Poptimist THORT For The Day

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

"quality, though it exists, is not a poptimist concern"

So sez jauntyalan - what say you?

(The Poptimist TFTDs will be drawn from that text poll I did last week about "Poptimist Tenets")

Comments

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Change "DEFINING" for "SPOTTING" in Kat's post and we're getting close to what I feel (not that I can speak for "poptimists").

The 'optimism' in Poptimism is usually taken by its critics to mean a Pollyannaish "Pop is great! Now is great! Everything's great!" attitude (the word was originally coined during the course of a long and not very edifying blogfite about whether 2003 - or was it 2004 - was any good or not).

I think this doesn't go far enough - the Poptimist project is to be optimistic about *everything* it encounters, to be able to ask how to listen to a thing in order for it to become "good pop", and how pop is flexing and changing to accomodate what's popular within that umbrella. Usually, because good pop is interesting, the question "What's interesting about this?" is a good starting point.

[byebyepride.livejournal.com]

how to listen to a thing in order for it to become "good pop"

What do you mean by this? Surely what you're defining is 'good listening' i.e. 'pop' is the object of good listening, since presumably a song doesn't compel a particular type of listening by virtue of any inherent qualities?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

What to listen for, then. (The answer might be "nothing")

[byebyepride.livejournal.com]

To listen for 'whatever'? Which is not nothing, or not quite nothing, but near enough to nothing!

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

She's, like, so whatever
We could do so much better

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

Hey hey!
You you!

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Now you've lost me!

[byebyepride.livejournal.com]

Sorry, carried away by words. Listen for anything -- whatever grabs you according to Mark's version. But I'm not sure any of us are actually talking about the same thing.

[byebyepride.livejournal.com]

i.e. I don't know if it can be put as listening for a quality, rather than as being about cultivating a certain quality of listening. But I'm more sceptical about the place of quality in poptimism.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Ah ok, I wasn't asking a question. I was rephrasing my "how to listen" as "what to listen for" (and yes, whatever grabs you - but for me part of poptimism is communicating that)

[byebyepride.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, sorry. I need to think more about the 'communicating' aspect of it, I guess.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

My answer above was something of a key-jerk reaction to the question, but I stand by it.

The presence of quality is not necessary for me to enjoy listening to or talking about music, but saying WHY music is good, bad or mediocre is definitely my concern! Otherwise how will it get any better? I KNOW THEY'RE LISTENING OUT THERE...

[jauntyalan.livejournal.com]

(loving this thread btw. sorry i'm late - been actual work busy!)

on my terms, i say yr being poptimist when you "enjoy listening to or talking about music" but not when "saying WHY music is good, bad or mediocre"

not being poptimist is no bad thing in itself - it is a limited stance, and it is specifically useless when it comes to interpersonal discussion of good v bad.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

But being an poptimist surely means that you can CHANGE yr goalposts on good/bad/mediocre if something AMAZING comes along, so it doesn't matter. (Also: dissecting *why* things are g/b/m IS talking about music!)

BTW Alang I listened to Madge Berger album SEVEN TIMES on Saturday and it is absolutely wonderful with all killer no filler. Album of the year!

[jauntyalan.livejournal.com]

hurrah. now if we can persuade the publishers to sell it in the UK we're on a winner!


I've always been cool on the whole "talking/writing about music" thing. in the end, i don't really like music reviews/writing or find it useful. so i'm never too hot on dissecting why things are g/b/m and it often feels 'orthogonal' to my visceral 'I JUST LIKE IT' preference. this has always distanced me from ppl on BBs talking about music, unsurprisingly. (It also explains why i tend to go for the 'poptimism=love' side of things, cos i don't spend time on stuff i don't like)

this is what i was getting at with my 'it exists, but it's not important'. (i was also wondering if anyone would go the extra step and deny my parenthetical 'though it exists'.)

i quite like Tom's approach which is not to say 'is this song of good/bad quality' but 'what is good about this song'. this is the +ve 'searching out' heuristic to complement my -ve 'what's not relavant'.

as such he out-poptimises me on my own terms (poptimism=love). thus he wins