IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

false metal = a subgenre of metal
fake rock = a subgenre of rock
bad pop = a subgenre of pop*

(also ps wow there is tons of grebt stuff on these threads!)

re the stones: the overlap year is 1966, when they were constantly in the charts, but "rock" had not yet firmed up as a "thing" (it was being done but not yet being pointed at unerringly) -- what's key to THEM tho is that they were already doing the "fake" thing as a self-marker -- they didn't play blues or R&B (old skool def) or country or soul, they played Fake Blues, Fake R&B, Fake Country, Fake Soul (not to be confused w.plastic soul!) (or indeed RUBBER SOUL!) -- later they purged their popness and became the "greatest rock'n'roll band in the world", and a certain amont of back formation and redefinition occurred

as actual overlap i would personally propose: under my thumb and mother's little helper

Comments

haha that pesky fossil astrisk

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

here marks the trace of a link to my admission that i recently realised that in my head i no longer make a distinction between the terms POP and ART and CULTURE and STUFF PWOT EOPLE DONE

[chezghost.livejournal.com]

fake anything = POP

MOST ABSURD (hence korrekt) "ROCK AND POP AT ONCE" SUGGESTION PRIZE

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

walkaway winner = giddyoldgoat

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

pickin up on koganbot's notes abt the stones in previous thread, the reason i'm saying that these both-at-once moments cause shifts in the R&P-o-sphere is bcz of a general lex-like need (and from the other side an alex-in-nyc-like need) for them to be never the shania twain shall meet --> hence the post-facto redef

[anthonyeaston.livejournal.com]

is this where i talk about liz phairs cover of mothers little helper on the deperate housewives soundtrack, or how much i hate both of those songs for their misogyny?