Keep On Moving
Jan. 31st, 2006 03:20 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
freakytigger.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
poptimistsTwo things said by the Lex on the Poptimists chart thread:
"Gareth and I were talking last night about how a lot of the pro-pop people appear to have collectively decided that pop is a sonic genre rather than...anything and everything which cannibalises anything and everything else with an eye on the charts and sonic results all over the map, which is how I would want to define and approve of pop."
"I think my view of pop is the, the pure poppist view! the "pop-is-not-a-sound-but-an-ethos" argument which means that anything from Avril Lavigne to Stardust can be pop if it wants but that any attempt to define pop on strict sonic boundaries, or to make music based on these definitions (as many of these Swedes seem to do), is itself r*ck*sm or even worse INDIE"
Worth more discussion I reckons. Maybe we should ignore the whole qn of indie as I honestly think it's a side issue, and let's also try and leave rock1sm out of this until we know what it means, but yeah, is pop a sound or an ethos, or a sound that epitomises an ethos, or WHAT?
(If yr starving for actual YSI fun I will have some goodies for you tonight, including Bosh of the Week)
(Meanwhile for full on comments box madness scroll back to the Now 18 poll and look at the bottom - EEK)
"Gareth and I were talking last night about how a lot of the pro-pop people appear to have collectively decided that pop is a sonic genre rather than...anything and everything which cannibalises anything and everything else with an eye on the charts and sonic results all over the map, which is how I would want to define and approve of pop."
"I think my view of pop is the, the pure poppist view! the "pop-is-not-a-sound-but-an-ethos" argument which means that anything from Avril Lavigne to Stardust can be pop if it wants but that any attempt to define pop on strict sonic boundaries, or to make music based on these definitions (as many of these Swedes seem to do), is itself r*ck*sm or even worse INDIE"
Worth more discussion I reckons. Maybe we should ignore the whole qn of indie as I honestly think it's a side issue, and let's also try and leave rock1sm out of this until we know what it means, but yeah, is pop a sound or an ethos, or a sound that epitomises an ethos, or WHAT?
(If yr starving for actual YSI fun I will have some goodies for you tonight, including Bosh of the Week)
(Meanwhile for full on comments box madness scroll back to the Now 18 poll and look at the bottom - EEK)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-01-31 05:59 pm (UTC)differentiate you from your older brotherwin the particular argument you are currently engaged in.For the purposes of this particular argument I want to point out that girls used to scream for the Rolling Stones, and that the world's current best pop star (Ashlee Simpson) will sometimes employ vocal attacks derived ultimately from "Satisfaction" and "Positively 4th Street" and "Violet" etc. So whether as sound or ethos, I'm not sure you guys get it. (And Stones and Dylan and Courtney were surely drawing on all the popular culture they'd gorged on as children.) (But to be honest I should also point out that Ashlee isn't nearly as boffo at the box office as I'd like.)
He Who Believes That Pazz & Jop Is Now About An Hour And A Half Away
(And I Would Like To Point Out That I Am Indeed A Spam Robot So You Can Stop Asking, OK?)