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

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

I am hungover but a minor point for me here is the kind of way in which an act can be bad. Britney's early sappy ballads were no problem, just press the skip button and ignore them - they didn't signify anything, they were just an expected part of the Britney parcel. Same for Destiny's Child ballads and the rubbish cabaret covers on the Pussycat Dolls album. I had more issues with 'Biology' even though I kind of like it, because I didn't like what it said about where Girls Aloud were going.

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

i think the idea of DIRECTION is kind of key -- but it reflects a sort of "auterist" assumption

ie we object more to a bad direction per se when we assume an act is likely to "know where they're heading"; an act we assume not much in control of its own destiny is forgiven a bad direction (though it may be instead despised for being a willing and/or silly "puppet" of forces beyond its control)

i enjoy lex's inversion of rockist auteurism -- ie when he says "why would someone WANT to sound like this?"; viz yes they are in control of their destiny but SO WHAT WHAT IF THEY PUT IT TO SUCH POOR PURPOSE!

(one element of "had to be there" is that now-pervasive templates may not AT THAT TIME have been laid down -- viz we can still strongly remember when something turned out much less than open seemed so at the time; seemed to be promising to go onto a brave future than in the event never arrived... but we can invoke the potential where the weren't-theres haven't a hope