Several comments followed (the names have been withheld to protect the idiotic).
"the people tht (sic) idolise these modern asrtists (sic) are imbecilic saps of the lowest order."
Presumably like those who use textspeak.
"I saw a similar one juxtaposing something called a Nikki Minaj with someone like Carol (sic) King."
Needless to say both of the above "music critics" are of a certain age.
While clearly there are cases to be made for the superiority of a certain writer, performer, genre, era of music etc, it is in the end entirely subjective exercise. Personally I have always found Bohemian Rhapsody to be overblown, pompous and too close to that particularly 70's monstrosity - the Rock Opera for comfort. Even Queen devotees, if they are really honest, must admit that Bohemian Rhapsody is a song to be admired occasionally rather than put on repeat on the iPod. What's more the argument presented in the above posting is severely flawed. Compare Queen with a contemporary stadium rock band (e.g. Coldplay) by all means but not Beyonce - a crossover R&B Pop artist. Compare her to Donna Summer or more appropriately to the multiple writer/producer teams behind the pop/soul hits of 70's era Diana Ross but not the towering talents behind Radio Ga Ga. Pop music of the tinniest, stupidest kind, produced by committee has always existed. Number One hits depend on a hook and record companies spend a fortune recruiting armies of songwriters and producers to find that winning hook. Some of those hits endure, some of them vanish - but this is not a modern phenomena. Take the Brill Building in the 60's for example, where Carole King first worked churning out formula hits for pop vocal groups now long forgotten, before writing and producing her own seminal masterpiece, Tapestry. Carole King wrote for the Minajs of her time before striking out on her own - in a different genre. And just for the record, Minaj's Starships is one of the most played songs on my iPod at the moment, and Tapestry is one of my enduring favourites. I love them both for different reasons and see no need to compare them.
It's easy to say that pop music now is crap and fails to hold up to the music we grew up listening to. But how much of that opinion is coloured by nostalgia? I have a fondness for the 80's both serious (The Clash, Talking Heads, New Order) and frivolous (China Crisis, Wang Chung) because those were formative years when I listened to records in my bedroom - they were my escape from the world. But at the risk of sounding like David Cameron trying to be down with the kids music is just as good now. Bon Iver produced arguably the best album of 2011 with their self titled sophomore effort while unique recordings from Beach House and Yppah have already contributed to making 2012 a vintage year.
The distribution of music has changed through new media - splintering audiences and turning them into tribes. Unfortunately this tribal mentality has also affected the fans given to knee jerk, intolerant arguments on social networks. Blogs, Facebook and Twitter have been a great leveler - now no one's opinion has a higher value than anyone else's be they critic, musician or fan. However such forums can easily become rant boards - where uninformed, facile arguments spill out into the world instead of staying in the pub where they belong. My father has a simple maxim which most facebookers and twitterers forget: Opinions are like arse-holes - everybody has one.
0 Yorumlar