A represented and diverse use of media utilized through one medium – music. Avid musicians and listeners have constructed their sense of the word through a well organized and constructive use of ebb and flow between beguiling choruses and well.the other part of the song that doesn’t really matter.
But sarcasm can only take us so far – what if the constructive hierarchy of musical form was disregarded completely?
Feathers, as self-determined “purveyors of the finest melodies since 2003,” have accepted such a multifarious feat and smashed it into the second installment of their three-EP series cleverly dubbed “Synchromy.” From what Feather’s label Hometapes has been notified, “Feathers decided to focus on quack medicine, magic, mock horror, the Bible, spirituality, the moon, snakes, great egomaniacs, paradise and the idea of taking real drugs” to compose a short yet self-serving instrumental masterpiece suited for nighthawks of spontaneity.
Influences ranging from aged horror films to British underground nuance, Feathers has been able compile so many distinct styles and attitudes that the sound is essentially enigmatic and unclassifiable.
Initiated by two but now a collective, Feather has rooted their quest in a blockbuster barrage of “Eisenstein-ian” montage. Feathers’ cryptic dogma, shrouded in children’s instruments and noisemakers, is what permits such subversive pop melodies to amuse even the most derisory of attention spans.
The second installment of Feathers’ trilogy of EPs – “Synchromy” – has already trivialized the brilliance of their first, “Absolute Noon,” and I only foresee even greater luminosity with the conclusion. What allows Feathers’ distinction is that the music essentially creates itself.
Feathers has critiqued the rigidity of structured pop sensation and mutilated and disfigured its carcass to such an extent, the only thing left is a childlike collective armed with an auditory arsenal.
KCSU volunteer Ben Blascoe can be reached at email@example.com. The opinions expressed in this column reflect the views of the individual author and not necessarily those of the Collegian.