Music:
Albums:
Beck "Guero": "Que Onda Guero" is a friggin' great song
Songs:
Beck "Que Onda Guero"
Bright Eyes "Lua"
Biz Markie "Just A Friend"
Louis XIV "The Grand Apartment"
Outkast "Hey Ya"
Books:
Tobias Wolff "This Boys Life" I read his short story "Bullet in the Brain", which was awesome, for my creative writing class. Now we're reading his memoir, and I love it. If it says anything, I'm way ahead of the assigned reading.
Plato "The Trial and Death of Socrates" Better than Herodotus, but you know, still not the funnest thing to read.
Also, an apology to Mr. Thucydides. Last week I said reading him was like pulling teeth. I judged a bit too early there, whoops! I actually ended up like "History of the Peloponesian War" quite a bit. So, anyway, sorry for the initial bad press (though you may want to work on your intro...)
Movies:
Nothing new or used to report. Sorry folks.
Things I'm looking forward to:
-Pitchfork reports new albums from the White Stripes, The Strokes, and Radiohead will soon be in my possession. Dates not set.
-My neighbor is going to sing on Letterman tonight. And I've heard her sing, she's good.
-Looks like Bright Eyes are going to be in the Cities, might have to make a trip for that.
-Sin City will be in theatres tomorrow, I'm going to try to see it this weekend.
-18 1/2 Days until my birthday.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
A Few Top 5 Lists
Here's my Top Five lists in a couple different categories. Why? Because I'm sick of reading Socrates...
Top 5 Albums (All Time)
1) Beck Odelay
2) Radiohead Kid A
3) Nirvana Unplugged
4) Bob Dylan Blood on the Tracks
5) Beastie Boys Paul's Boutique
Top 5 Songs (All Time)
1) Pink Floyd "Wish You Were Here"
2) Nirvana "Where Did You Sleep Last Night"
3) Radiohead "Morning Bell"
4) The Who "Baba O'Reilly"
5) Beck "Hotwax"
Top 5 Books (All Time)
1) Kurt Vonnegut Cat's Cradle
2) Mikhail Lermontov A Hero of Our Time
3) Ivan Turgenev Fathers and Sons
4) Fyodor Dostoyevsky Crime and Punishment
5) Kurt Vonnegut Slaughterhouse 5
Top 5 Movies (All Time)
1) Kill Bill (1&2)
2) Raging Bull
3) Pulp Fiction
4) A Clockwork Orange
5) The Godfather
Top 5 People (All Time)
1) Ghandi
2) Fyodor Dostoyevsky
3) Ghengis Khan
4) Napoleon (Bonaparte or Dynamite)
5) Ivan the Terrible
Top 5 Household Objects (All Time)
1) Stereo
2) Television
3) Pen
4) Dutch oven
5) Potholder
Top 5 Albums of 2005 (So far)
1) Bright Eyes I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning
2) Beck Guero
3) The Decemberists Picaresque
4) 50 Cent The Massacre
5) Sonic Death Monkey Seahorse
Top 5 Albums (All Time)
1) Beck Odelay
2) Radiohead Kid A
3) Nirvana Unplugged
4) Bob Dylan Blood on the Tracks
5) Beastie Boys Paul's Boutique
Top 5 Songs (All Time)
1) Pink Floyd "Wish You Were Here"
2) Nirvana "Where Did You Sleep Last Night"
3) Radiohead "Morning Bell"
4) The Who "Baba O'Reilly"
5) Beck "Hotwax"
Top 5 Books (All Time)
1) Kurt Vonnegut Cat's Cradle
2) Mikhail Lermontov A Hero of Our Time
3) Ivan Turgenev Fathers and Sons
4) Fyodor Dostoyevsky Crime and Punishment
5) Kurt Vonnegut Slaughterhouse 5
Top 5 Movies (All Time)
1) Kill Bill (1&2)
2) Raging Bull
3) Pulp Fiction
4) A Clockwork Orange
5) The Godfather
Top 5 People (All Time)
1) Ghandi
2) Fyodor Dostoyevsky
3) Ghengis Khan
4) Napoleon (Bonaparte or Dynamite)
5) Ivan the Terrible
Top 5 Household Objects (All Time)
1) Stereo
2) Television
3) Pen
4) Dutch oven
5) Potholder
Top 5 Albums of 2005 (So far)
1) Bright Eyes I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning
2) Beck Guero
3) The Decemberists Picaresque
4) 50 Cent The Massacre
5) Sonic Death Monkey Seahorse
Beck!
