ext_218396 (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
blue-russian.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
poptimists2007-03-08 09:24 am
blue-russian.livejournal.com) wrote in poptimists2007-03-08 09:24 am
more pop filosophie: discuss
We all read fluxblog, don't we? Yes, of course, we do. Matthew really seems to have raised his game over the last year or so, don't you think? Well, I just wanted to call people's attention to a post he updated yesterday. Somehow I would expect we'll all agree with his basic idea, if not about the specific example, although there's quite a bit too tease out.
I'll excerpt the relevant bit:
I'd like to address this comment left in the box below, which more or less echoes what I was railing against the last time I wrote about CSS at length:
I'm sure Lovefoxxx is not emoting that much. She's in a dance band for crying out loud and not a very good one. - Anon
To a certain extent this (obviously quite brave!) anonymous poster is entitled to their opinion, and since it is apparent that they haven't given this a great deal of thought, it's not really worth arguing with them, at least not in the interest of trying to change their mind. But honestly, there's no way I can read this sort of comment without assuming some pretty harsh things -- mainly, that they seem to have extremely rigid and unimaginative ideas about what signifies intelligent and emotionally moving art.
I think that a lot of the problem that some people run into with CSS is that their record is very much a product of the present tense, and though I believe that accounts for a great deal of its beauty, art that is so tied into a moment that will inevitably pass tends to freak out a certain type of insecure fan who demands permanence and timelessness, often because they are terrified of ever having to admit that they enjoyed something that has since become dated. If you want to cling to the notion of having an imagined aesthetic upper hand, you will most likely become allergic to this sort of music, and find refuge in safe bets. If you've conditioned yourself to think of contemporary culture (especially internet culture) as being an endless stream of vulgar novelty -- a notion that is not entirely inaccurate, by the way -- you've most likely blinded yourself to any art that speaks to the humanity and emotional truth of experiences within that culture.
Personally, I remember quite clearly a moment at uni when my roommate and I were questioning "Will we always like this music?" although for us I think it was a given that the music was timeless, and while it was we that would become dated.
I'll excerpt the relevant bit:
I'd like to address this comment left in the box below, which more or less echoes what I was railing against the last time I wrote about CSS at length:
I'm sure Lovefoxxx is not emoting that much. She's in a dance band for crying out loud and not a very good one. - Anon
To a certain extent this (obviously quite brave!) anonymous poster is entitled to their opinion, and since it is apparent that they haven't given this a great deal of thought, it's not really worth arguing with them, at least not in the interest of trying to change their mind. But honestly, there's no way I can read this sort of comment without assuming some pretty harsh things -- mainly, that they seem to have extremely rigid and unimaginative ideas about what signifies intelligent and emotionally moving art.
I think that a lot of the problem that some people run into with CSS is that their record is very much a product of the present tense, and though I believe that accounts for a great deal of its beauty, art that is so tied into a moment that will inevitably pass tends to freak out a certain type of insecure fan who demands permanence and timelessness, often because they are terrified of ever having to admit that they enjoyed something that has since become dated. If you want to cling to the notion of having an imagined aesthetic upper hand, you will most likely become allergic to this sort of music, and find refuge in safe bets. If you've conditioned yourself to think of contemporary culture (especially internet culture) as being an endless stream of vulgar novelty -- a notion that is not entirely inaccurate, by the way -- you've most likely blinded yourself to any art that speaks to the humanity and emotional truth of experiences within that culture.
Personally, I remember quite clearly a moment at uni when my roommate and I were questioning "Will we always like this music?" although for us I think it was a given that the music was timeless, and while it was we that would become dated.
no subject
- "used to like artist X, but times change and people change and we have grown apart: I still like the songs I used to like, but I never choose to listen to them"
- "used to like artist X but they have gone so shit that I could never say I liked them any more"
- "used to like artist X but they have gone shit, and what I think is shit suddenly infects all of their previous work so that I cannot listen to it in the same way again"
i really do judge...
(eg i am quite open to someone rescuing u2 for me in this area -- tho not remotely confident they can be rescued)
Re: i really do judge...
one of the reasons I love r&b is because it's so fertile for digging, it's geared towards instant beat-involvement and when that wears out it always has emotional layers to dissect one after another.
no subject
no subject