music, never has an artist touched my soul the way she has. Weird to say, but I feel like I’ve known this person my entire life. Artist like Ethel Cain only come around once in lifetime and thank God we get to experience this gift in ours.
We love you Hayden🖤
agreed
feel this so much, people who find their way here are the most damn beautiful people
i miss this song on spotify, it's so beautiful
Do you know why it was taken off ? X
@@mcnaughtonjoshbc she doesn’t want this era to reflect her as an artist anymore.
I hate how many times the Nightmares EP has disappeared. It is so amazingly fantastic and deserves to be out there in the wild for people to find and enjoy. Thanks for having it up.
Haydn has repeatedly requested for it to be taken down. She isn't comfortable with the early works and doesn't want them distributed any longer. It's an issue of respect for an artists wishes but also an identity/deadnaming issue. She recently removed her soundcloud because people refused to respect her wishes in this regard.
@@beksinski It's also an issue of media preservation plus the fact that once art is released into the wild it has a life all of its own.
I'm not familiar with any Soundcloud issues, as I don't personally use the site. As for dead naming, just enjoying any sort of art, be it music, book, movies, etc, produced before someone's transition isn't dead naming if that is what is inferred, but not quite sure what your are getting at because it was very unspecific.
Unfortunately the situation with her early tracks won't just evaporate, especially because they are mostly fantastic. The more attention that is drawn to them just creates the Streisand effect. How do you think I heard about them in the first place? I didn't know anything about earlier projects, but there were plenty of people discussing these tracks and keeping them alive because of those requests. If someone feels deeply connected to a piece of art/music and identifies with its sound/message/themes, then removing something that person has emotional connection to does cause a sense of loss. I know I would be profoundly upset if I could never hear these tracks again. Nightmares was one of the most impactful projects I heard within the last year when I ram across it, so that begs the question what should be done at a crossroads like this.
It seems like the artist herself has found that happy medium by reportedly asking people to take it down if they are willing while she no longer distributes it herself through official channels, that way it is still there for the people that feel that connection to it, but it isn't further publicized, but then some 3rd party comes in to think they have some sort of moral high ground or trying to maybe seek favor with the artist, IDK, but go around making a big deal about her asking for it to be removed which only draws more attention to it rather than leaving it alone.
I really hope she comes to embrace her earlier work one of these days. I can completely understand, with a media rebranding and a change in sound that differs from current works, that an artist might not be the happiest with their earlier releases, but that is most musicians.
If you had an artists album and it was music you cherished and connected with, but they decided they no longer liked it in circulation would you destroy the physical media if they asked? Probably not. I would say definitely not, especially when it is not directly from the artist. As for sites like UA-cam there are ways for artists to directly make that request happen through the proper channels by exercising their powers via copyright ownership.
I'd hate to see that happen and I think it would only further exacerbate the situation.
@@jeremysmith4620 So the wishes of an artist are not relevant at all? Even in a situation where defiance of them is a trigger of dysphoria? Why would you want to disrespect someones stated personal boundaries? Especially someone whose art you enjoy? This seems pretty one dimensional and lacking in compassion. Especially considering the running themes in the very music you are listening to. I hope you will reflect on this a bit more.
@@beksinski Oh, I've reflected on it plenty. If it were a monetized channel posting the content trying to profit from another's work I'd take issue, but I don't think you grasp the full ramifications of the discussion. You are viewing it from one very narrow side, which is probably not the entirety of the artist's feelings. Do I think the artist personally wants me to never hear that music again? No, no I do not. There is also an amount of control that is given up, and given up freely, when music or any other form of art is released.
I am an artist. I've released music for decades. I've written EPs about the overdoses of close friends, I've espoused feelings and ideas that are no longer mine. I have done work I am certainly not proud of. I myself, like many other musicians I've known hate listening to their own music. Never would I dare tell someone else they could not. Once I created it and put it out in the world it no longer belonged to me in the same way. I can't take it away from anyone unless they were seeking to profit from it's use, and that's only a fraction of it because most of my work I released copyright free and I made available for free to any CD-R indie label back when that was a ling decades ago.
It is like having a child. While you are raising that child you have a good deal of input for what direction it takes. At the very beginning you control virtually all aspects of it, but the older it gets, the more fully formed it gets, the less you control it, no matter how much you may wish you did or thought that you did. By the time I got 70% done with a track I barely had any input left, the song wrote itself and id most of the additional work. It knew how it needed to be mixed, in a sense that you may or may not understand since I don't know your association to producing music or art. Once finished and released my job was done. I could no longer alter how that music sounded or alter physical media if you consider visual art. Then it truly did belong to the world, no matter if 50 people listened to it or 50 million. That is just simply how art and music work. Only through invoking copyright to remove and restrict art gets such things removed and then only in that specific case. Once again causing too much of a fuss just causes a Streisand effect, which could happen here because of nonsense like this.
As for dysphoria, if the music caused the artist that much harm then they would probably invoke copyright to get it taken down. I think you may be conflating the two issues and mixing together what could be very separate points. Could listening to old music bring up feeling of dysphoria? Absolutely, no question about it. Does it merely existing to be enjoyed by fans who have personal attachment to it cause dysphoria? No, no it does not because the artist has no idea when I or anyone else listens to it, nor does it somehow force that artist to have to listen to it again and experience those feelings.
This does get more complicated in a public setting, especially with more popularity. There are a good deal of artists who have struggled with depression, dysphoria, ideations, PTSD, and a host of other horrible issues and use that to create amazing music. That's what music does best when done well, channel deep rooted passion or pain into something to share with others to not only make one's own pain more bearable but to illicit emotion within others. Does listening to the EP I wrote about my friend's overdose take me back to a place I'd rather not be, yes. Do I still listen to it? No, sadly I don't even still have a copy, but wouldn't listen to it if I did. Others listening to it does not make me experience anything, as they are enjoying it privately.
Maybe this lends you a little more perspective, but I even think your tone is just coming from the wrong place. As someone that deeply enjoys this particular artist's work do you think I would actively promote or engage in activities or behavior that would force feelings of dysphoria upon said artist? Of course not, that's preposterous, and I think you are coming from way out of pocket even suggesting such a thing. It just came off as some gatekeepy white knight strangeness and just calls more attention to the thing you are claiming to try and deflect attention from. The real point here is that if the artist wanted it truly removed it is within her power to do so. I think that would be to the detriment of her fans and the body of her work, but that's the artists call, not some rando on the internet trying to act like they are defending their parasocial best friend. If you just stop trying intimate the idea that people who enjoy this music are somehow engaging in a willing attempt to cause feelings of dysphoria or hurt the artist in some fashion it might actually make your point easier to get across. When you start at a place such as that you aren't going to get very far, will most likely cause feelings disdain, and make many people completely discount what you are attempting to say.
@@jeremysmith4620 tl;dr: I wouldn't care if people privately enjoy deeply personal/painful/ triggering music that I made. Therefore, I should get to decide for Hayden how she should feel about hers. Besides, the music belongs to us now, not her. The artistic value of her music is worth more than Hayden's mental health. After all, if she *really* wanted it removed, she could spend her time seeking out the very things that trigger her and post a copyright notice. I'm not *trying* to hurt Hayden, so why are you making me feel bad about it? When you accuse people, you aren't going to get very far and many people (me especially) will just stop listening if you try.