The new Beck album came out yesterday, and I got a chance to listen to it after I bought it (instead of the usual custom of making hansome lawn decorations with my new CDs). Beck is one of those artists that unless he continuously screws up for about 15 years, I'll still buy his CD no matter what. Odelay was such a big part of my junior high/high school life that I feel a certain affinity for the guy (though tempered with time). Plus, he hasn't put out anything terrible, and I enjoy all of his albums from One Foot In The Grave to Midnight Vultures. Therefore, Beck coming out with a new album is a sort of event for me, and every 2-3 years, I can celebrate Beck Day. So yay!
Well, what do I think of Guero? I can't really say yet. Gone are the days when Beck could do no wrong in my mind, and anything he created was eagerly loved by yours truly. So I come in with a more critical eye towards the album. I certainly need more time to get to know the album. But my preliminary feeling is that it's good, but not great. It's a worthy, interesting album, but it's not a classic. The first song, E-Pro, is fun, energetic, but nothing special. Which pretty much sums up the entire album. This of course, is an initial impression. I won't fault the album for not being Odelay. I'll allow the album to live on it's own merits, because it's completely unfair to hold it to Odelay standards. That album is a classic in it's own right. Beck is a different person now, and is making different music. Give me a few days, and I'll have a real review for you. For now, just be happy with a preliminary rating of ***
Well, what do I think of Guero? I can't really say yet. Gone are the days when Beck could do no wrong in my mind, and anything he created was eagerly loved by yours truly. So I come in with a more critical eye towards the album. I certainly need more time to get to know the album. But my preliminary feeling is that it's good, but not great. It's a worthy, interesting album, but it's not a classic. The first song, E-Pro, is fun, energetic, but nothing special. Which pretty much sums up the entire album. This of course, is an initial impression. I won't fault the album for not being Odelay. I'll allow the album to live on it's own merits, because it's completely unfair to hold it to Odelay standards. That album is a classic in it's own right. Beck is a different person now, and is making different music. Give me a few days, and I'll have a real review for you. For now, just be happy with a preliminary rating of ***
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Gushing Praise: Pulp Fiction
This will be part of a series in which I heap gushing praise on films I love. Part I is Pulp Fiction, which I watched Friday night after a long hiatus.
First of all, let there be no doubt that this movie is a 10/10, absolutely positively without a doubt. First of all, let's look at why:
1) DIALOGUE- I mean, Tarantino makes it look easy (which it isn't) to create sparkling, crackling dialogue. The absolute epitome of which is the diner scene in which Mia and Vincent have a conversation that is more exciting and interesting than any CGI explosion Hollywood has ever created. And that's only the tip of the iceberg. Let's make a comparison here. Tarantino's dialogue is like the special effects in Lord of the Rings. Most other movie's dialogue is like the special effects in a puppet show.
2) Well paced story-Look people, a movie doesn't have to have an action packed "plot" to be interesting. In a nation of ritalin junkies bred on video games, perhaps this is the case. Now, there isn't a real cohesive plot to the story, just three stories that are loosely interrelated. But partly because of the dialogue and Tarantino's ability and actor's ability to create realistic characters, the movie remains interesting without "suprise twists" suspenseful moments. Not everything has to be a roller coaster ride, and Tarantino understands that (though he understands that sometimes it is, and adds some of the adrenaline in at appropriate times).
3) Music-While writing can only use the words fo the author to create mood, movies have the added advantage of music. Some people take this advantage and squander it by plugging in mood by numbers songs. Tarantino takes the music seriously and makes sure it fits with the movie seamlessly.
4) Acting-I know a lot more about writing than I do about acting, but I can tell the difference between Keanu Reeves acting abilities, and Samuel L. Jackson or John Travolta's, as displayed in Pulp Fiction. So I'll trust the Acadamy on this one and say it was pretty good.
Now for a retort on popular complaints:
1) It's boring-Obviously sir, you don't appreciate the use of language, the well made characters, and the quirky stories Tarantino creates. In short, you're a nimrod. Hope you enjoy "Pearl Harbor" when the special edition comes out.
