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

[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.