Transferrable poptimism?

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

When you start exploring a new genre do you make any assumptions about whether the best-known acts/records/choons in that genre are likely to be the best or not? Do you think, for instance, that there must be a load of obscure better records lurking behind the famous ones that the Real Heads know about?

Of course I think for most people the answer is "depends" - but what does it depend on? For instance, here are two statements someone might make:

"James Brown isn't actually that good - there are loads of other obscure funk acts who are way better than him."

"Incantation aren't actually that good - there are loads of other obscure pan pipe moods acts who are way better than them."

I think statement #1 would raise eyebrows and statement #2 would be more generally accepted as likely to be true.

(I started on this train of thought because I realised when answering a thread on sukrat that for all I knew Merzbow might be a huge noise sell out and despised by all the real noise fans.)

Comments

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

I always assume obscure better records lurking behind the famous ones b/c of what I know about the music I'm a Real Head about! It doesn't usually mean the famous ones are bad, but - especially with genres which are less mainstream - the reason the crossover hits actually crossed over is because they were different in some way to what the genre fundamentally was. And there's a fine line between adding to the genre essentials to cross over (eg in the form of a big pop hook which isn't at odds with what the genre was best at doing) and diluting them (eg thinning out the production).

I'm also suspicious of examples which are famous because of critical canonisation...like Outkast in hip-hop. I really hate the thought of some hip-hop newcomer being directed to stuff like Outkast and the Beastie Boys and Kanye (all of whom I like) (not so much the BBs though), rather than TI or Trina.

[piratemoggy.livejournal.com]

Outkast are a weird one, though, aren't they. Cus people like them and Kelis are, unless I'm hugely mistaken, fairly weird and groundbreaking in their own rights but in doing so, have sort of ostracised themselves from their genre's womb.

Kanye is a totally different story. I do not like him much at all... I see him as just ripping off a lot of other people's stuff and doing it worse, only being acceptably "white" enough to get a lot of mainstream play. Possibly the same is true of Outkast and Kelis and I just didn't notice it when I started liking them because I was younger and less aware of things like that but still.

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Oh yeah Outkast and Kelis ARE weird and innovative - with varying degrees of success - but their innovation is so often used as a stick to beat the genre they came from and have now separated themselves from. Kelis = classic beyond classic; people who won't listen to r&b except Kelis = dud.

tbh I think a huge factor in Kanye's crossover appeal is his voice - he's similar to Missy in this respect, they have these very distinctive voices which aren't particularly tied to traditional hip-hop ideas of good flow, and they both really enunciate their words (as well as, in their singles, not using too much impenetrable hip-hop slang) (while still retaining lots of hip-hop mannerisms and signifiers to NOT separate themselves from their genre as much as Outkast).

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

But there's obvious hooks for why newcomers might be sent to Beastie Boys (white, been at it for 20 years, "grew up" sharply after first album) or Kanye (mega producer, finds his voice, likely to have a rap best-of guesting on his records). Outkast as far as I can tell, people recommend them because they like the music they make.

[freakytigger.livejournal.com]

Oh come on Andrew - LOADS AND LOADS of Outkast copy involved Andre 3000 as hip-hop's Bowie - gender-playing dandy in the midst of all that nasty guns and bling stuff. It's only after that film they did flopped that Big Boi's getting much of a look in again, coverage-wise.

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

Oh! I genuinely didn't see any of that. I mean, I quite like that he isn't about guns, I'm not sure how he's not about bling!

Also even when all I knew was the video for B.O.B. (or even just the mp3!) it all seemed very "Andre 3000 and his the mighty Outkast".

[weasel-seeker.livejournal.com]

Was that really always the case though?

I definitely got that sense circa Speakerboxx/The Love Below when everyone was enamoured with Dre's spotty attempts to become Prince, but ATLiens? Stankonia? They've certainly been presented as kind of a yin/yang Poet/Gangsta group, but it's not as through 3000's been completely devoid of gun talk or bling.

Is the question whether or not there are BETTER acts than crossover-to-pop acts, or are we talking on the meta-level of how they're written about in the press and the narratives that get created to faclitate mainstream acceptance? Because those seem fairly distinct from one another.

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

Outkast's big hook = "not like other hip-hop".

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

That's a good hook! Okay, point taken.

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

Also what if the thing that's been lost in mainstreaming it was one of the pillars of the genre, but unfortunately a pillar of sh1t that the genre could never have been popular without?

(eg "oh no this is new jaunty country music" - good, keep it coming!)

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

If one of a genre's pillars is a pillar of shit, it's unlikely I'll care much about that genre in the first place!

[braisedbywolves.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's what I'm saying, but you might like a crossover hit that did away with it.

[alexmacpherson.livejournal.com]

I almost certainly have! (eg indie with an actually decent rhythm section and competent voices.) Sometimes I think "validity of a genre's particular pillars" could be a discussion worth having, ie why is this thing which is so fundamental to a genre liked by its fans/disliked by non-fans, etc.