2) It's too violent-Now, perhaps, this is a legitimate complaint for some. I know some people don't like the violence. But I don't think this movie succeeds without the violence. It's supposed to be violent, that's the subject matter. In addition, Tarantino is a thoroughly American filmmaker, and while he mines many things, he ultimately is steeped in American culture. And violence, especially gun violence, is deeply ingrained in American culture.
3) Too much swearing-They're freakin' gangsters you pansy. How about getting past age four.
Anyway, if you haven't seen it, see it.
First of all, let there be no doubt that this movie is a 10/10, absolutely positively without a doubt. First of all, let's look at why:
1) DIALOGUE- I mean, Tarantino makes it look easy (which it isn't) to create sparkling, crackling dialogue. The absolute epitome of which is the diner scene in which Mia and Vincent have a conversation that is more exciting and interesting than any CGI explosion Hollywood has ever created. And that's only the tip of the iceberg. Let's make a comparison here. Tarantino's dialogue is like the special effects in Lord of the Rings. Most other movie's dialogue is like the special effects in a puppet show.
2) Well paced story-Look people, a movie doesn't have to have an action packed "plot" to be interesting. In a nation of ritalin junkies bred on video games, perhaps this is the case. Now, there isn't a real cohesive plot to the story, just three stories that are loosely interrelated. But partly because of the dialogue and Tarantino's ability and actor's ability to create realistic characters, the movie remains interesting without "suprise twists" suspenseful moments. Not everything has to be a roller coaster ride, and Tarantino understands that (though he understands that sometimes it is, and adds some of the adrenaline in at appropriate times).
3) Music-While writing can only use the words fo the author to create mood, movies have the added advantage of music. Some people take this advantage and squander it by plugging in mood by numbers songs. Tarantino takes the music seriously and makes sure it fits with the movie seamlessly.
4) Acting-I know a lot more about writing than I do about acting, but I can tell the difference between Keanu Reeves acting abilities, and Samuel L. Jackson or John Travolta's, as displayed in Pulp Fiction. So I'll trust the Acadamy on this one and say it was pretty good.
Now for a retort on popular complaints:
1) It's boring-Obviously sir, you don't appreciate the use of language, the well made characters, and the quirky stories Tarantino creates. In short, you're a nimrod. Hope you enjoy "Pearl Harbor" when the special edition comes out.
2) It's too violent-Now, perhaps, this is a legitimate complaint for some. I know some people don't like the violence. But I don't think this movie succeeds without the violence. It's supposed to be violent, that's the subject matter. In addition, Tarantino is a thoroughly American filmmaker, and while he mines many things, he ultimately is steeped in American culture. And violence, especially gun violence, is deeply ingrained in American culture.
3) Too much swearing-They're freakin' gangsters you pansy. How about getting past age four.
Anyway, if you haven't seen it, see it.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Current Favorites (March 24, 2005)
Music
The Decemberists Present Picaresque-Just got a chance to listen to this album, which came out last Tuesday. Pretty good, but a little dissappointing. Didn't really care for the first two songs ("The Infanta", "We Both Go Down Together"), with a special ire for the rather stupid lyrics in "We Both Go Down Together". However, it picks up after that, with highlights including "Eli, The Barrow Boy", and "The Bagman's Gambit". Nothing here even approaches most of Her Majesty the Decemberists. Still a good album though, maybe Her Majesty was just that good...
***1/2
Favorite Songs:
Decemberists: "The Mariners Revenge Song", "The Bagman's Gambit"
Beck: "Hotwax"
Bright Eyes: "Poison Oak"
Wilco "Hummingbird"
The Who "A Quick One While He's Away"
Books
Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War-Like pulling teeth
Movies
Braveheart-I love this movie, so I rewatched it, I think this is the third time I watched it. Still gets me everytime. The last scene is corny, but still...male weepie...10/10
The Notebook-I'm sure most of you can guess why I watched this. Fortunately I was tired and fell asleep halfway through before I vomited everywhere. Technically, I can't rate it since I didn't watch the whole thing.
Pauly Shore is Dead-Never was a big Pauly Shore fan, but this was pretty entertaining. Rico Suave scene was classic. He brings up a good point, there really is no difference between Shore and Adam Sandler. Worth renting. 6/10
The Decemberists Present Picaresque-Just got a chance to listen to this album, which came out last Tuesday. Pretty good, but a little dissappointing. Didn't really care for the first two songs ("The Infanta", "We Both Go Down Together"), with a special ire for the rather stupid lyrics in "We Both Go Down Together". However, it picks up after that, with highlights including "Eli, The Barrow Boy", and "The Bagman's Gambit". Nothing here even approaches most of Her Majesty the Decemberists. Still a good album though, maybe Her Majesty was just that good...
