Guilty Pleasures

[mippy.livejournal.com]

I was looking att he latest issue of Q yesterday int he library and reading through their list of '50 Guiltiest Pleasures'. And it got me to thinking - is the idea of a 'guilty pleasure' inherently rockist? Most of the songs I 'like but shouldn't like' are songs I wouldn't normally listen to except because of association/nostalgic reasons because they're a bit rubbish. But not liking ELO's Living Thing just because the rock canon doesn't like them? And don't even get me started on Macarthur Park...

So does poptimism recognise the concept of the guilty pleasure, or - as it should be - music is music and whether it's the gaspings of a tortured soul or the wall of sound rebuilt in Duplo, what matters is whether it's ANY GOOD AT ALL?

There should be a poll on this, maybe, but I don't have the issue to hand.

Comments

[byebyepride.livejournal.com]

Ans so far seems to be:

poptimism = refusing to acknowledge 'social' guilt i.e. there are no guilty pleasures based on what other people think about music (refusal of the cool / naff dichotomy in all its multi-variate and shifting forms (i.e. it's essentially relational not a general social norm)).

but are we going to use poptimism in the dubdobdee sense of 'lazy listening' in which case bothering to set a rule for yourself is sukrat territory c.f. 'concrete so as to dubdobdee'.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

When nosily google blogsearching on 'poptimism' to see if anyone I didn't know had mentioned Saturday's club, I found someone tut-tutting about how 'poptimists' (not us) seemed to "defend anything".

I quite like this! It's not true exactly though. But I like trying to find the use in a record.

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

No Gary Jules, no cred!

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

(use of G. Jules is quite obvious - DISPERSE AND RETURN TO YOUR DOMICILES!)

[lockedintheatti.livejournal.com]

If it's not true exactly, then what would poptimists classify as indefensible (obviously setting aside Lex's views on Indie for a moment)?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Well, as a group possibly nothing! I meant that most individuals have things they really don't see any value in (or maybe I mean 'don't see the worth in trying to find value in')

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

SANDI THOM.

But that doesn't have any music in it.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

I mean, I've heard better football chants.

[lockedintheatti.livejournal.com]

Football chants at least often have the redeemiing feature of (rather basic) humour. And I personally find her indefensible, as I'm sure most of us here would. I really can't find any redeeming features. But there's obviously something about her that resonates with people or she wouldn't have sold that many records. Should those people feel guilty about it?

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

No. However as poptimists we reserve the right to slag off songs just as much as we can celebrate them!

[lockedintheatti.livejournal.com]

Well that goes without saying, obviously.

[mippy.livejournal.com]

Well, do you defend Westlife? They're pop, but they're soul-less.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I could quite easily defend them.

[mippy.livejournal.com]

Defend away.

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

is there a possibility that what it's REALLY about is arguing though. back to ye olde "defend the indefensible" type threads. or at least that having a position that allows you/us to engage in argument (not even discussion) is more FUN than agreeing with everyone?

[carsmilesteve.livejournal.com]

where "everyone" = rock crits obv ;)

[mippy.livejournal.com]

I'm showing my ignorance here, I know, but...sukrat?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

sukrat is a kind of sister community to Poptimists, for talking about very unpop music.

[jeff-worrell.livejournal.com]

and for talking about very pop music that doesn't get a look in here, e.g. prog, easy listening

[whalefish.livejournal.com]

People are saying c.f.! YAY!

[mippy.livejournal.com]

c.f is my fav. abbrev.