Unrelated to what's been said so far on this thread:
One can like or dislike a preponderance of the pop of one's time without having a general opinion one way or another as to whether pop is a good thing. Which is to say that one can respond to the content of the music and the way people use it without assuming that such content and uses are inherent in anything that's going to ever be popular anywhere. E.g., in 1972 I thought that both the pop (which included a lot of rock) and the semipopular rock of the time was a lot worse than the pop-rock of 1966, in fact had retreated from the most interesting aspects of 1966.
no subject
Date: 2007-03-12 04:41 pm (UTC)One can like or dislike a preponderance of the pop of one's time without having a general opinion one way or another as to whether pop is a good thing. Which is to say that one can respond to the content of the music and the way people use it without assuming that such content and uses are inherent in anything that's going to ever be popular anywhere. E.g., in 1972 I thought that both the pop (which included a lot of rock) and the semipopular rock of the time was a lot worse than the pop-rock of 1966, in fact had retreated from the most interesting aspects of 1966.