I don't think people really do listen. We plug into music, and we have short attention spans. We tend to download individual tracks from iTunes rather than a whole album. We buy music DVDs and watch them once, and then they disappear into a drawer, or we loan them to a friend, and we never watch it again.
People have really long attention spans, and they love complicated plots. TV series are giving the audience what they want.
Some people like the same thing forever, but I don't know. We kind of, like, listen to loads of different stuff, and our attention spans aren't good enough. So there was a bit of frustration when you're, like, having to play the same thing all the time because we play all, like, loads of different instruments.
I'm very conscious of people having pretty short attention spans: I know, I'm guilty of it. I'm 17 now: what happens by the time I'm 21, am I a burn-out or something? Will they still listen to my record?
I think there was a sense that the impact was being lost because the audience was so familiar with the form. You combine that with people's attention spans, which are clearly conditioned to be shorter now, and there's a need to vary the paradigm.
People's attention spans don't run too long these days.
In '77 there was no Internet, there was no Twitter or Facebook, and I think that, without being some old git who hates anything new, people's attention spans are too short. Back then you had 'Top Of The Pops' and 'Melody Maker,' and you had to make the effort to go to a show so that you absorbed the culture of music.
Attention spans are so limited and ticket prices so high. We're anyway in a business of manipulating emotions. But each film needs to be positioned truthfully so that people don't feel cheated.
The penalty of success is to be bored by the attentions of people who formerly snubbed you.
What writing a poem really does - and what figuring how to perform effectively really does - is forces people to listen to you. It frames your thoughts in such a way that grabs people's attentions and forces them to hear the things that you're actually saying.
I recognize that it often serves competitors best to talk past each other - especially when you are trying to claim the fleeting attentions of voters on a debate stage or on social media. But think how much more clarity we could get if the people who wanted to be president clearly explained why he or she is the better choice.
It is perfectly evident to any logical mind that when you have got the vote, by the proper use of the vote in sufficient numbers, by combination, you can get out of any legislature whatever you want, or, if you cannot get it, you can send them about their business and choose other people who will be more attentive to your demands.
There are many benefits to this process of listening. The first is that good listeners are created as people feel listened to. Listening is a reciprocal process - we become more attentive to others if they have attended to us.
Given the historical power differential between blacks and whites, blacks are required to be attentive to the way their white counterparts see themselves in relation to people of color if they want to survive and even thrive.
I am lucky to have had an attentive, curious and loving dad and heart-smart, down-to-earth, gifted mother. They changed the outlooks of their own lives and have never forgotten the people and organizations that helped them dream bigger than their circumstances should have allowed.
I have known healthy, wealthy people who were depressed, and people with critical illnesses who could honestly attest to joy.
I actually was class clown, but I don't know how that happened because I've never been considered an outwardly funny person-as the people in this room will attest.
People may hear your words, but they feel your attitude.
I started out as an impressionist and that's all about observing - how people move, their voice quality, their attitudes and quirks.
Men have always been gentlemen to me - responsible people with healthy attitudes.