***1/2
Favorite Songs:
Decemberists: "The Mariners Revenge Song", "The Bagman's Gambit"
Beck: "Hotwax"
Bright Eyes: "Poison Oak"
Wilco "Hummingbird"
The Who "A Quick One While He's Away"
Books
Thucydides: History of the Peloponnesian War-Like pulling teeth
Movies
Braveheart-I love this movie, so I rewatched it, I think this is the third time I watched it. Still gets me everytime. The last scene is corny, but still...male weepie...10/10
The Notebook-I'm sure most of you can guess why I watched this. Fortunately I was tired and fell asleep halfway through before I vomited everywhere. Technically, I can't rate it since I didn't watch the whole thing.
Pauly Shore is Dead-Never was a big Pauly Shore fan, but this was pretty entertaining. Rico Suave scene was classic. He brings up a good point, there really is no difference between Shore and Adam Sandler. Worth renting. 6/10
Monday, March 14, 2005
Current Favorites (March 14, 2005)
Music I'm listening to:
Bright Eyes I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning (whole album)
Franz Ferdinand "This Fire"
Modest Mouse The Moon and Antarctica (esp. "Paper Thin Walls")
Wilco Yankee Hotel Foxtrot (esp. "Jesus Ect." and "Ashes of American Flags")
The Shins "Young Pilgrims"
Special mention goes to 89.3 The Current, put out by MPR. Great stuff, check out the links section to listen online.
Books I'm reading:
J.M. Cotzee The Master of Petersberg- Pretty good so far, it's about Dostoevsky's time in St. Petersberg after his stepson dies under mysterious circumstances. I'm only about eighty pages in, but I'm still reading it.
Herodotus Histories-It's for my Ancient Greece class. Not all that exciting. I try and find excuses to avoid it.
Movies recently viewed:
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest-I just saw it for the first time, and liked it a lot. Preliminary feeling is that it is an 8/10. Jack Nicholson's performance is indeed one for the ages.
Swingers-Just watched it for the third time. So money...9/10
A Clockwork Orange-I don't know how many times I've watched this, but it gets better every time. I might have a longer write up about this movie in the future, who knows. 10/10
The Battle of Algiers-French movie about the Algerian independence movie. Slanted towards the Algerian side but it doesn't make the movie suffer. Has two of the best scenes in any movie. Otherwise, it feels a little choppy, but still, very, very good. 8/10
Things I'm anticipating:
The new Decemberists CD, out March 22.
The new Beck CD, out March 29
The beginning of a new baseball season, with the Red Sox defending their title (and handing out the rings at Fenway, right in front of the MF-Yankees on April 11)
My dad's birthday is Wednesday, March 16.
St. Patty's Day is Thursday, March 17...unfortunately, no choruses of "Ole" this year...
Bright Eyes I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning (whole album)
Franz Ferdinand "This Fire"
Modest Mouse The Moon and Antarctica (esp. "Paper Thin Walls")
Wilco Yankee Hotel Foxtrot (esp. "Jesus Ect." and "Ashes of American Flags")
The Shins "Young Pilgrims"
Special mention goes to 89.3 The Current, put out by MPR. Great stuff, check out the links section to listen online.
Books I'm reading:
J.M. Cotzee The Master of Petersberg- Pretty good so far, it's about Dostoevsky's time in St. Petersberg after his stepson dies under mysterious circumstances. I'm only about eighty pages in, but I'm still reading it.
Herodotus Histories-It's for my Ancient Greece class. Not all that exciting. I try and find excuses to avoid it.
Movies recently viewed:
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest-I just saw it for the first time, and liked it a lot. Preliminary feeling is that it is an 8/10. Jack Nicholson's performance is indeed one for the ages.
Swingers-Just watched it for the third time. So money...9/10
A Clockwork Orange-I don't know how many times I've watched this, but it gets better every time. I might have a longer write up about this movie in the future, who knows. 10/10
The Battle of Algiers-French movie about the Algerian independence movie. Slanted towards the Algerian side but it doesn't make the movie suffer. Has two of the best scenes in any movie. Otherwise, it feels a little choppy, but still, very, very good. 8/10
Things I'm anticipating:
The new Decemberists CD, out March 22.
