The race is almost run

[mippy.livejournal.com]

OK, I've just had a claws-out argument with someone about The Days of Pearly Spencer. I love it, and told said person. "Mark Almond? Seriously? You are fucking weird. That's a terrible record. Mark Almond? This is some sick joke, right?' Then I was sent an mp3 of Peter Allen's I Go To Rio as my 'punishment', along with 'I played this AND Pearly Spencer on my student radio station as part of 'it's so bad, it's good...' 

I really love Pearly Spencer. I may have to re-evaluate my friendship in the light of this. But never mind that. I love MacArthur Park, because it's so over the top, it's wonderful. I love Pearly Spencer for much the same reasons - sheer melodrama - but sincerely; it's in the same category as ABC's All Of My Heart, PSB's It's A Sin, and some other records by acronym groups. I wouldn't go as far to say 'If you don't understand this record, you don't understand MOI!' and stomp off to my room to play my tapes, but really, it's not kitsch fodder, is it?

So, questions for discussion:

1. Which records can you genuinely not understand people disliking, somehow?
2. 'So bad it's good' - pop snobbism getting in the way of TEH TUNEZ?

Please write on both sides of the paper at once.

 

 

 

Comments

[anatol-merklich.livejournal.com]

Actually this song may not be the best example for this *cough* theory, but still I THINK MAYBE:

For many people, including those Fond of Pop in General, songs that sound, or are, from a slightly, but not very, alien pop tradition can easily sound overkitsch. I'm reminded of the discussion after Tom's Popular entry on "Those Were the Days", where someone who absolutely hated it also hated "Seasons in the Sun". These songs have a quite identifiable national style, meaning among other things that they don't fit in very well with our expectation of what "pop" *should* sound like in our days *or*, possibly, when they came out. Still, they're not alien enough ("Kiss Kiss", "Mundian to bach ke") that they are seen as groundbreaking or exciting, or even properly exotic.

This song in particular is by an Irish folk/rock writer, though -- but with those swirly strings + Almond's cabaret/chanson stylings and history it may possibly hit the same spot with people?

[anatol-merklich.livejournal.com]

I like it v much by the way!

[(Anonymous)]

No. Malc Almond's cover versions appeal to people who are enamored with the "daring" excess of he and others like him, such as The Communards (who covered Harold Melvin & Bluenotes/Thelma Houston) etc. I blame the current popularity of so-called Gay "culture", ("Will & Grace" etc.) - used to reinforce the idea of some mythical gay "community" and "identity". This has simply raised the profile of those too dumb to create anything original and lasting.

P.S. I am gay, and find most entertainment popular on the Gay scene to be empty-headed tripe. We're not all mincing bimbos.