"The once-challenging claim that for certain listeners, the (likes of) Backstreet Boys could have been as potent as (the likes of) Nirvana has been passive-nihilistically reversed"
this argument cropped up on ILX loads too, idiots like jess and deej and that terminally unpleasant Alex in Baltimore person all made it on the Hilarity Duff carcrash thread. are they seriously saying that popism has won to the extent that you'd be taken seriously among not even critics but the general public if you casually opined that Backstreet Boys or Hilarity Duff were superior to Nirvana? seriously? I mean...if so they must go out even less than I thought.
I think the 'general public' thing is important - not that Poptimists or its members has some kind of amazing connection to the common man but the frame of our discussion is often (not always) the people we know, talk to, music as we encounter it in everyday life. Every thread I start here comes out of another conversation, most of my FT posts that aren't part of a big series do too.
Whereas the K-Punk end of things tends to focus on i. the tides and opinions in criticism / the blogosphere as they see it and ii. a wider cultural and political picture. We pay attention to i. too, we're doing it now - and often those threads get self-indulgent or defensive or weak - but it's true to say we stay away from ii. So in that sense Poptimists is "anti-intellectual", reactive and conversational rather than proactive and um manifestational. And that can look like a position born out of complacency and privilege - it IS in a global sense (you think it's tough now - come to Africa).
The yoghurt is full of dairy, which helps keep the populus docile and pliant, while they buy into the VideOrganic spectacle drip-fed by the Murdochist MIAutocrats.
I'm sure we could all talk about the wider political picture if we wanted. I probably wouldn't mention music very much though given how minimally important it is if you're analysing eg New Labour.
It is? I'm sure trying to get people to talk about a wider cultural and political picture in my column. And I'd consider the koganbot, livejournal, where we discuss such things, pretty much an extension of poptimists, though of course not all of you look at koganbot (and those of you who do not look are worse people, obviously).
The fact that people here continually use the word "indie" and such indicates an interest in the broad musico-cultural landscape we find ourselves in. But we could do a better job, for sure.
Btw, I don't think I'm being anti-intellectual in saying that the argument between "popists" and "rockists" is generally formulated in such a poor way that it's a discussion not worth having. But then again I don't think that popists and rockists exist, and I've never been able to find myself on a social map that contains the words "rockism" or "popism" or "poptimism," and can't place any of you there either. So (very selfishly, perhaps) I don't give a shit - except to the extent that I think I have some interesting ideas and pose some intriguing question, and "rockism" and "popism" and "poptimism" are what people waste their time talking about instead. (But I realize that this last paragraph is plenty cryptic.)
I've never been able to find myself on a social map that contains the words "rockism" or "popism" or "poptimism"
This is a question for another thread! I'm very busy at work this week and the next, but someone remind me about this in September and I shall expand my thoughts...
k-punk covers this - I mean, he does so in a style that combines excruciating prose style, grievous bad faith and all-round "this isn't really even annoying or funny, the guy has some serious problems" eye-bleediness, but he does cover it:
Even if the ‘Nathan’ with whom Kogan debates exists - and I’ll be honest with you, I’m finding it hard to believe that he does - his function is a fantasmatic one (in the same way that Lacan argued that, if a pathologically jealous husband is proved right about his wife’s infidelities, his jealousy remains pathological): for popists to believe that their position is in any way challenging or novel, they have to keep digging up ‘Nathans’ who contest it. But, in 2007, Nathan’s hoary old belief that only groups who write their own songs can be valid has been refuted so many times that it is rather like someone mounting a defence of slavery today – sure, there are such people who sold such a view, but the position is so irrelevant to the current conjuncture that it is quaintly antiquated rather than a political threat.
So, Kogan has made up his friend saying that about the Backstreet Boys. But even if he hadn't, he would still have essentially been making it up. If there are people out there saying pop is shit they are not worth arguing with - unlike the Popists who are all posh and run the media and the US and UK governments. Lacan namedrop Spinzonan videodrome just like New Labour burble burble.
I would not mind so much if it was meant to be funny, but I would bet that if one were to Google one would find a previous k-punk post outlining how we are all living in the OedIpod now...
I am clearly going spend all a'noon responding to quotes from a blog post I can't read but GNNNN this is the whole everyday life thing again - Kogan is NOT WRITING TO K-PUNK AND HIS BLOGOSPHERE MATES he is writing in a free paper for a general audience for whom this stuff hasn't been "refuted". And also isn't the whole piece directly SAYING yes this writes-own-songs stuff is a bit of a side issue, let's look at the social issues behind it?
k-punk says 'it's irrelevant to the TRUE war' and people who hold those views are just irrelevant. k-bot seems to be saying, or I'd like him to be saying 'why do people carry on holding views which seem a bit beside the point as soon as you start to think about them' but also 'why are there people who continue to think that there's a true war to be fought', what are these views *doing* for the people who hold them and how are they connected to class.
So k-punk is not as bad as someone saying 'anyone who holds this view is an idiot who needs to be sorted out' but no-one seems to be saying this, and in the context k-punk's view seems more unpleasant.
EDIT: especially when he IS saying that about popists but since THEY are all public school toffs WE can all agree on the fact that they are idiots. LOLZ.
& "the real war" is a load of ppl arguing with each other on the Internet. It's a closed circle - barely anyone new is reading the "pop blogosphere" on either "side", Scrabulous has killed it.