The new Beck CD, out March 29
The beginning of a new baseball season, with the Red Sox defending their title (and handing out the rings at Fenway, right in front of the MF-Yankees on April 11)
My dad's birthday is Wednesday, March 16.
St. Patty's Day is Thursday, March 17...unfortunately, no choruses of "Ole" this year...
Smoking Ordinance
I'm currently in my hometown of Stevens Point, Wisconsin. Here in this oasis of a small city, the natives are embroiled in a controversy of whether or not to ban smoking in all businesses (including bars and restaurants). Now I'm opposed to this for a couple of reasons.
Rights of Businesses: There are certain businesses in town, that in a way, are defined by the fact that they are smoky. For example, there's a little diner that serves all the old Polish people in the Park Ridge area. It's called Al's Diner. I've been going to Al's Diner since the original Al owned the place. He was a pretty big Bears fan, and he and I would usually bet a Coke when the two would play each other. Since then, ownership has moved on to one of the waitresses Al had, but the place has remained largely the same (though the Bears memoriablia has been replaced with green and gold). This includes a smokey atmosphere, which, admittedly, I prefer to be without. However, their pancakes are so darn good (and inexpensive), I can't resist going there once in awhile for breakfast, and just live with the smoke. But I know that if I complained about the smokiness I'd be out of line. Just about all of the regulars smoke, and they enjoy sitting around the table, laughing, talking, and polishing off a carton between them over eggs and keilbasa. Smoking is part of the atmosphere, like it or not. I know my dad, who quit smoking, can't handle it, so he just doesn't go there anymore. Believe it or not, Al's does not have a stranglehold on the breakfast business in Stevens Point. My dad, any time he wants, can get breakfast at the Blueberry Muffin, Cozy Kitchen, the Wooden Chair, or other establishments that either ban smoking or separtate smoking and non-smoking areas. Al's has lost a customer, but they seem to be getting along fine, the Cadillacs and Buicks still fill their parking lot. My dad still gets a good breakfast at other restaurants.
If the owner wants smoking in his/her business, there's no reason he/she cannot. Customers will avoid smokiness if they dislike it, like my father does.
Government Interference: I'm not exactly a libertarian, but sometimes they have a point. Why, exactly, is it's the governments job to tell me that it's bad for my health to enjoy a pancake in a smoky environment once in awhile? Realistically, so is the butter and syrup I slather on the thing. Will nutrition requirements be next? This is not a public health issue. This is a bunch of well meaning people using the wrong tactics to achieve their goals. Smoking is bad for you, most rational people will concede this point, but it is a legal activity. Therefore, if a business wants to use smoking as a draw, it should be allowed. Bars, some restaurants, and a few other businesses have determined that smoking does not inhibit their sales, and in some cases, gives them a unique draw (especially bars). Why shouldn't businesses be able to exploit this niche market? People are going to smoke, whether in their homes, in their cars, or at their favorite watering hole. The smoking ban would set a dangerous precident of government interference.
Incidently, it seems most of the people in Stevens Point are opposed to this ordinance. I'm not sure whether to chalk this up to well thought out consideration of the facts, or whether this town just likes to smoke. Whatever reason, I hope the ordinance fails (the vote is coming up soon). Though I admire the spirit of the anti-smoking people, their heart is in the wrong place. May Al's stay smoke filled till its customers die of horrible, lung-related diseases.
ZT Krogman
Rights of Businesses: There are certain businesses in town, that in a way, are defined by the fact that they are smoky. For example, there's a little diner that serves all the old Polish people in the Park Ridge area. It's called Al's Diner. I've been going to Al's Diner since the original Al owned the place. He was a pretty big Bears fan, and he and I would usually bet a Coke when the two would play each other. Since then, ownership has moved on to one of the waitresses Al had, but the place has remained largely the same (though the Bears memoriablia has been replaced with green and gold). This includes a smokey atmosphere, which, admittedly, I prefer to be without. However, their pancakes are so darn good (and inexpensive), I can't resist going there once in awhile for breakfast, and just live with the smoke. But I know that if I complained about the smokiness I'd be out of line. Just about all of the regulars smoke, and they enjoy sitting around the table, laughing, talking, and polishing off a carton between them over eggs and keilbasa. Smoking is part of the atmosphere, like it or not. I know my dad, who quit smoking, can't handle it, so he just doesn't go there anymore. Believe it or not, Al's does not have a stranglehold on the breakfast business in Stevens Point. My dad, any time he wants, can get breakfast at the Blueberry Muffin, Cozy Kitchen, the Wooden Chair, or other establishments that either ban smoking or separtate smoking and non-smoking areas. Al's has lost a customer, but they seem to be getting along fine, the Cadillacs and Buicks still fill their parking lot. My dad still gets a good breakfast at other restaurants.
