Re: (none)

[Mike Machnik <mike_m@apollo.com>]

In article <8905310005.AA02217@sparcy> arc!ken@apple.COM writes:
>	Since our society repeatedly promulgates the nonsense that our
>self-worth is based on something outside of ourselves, then people are
>always looking for something outside of themselves to base their sense
>of identity on.
>
>	By the way, I find that this factor is indeed the biggest
>block to a greater appreciation of good music.  If you're a "Mod", you
>don't listen to music by "Rockers".
>
>	As the posting above states, it "doesn't make any sense".  But
>as long as the media is in the hands of people who don't have a clue
>about how a healthy mind works, then you can't realistically expect
>most other people to make sense either.
 
    You have a good point here.  Many people will listen only to
    what they are "told" to listen to - by their friends, by radio,
    by MTV, etc.  This is clearly evident when I hear someone say
    regarding some of the music I like, "Well, I haven't heard
    of <band> before, so they can't be any good," or, "<top 10
    band> charts higher than <local undiscovered band>, so they
    must be better."  People fail to realize that the charts do
    not measure quality, but quantity.  

    Likewise, the fact that an artist charts well does not mean
    that his/her/their material is trash, and this is a mistake
    that many of the "alternative" people make.  THIS is where 
    the whole sell-out question arises (a hot topic now on the
    nm-list). 

    It's difficult to consider something "good" that you don't
    like.  For example, I don't like Michael Jackson.  I'm not
    making a statement about the quality of his work - I just
    do not like his music.  But I wouldn't go so far as to suggest
    that his music isn't any good.  I'm sure that it is good
    to those who like him and awful to those who don't.  In fact,
    I've heard most of his songs off the past three albums, and
    even though I don't like them, I can see how someone *would* -
    in that sense, I do consider his music good.  Hopefully, this
    answers the question "But if you consider it good, why don't
    you like it?"

    But, it's not possible or even expected that someone will
    like everything.  And the reasons why someone does or does
    not like an artist aren't always clear.  Some people like
    bluesy guitar, and they listen exclusively to artists that
    play that style; etc.  
    
    I can't always explain why I like what I do.  I'm sure it's not
    because of commercial radio.  I do like some bands that get
    played on commercial radio, but I don't believe it's because
    they are played there because I rarely listen to commercial
    radio.  I'd like to think I have a pretty open mind when it
    comes to music.  I won't turn something down unless I hear
    it first.  In fact, if I feel any pressure to listen to
    anything, it's from friends who listen to 1) new disco music
    2) "classic" rock stations.  This is what I hear when I
    visit them, take a trip in their cars, etc.  Once in a
    while a song I think is OK slips through - but not often.
    There's only one other person I know well who likes many
    of the same artists I do - and she doesn't even like ALL
    of them (and vice versa).  She still doesn't like
    Ministry.  

    So, I don't feel I'm pressured at all to listen to what
    I listen to.  I've spent the time (and money) to check
    out some artists that people on the net have recommended.  That's
    done in the privacy of my own home/car.  There's no one
    there telling me it's good or bad, or that I should like it.
    Some of the music I've liked, some of it I haven't.

    From an older message:

>This posture
>has as its essential elements that any older musicians are
>automatically "dinosaurs", and that only the newer artists (who rip
>off the older ones) are "cool".
                           
    Ken, I missed this before, but now in an attempt to continue
    a more civilized discussion: could you explain to me, for
    example, how newer artists like 1) Joy Division 2) Kate Bush
    3) Ministry et Al (pun intended) have ripped off older artists;
    and who are those older artists?  

    Also, for every newer (i.e. last 10-12 years) artist that blatantly
    copies the style/music of a "classic" band to make money, there
    are many new artists playing good, original music.  I don't 
    think the level of "robbery" today is anywhere near what it 
    was 25 years ago when the British Invasion bands were ripping
    off the style and, in some cases directly, the music of
    black American musicians.  Give a listen to early Led Zeppelin
    and check their credits - they rarely credited the musicians 
    whose music they took.  Even the Beatles began as a band playing
    American R & B, but they and others were able to take it beyond
    that stage.  For the most part, those were the ones whose
    music lasted.


    - mike