Or should I expect to see K-Punk at the Cross Kings on the 1st Sept TOOLED UP then?
Oh something I always wanted to ask about Scrabulous - how work-friendly is it! B/c so many people have added it but even by my lax standards I can't imagine having the time or the ability to get away with obvious scrabble on screen...
Yes, I haven't read the K-Punk piece either, not because I can't but because I felt I had better things to do with my time (one can construe this as either anti-intellectualism or sanity), but what Tom's saying here is very important. My piece isn't interested in refuting Nathan's statement but in understanding it, and in fact I see myself as posing questions and suggesting ideas that no one else ever has about such statements (well, no one that I know of; I hope someone somewhere has), and I assume that - while the issue "does ______ write his own lyrics" is a stand-in issue - the inchoate perceptions and impulses that it stands in for are quite real and potent.
Maybe K-Punk addresses this later in his piece, but I'm too anti-intellectual/sane to find it.
Half of me thinks k-p hasn't read one of your column all the way through, Frank. He clearly doesn't understand the motivation behind it. Is he even aware of this community and what we talk about/the manner in which we talk about it?
But it's true: For certain listeners the likes of Nirvana could have been as potent as the likes of the Backstreet Boys. (Me for instance.) Not quite sure what's nihilistic about that assertion, however, or even passive.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 01:52 pm (UTC)this argument cropped up on ILX loads too, idiots like jess and deej and that terminally unpleasant Alex in Baltimore person all made it on the Hilarity Duff carcrash thread. are they seriously saying that popism has won to the extent that you'd be taken seriously among not even critics but the general public if you casually opined that Backstreet Boys or Hilarity Duff were superior to Nirvana? seriously? I mean...if so they must go out even less than I thought.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:12 pm (UTC)Whereas the K-Punk end of things tends to focus on i. the tides and opinions in criticism / the blogosphere as they see it and ii. a wider cultural and political picture. We pay attention to i. too, we're doing it now - and often those threads get self-indulgent or defensive or weak - but it's true to say we stay away from ii. So in that sense Poptimists is "anti-intellectual", reactive and conversational rather than proactive and um manifestational. And that can look like a position born out of complacency and privilege - it IS in a global sense (you think it's tough now - come to Africa).
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:17 pm (UTC)what annoys me is the lack of intellectual content when people post about eating yoghurt. the public-school shitbags.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 07:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 03:21 pm (UTC)but it's true to say we stay away from ii
It is? I'm sure trying to get people to talk about a wider cultural and political picture in my column. And I'd consider the
The fact that people here continually use the word "indie" and such indicates an interest in the broad musico-cultural landscape we find ourselves in. But we could do a better job, for sure.
Btw, I don't think I'm being anti-intellectual in saying that the argument between "popists" and "rockists" is generally formulated in such a poor way that it's a discussion not worth having. But then again I don't think that popists and rockists exist, and I've never been able to find myself on a social map that contains the words "rockism" or "popism" or "poptimism," and can't place any of you there either. So (very selfishly, perhaps) I don't give a shit - except to the extent that I think I have some interesting ideas and pose some intriguing question, and "rockism" and "popism" and "poptimism" are what people waste their time talking about instead. (But I realize that this last paragraph is plenty cryptic.)
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 10:36 pm (UTC)This is a question for another thread! I'm very busy at work this week and the next, but someone remind me about this in September and I shall expand my thoughts...
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:14 pm (UTC)Even if the ‘Nathan’ with whom Kogan debates exists - and I’ll be honest with you, I’m finding it hard to believe that he does - his function is a fantasmatic one (in the same way that Lacan argued that, if a pathologically jealous husband is proved right about his wife’s infidelities, his jealousy remains pathological): for popists to believe that their position is in any way challenging or novel, they have to keep digging up ‘Nathans’ who contest it. But, in 2007, Nathan’s hoary old belief that only groups who write their own songs can be valid has been refuted so many times that it is rather like someone mounting a defence of slavery today – sure, there are such people who sold such a view, but the position is so irrelevant to the current conjuncture that it is quaintly antiquated rather than a political threat.
So, Kogan has made up his friend saying that about the Backstreet Boys. But even if he hadn't, he would still have essentially been making it up. If there are people out there saying pop is shit they are not worth arguing with - unlike the Popists who are all posh and run the media and the US and UK governments. Lacan namedrop Spinzonan videodrome just like New Labour burble burble.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:55 pm (UTC):o
Date: 2007-08-22 03:28 pm (UTC)Re: :o
From:Re: :o
From:no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:34 pm (UTC)So k-punk is not as bad as someone saying 'anyone who holds this view is an idiot who needs to be sorted out' but no-one seems to be saying this, and in the context k-punk's view seems more unpleasant.
EDIT: especially when he IS saying that about popists but since THEY are all public school toffs WE can all agree on the fact that they are idiots. LOLZ.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:40 pm (UTC)Scrabulous has killed it.Or should I expect to see K-Punk at the Cross Kings on the 1st Sept TOOLED UP then?
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 02:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 04:12 pm (UTC)Maybe K-Punk addresses this later in his piece, but I'm too anti-intellectual/sane to find it.
no subject
Date: 2007-08-22 10:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2007-08-23 05:27 am (UTC)