If the owner wants smoking in his/her business, there's no reason he/she cannot. Customers will avoid smokiness if they dislike it, like my father does.
Government Interference: I'm not exactly a libertarian, but sometimes they have a point. Why, exactly, is it's the governments job to tell me that it's bad for my health to enjoy a pancake in a smoky environment once in awhile? Realistically, so is the butter and syrup I slather on the thing. Will nutrition requirements be next? This is not a public health issue. This is a bunch of well meaning people using the wrong tactics to achieve their goals. Smoking is bad for you, most rational people will concede this point, but it is a legal activity. Therefore, if a business wants to use smoking as a draw, it should be allowed. Bars, some restaurants, and a few other businesses have determined that smoking does not inhibit their sales, and in some cases, gives them a unique draw (especially bars). Why shouldn't businesses be able to exploit this niche market? People are going to smoke, whether in their homes, in their cars, or at their favorite watering hole. The smoking ban would set a dangerous precident of government interference.
Incidently, it seems most of the people in Stevens Point are opposed to this ordinance. I'm not sure whether to chalk this up to well thought out consideration of the facts, or whether this town just likes to smoke. Whatever reason, I hope the ordinance fails (the vote is coming up soon). Though I admire the spirit of the anti-smoking people, their heart is in the wrong place. May Al's stay smoke filled till its customers die of horrible, lung-related diseases.
ZT Krogman
Popularity
I just got one of those new Bright Eyes CDs, I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning. My first encounter with Bright Eyes was the song Lua, followed by a massive amount of downloading everything by them. But with me, I don't like having a massive depository of songs as my only possession of an artist, especially if I like them a good deal. To me, MP3 downloading is like a radio station that only plays stuff I like. It's a great way to hear new music for free. I always feel guilty not buying an album that I love. Not because I feel like I'm stealing from the artist, but rather, because I feel like I'm stealing from the local record store (Radio Kaos) in Stevens Point, WI. Also, I have a thing about actually being able to hold the album in my hands. Nothing on a computer actually seems real to me. Owning MP3's of Bright Eyes does not mean I own anything by Bright Eyes. Especially when they are pirated with long filenames.
Anyway, after I buy an album, I like to do some reading on it, just to see what others think of it. Now, I personally love the album. But I like to hear what people who don't like it have to say. It's a time waster of mine. Well, it seems some people take the album as an affront to their intelligence, ears, musical sensibilities, ect. Of course, there are a segment of these dissenters that think Bright Eyes andeveryone who listens to them are certified losers who should apologize to the world for hoisting this pretentious tripe upon the unsuspecting populace and telling them that it's a masterpiece or other such hyperbole.
This is not exclusive to Bright Eyes of course. Name any band that plays outside of their garage at least once and you'll find someone who orgasms at the mention of their name, and someone who's filled with malace towards those posers. I can say there are bands that I absolutely love and who give me a great deal of pleasure. I'm not sure if Bright Eyes will make the Pantheon, that will take a bit of time to determine. There are also bands which I dislike a good deal, though I'm not bitter towards them or anything. I finished junior high seven years ago.
Where the hell am I going with this? The damn thing is titled "Popularity", when exactly am I going to talk about "popularity"? Right now dear reader, right now...Here's the point, in much of this vitriol or praise that is heaped on artists (whether musicians, writers, directors, and other purveyors of culture), makes an argument about the group's popularity. Bright Eyes, for example, actually had the #1 and #2 singles at the same time (which is fairly astonishing). So, most of the haters snipe at this as a sign of the apocolypse, that the whole world has been led astray by a con man named Connor. The lovers say that finally, finally the general public is gaining some taste after years of putting Britney on a pedastle. Both fit the popularity to their views as appropriate.
