Avoiding Awfulness

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

"And I don't think she remotely cuts it compared to the Lorettas and Tammys and Dollys she's harking back to, much less the modern-day MOR Deanas and Martinas and Joe Dees and Jamies and LeAnns and Lee Anns and Natalies. But I think she's got talent and I'll guess that she never does the totally sappy dreck that some of my current loves are quite capable of unleashing."

This quite of Frank K's (about Neko Case, but the subject isn't really the important thing) touches on something quite important and related to that Fluxblog post we were discussing yesterday, i.e.

How important is it to you that the artists you love don't produce dreadful stuff along with the amazing stuff?

And do you think the risk of dreadfulness in some cases stops being something you have to endure and becomes a deeper part of why you like something?

(I think these ideas are kind of related to the 'NPR' idea that Frank writes about in his book, maybe, but if you haven't come across that idea don't let it stop you discussing this) (EDIT: I meant "PBS"! - though NPR and PBS are kind of similar things, no?)

Comments

Why rock bands that go bad rarely get good again

[koganbot]

Why rock performers who go bad rarely get good again (or, when they do get good again, rarely approach their earlier greatness):

Punks don't grow, they stop. Meaning that when it no longer makes sense for them to act like punks anymore, they don't have anything half as interesting to replace it. By "punk" I probably mean "have punk tendencies" and rarely mean "belong to the genre 'punk rock.'" Dylan and Stones are still my prototype punks, though of course that's not what I called them at the time, and I've never thought "punk" was the right word for what it was trying to describe anyway. Axl and Eminem fit the category, and exemplify the rule, unfortunately.

Re: Why rock bands that go bad rarely get good again

[piratemoggy.livejournal.com]

This is why I am glad an Offspring reunion (at least, in the sense of new material) seems really quite unlikely. I still nearly claw my face off at the thought of 'Can't Repeat' and not just for the obvious total irony of the fkn title. :( [They did the awesome-rubbish-ok-TERRIBLE thing highly illustratively, with Americana as obvious 'rubbish' bit, 'Conspiracy Of One' and 'Splinter' (OBVIOUS IRONY RE: SMASH ARGH) as slight recovery and 'Can't Repeat' ie: their last single as LITERALLY THE WORST THING EVER.]

/completely irrelevant rant

Re: Why rock bands that go bad rarely get good again

[mooxyjoo.livejournal.com]

you should make a list of predominating reasons for becoming a musician, like

to piss someone off
to make money
to have fun
to get girls
to learn a craft
to give meaning to your miserable existence
everyone else was doing it
was bored
etc.

and see if you think a lot of the musicians you have in mind have anything in common (and if they jointly lack a reason that some other kinds of musicians might have).