Nannerfan wrote:I take it this is directed towards commodorejohn?tallowwaters wrote:Mindless songs about mindless activities completely lacking any grandiose pretense are far better than pretentious wankers masquerading behind their banal wheedling and calling it real 'art'. Oh, please define your 'progressiveness', 'pacing', and 'catchiness' while I fall asleep listening to your aural pablum.
It appears it was directed at him and the above post from page 3...commodorejohn wrote:"Sure it's s**t, but you don't care that it's s**t when you're drunk off your a*s!" is not exactly a strong argument. And it's not like dance music is just inherently shitty - I don't even care for it that much and I can still point to much, much better stuff than this. Whereas this thing...there's no pacing, there's no progression, there's no melody. It's like a musical homunculus: it has the form of a song, but it doesn't have the essence of one. Or, as Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, "there is no there there."
"Sure it's s**t, but you don't care that it's s**t when you're drunk off your a*s."
"It's like a musical homunculus: it has the form of a song, but it doesn't have the essence of one."
This is a perfect comparison IMO.
I don't see anything wrong with what commodorejohn is saying, maybe it was the way he said it that pissed some people off. But in the end I think he made some very valid points. So did others...so what's the big deal? Isn't that why we're here? To discuss, debate, argue...Isn't the first step in that process to share our opinion? So why get mad at someone for doing that?