However, this is absurd. Seriously, popularity means one thing, how commercially successful an artist is. I mean, a few years ago the #1 album was Radiohead's Kid A. Of course, this did not mean that, say, next up was (insert beloved Indie band here) debuting at #1. It just meant that a lot of freaking people bought Kid A, and that Jay-Z didn't release an album that week. Popularity has little bearing on how good something is. American Idol is the number one TV show, and the Sopranos isn't. Does that mean American Idol is better than the Sopranos. Most would argue no, part of it has to do with differences in distribution, and the amount of TV them youngins watch. Of course, for awhile, Seinfeld was the number one show. Should we then infer that Seinfeld, being a number one show, is not a very good show, because the ignorant populace embraced it? Of course not (unless, of course, you never liked that Seinfeld show much).
I will concede this: popularity has some bearing on something's legacy. Massive popularity can overcome obvious deficiencies in something's quality (see: Star Wars). Large numbers of people enjoying something can in fact pressure others to conform to assent to it's greatness. But then again, it's power is limited. Van Gogh was never appreciated in his lifetime. Crime and Punishment was the only topic of conversation in Russian when it was first published. Both are (generally) considered great works of art. I think what truly seals something's legacy is how good it is, rather than it's popularity.
So in short, arguments based upon something's popularity reveal little of its inherent quality. I hope you all knew that, but obviously some haven't understood the concept. Like Rousseau...that guys full of shit sometimes...
ZT Krogman
Anyway, after I buy an album, I like to do some reading on it, just to see what others think of it. Now, I personally love the album. But I like to hear what people who don't like it have to say. It's a time waster of mine. Well, it seems some people take the album as an affront to their intelligence, ears, musical sensibilities, ect. Of course, there are a segment of these dissenters that think Bright Eyes andeveryone who listens to them are certified losers who should apologize to the world for hoisting this pretentious tripe upon the unsuspecting populace and telling them that it's a masterpiece or other such hyperbole.
This is not exclusive to Bright Eyes of course. Name any band that plays outside of their garage at least once and you'll find someone who orgasms at the mention of their name, and someone who's filled with malace towards those posers. I can say there are bands that I absolutely love and who give me a great deal of pleasure. I'm not sure if Bright Eyes will make the Pantheon, that will take a bit of time to determine. There are also bands which I dislike a good deal, though I'm not bitter towards them or anything. I finished junior high seven years ago.
Where the hell am I going with this? The damn thing is titled "Popularity", when exactly am I going to talk about "popularity"? Right now dear reader, right now...Here's the point, in much of this vitriol or praise that is heaped on artists (whether musicians, writers, directors, and other purveyors of culture), makes an argument about the group's popularity. Bright Eyes, for example, actually had the #1 and #2 singles at the same time (which is fairly astonishing). So, most of the haters snipe at this as a sign of the apocolypse, that the whole world has been led astray by a con man named Connor. The lovers say that finally, finally the general public is gaining some taste after years of putting Britney on a pedastle. Both fit the popularity to their views as appropriate.
However, this is absurd. Seriously, popularity means one thing, how commercially successful an artist is. I mean, a few years ago the #1 album was Radiohead's Kid A. Of course, this did not mean that, say, next up was (insert beloved Indie band here) debuting at #1. It just meant that a lot of freaking people bought Kid A, and that Jay-Z didn't release an album that week. Popularity has little bearing on how good something is. American Idol is the number one TV show, and the Sopranos isn't. Does that mean American Idol is better than the Sopranos. Most would argue no, part of it has to do with differences in distribution, and the amount of TV them youngins watch. Of course, for awhile, Seinfeld was the number one show. Should we then infer that Seinfeld, being a number one show, is not a very good show, because the ignorant populace embraced it? Of course not (unless, of course, you never liked that Seinfeld show much).
I will concede this: popularity has some bearing on something's legacy. Massive popularity can overcome obvious deficiencies in something's quality (see: Star Wars). Large numbers of people enjoying something can in fact pressure others to conform to assent to it's greatness. But then again, it's power is limited. Van Gogh was never appreciated in his lifetime. Crime and Punishment was the only topic of conversation in Russian when it was first published. Both are (generally) considered great works of art. I think what truly seals something's legacy is how good it is, rather than it's popularity.
So in short, arguments based upon something's popularity reveal little of its inherent quality. I hope you all knew that, but obviously some haven't understood the concept. Like Rousseau...that guys full of shit sometimes...
ZT Krogman
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
