Damn those polls!!
PolyPam
greatest artists in pop music, as well as albums, songs....to be put in a
future issue.
Right now The Beatles are of course the top classic group, but as far as best
album it's going to Pet Sounds, and song "Good Vibrations". Oh dear. This is
just preliminary. Tomorrow will be the official final nominations. Get your
votes in!!
http://cgi.pathfinder.com/ew/fab400/music100/index.html
Oh God...why do I care? heehee. Well just cuz I do doesn't mean the rest of you
have to....but feel free to vote! ;-)
Peace,
TC
**"Out of college, money spent. See no future, pay no rent. All the money's
gone, nowhere to go."**
Jeff
Record sales are what counts.
ChappyLoser
Life...@webtv.net (Jeff) wrote:
> Damn those polls alright. They prove nothing.
> Record sales are what counts.
>
>
Poles are only good for one thing...hanging flags! Oops, you mean polls.
Quite skewed and never accurate. The size of the sampling group is never
adequate to reflect the opinions of society, and the only people who respond
to polls are the ones with the strongest opinion.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
JSeraf7064
I'll remember this, next time we're discussing who writes 'better' songs...
John or Paul.
-JS
Tom
The only thing that counts is the quality of the music.
The only way to judge that is subjectively. Using polls or record sales as
evidence is a sign of insecurity. "Look, I really do have good taste. I can
prove it."
Gondola Bob
jsera...@aol.com (JSeraf7064) wrote:
> >Damn those polls alright. They prove nothing. Record sales are what counts.
>
> I'll remember this, next time we're discussing who writes 'better' songs...
> John or Paul.
Or the next time anyone puts down Britney Spears? Hey, she sells lots of
records! Obviously, a major talent, then.
GB
Jeff
Wait JS. I hope you aren't suggesting that I ever
said I liked John's songs better cause you know
I'm a Harrison fan as a solo artist than MORE
than a Lennon or McCartney fan.LOL
Maybe they should do a poll that Lennon had
the substance and McCartney had the style
and then I'd vote and agree with you. All other
polls stink.:)
Jeff
insecurity
What? Record sales are an indication of how
popular a artist or band is, and polls are only
samplings of whomever decided to vote at
a particular time. There's a big difference Tom
You don't agree?
Jeff
music
yeah that too. I agree.
davisk
"Tom" <Blac...@msn.com> wrote:
>
>
> >>Damn those polls alright. They prove nothing. Record sales are what
> counts.
> >
> >I'll remember this, next time we're discussing who writes 'better' songs...
> >John or Paul.
> >
>
> The only way to judge that is subjectively. Using polls or record sales as
> evidence is a sign of insecurity. "Look, I really do have good taste. I can
> prove it."
>
>
I think what's wrong with things today is that people are trying to quantify
peoples feeling by using statistics as a guage. Maybe the feeling is if we
can scientifically determine what people are thinking, that can be used to
perhaps create an even better rock group, or something. I say, forget polls.
I myself go through phases of interest in music - one day I might think a
particular James Brown record is the coolest thing ever recorded, and then a
few days later, I decide that I really really like 'I Want You (She's So
Heavy)'. Overall, I still like the stuff I listen to, but to single any one
song or one person out as my favourite of all time - that's dependant on what
state of mind you're in (although, I must say, that the Beatles will always
be my favourite group, polls or no polls).
Tom
But using either as a proof of quality is insecurity. Was "Wooly Bully" a
better record than "Help?" It was the best selling single of 1965. Is
Wynton Marsallis a better musician than Eric Dolphy was? Abba better than
XTC? For that matter, Wings better than George's solo albums. (I might agree
with that last one, but you've said that you don't)
Saying "I believe that this is a better record because I enjoy it more" is a
position of security." Saying "I believe that this is a better record
because of these external factors" is a lack of confidence in one's own
taste.
lennon fan
agree, tho that's not why I think they're better, the music is just
simply more enduring. ABBA has the no.1 album in England now, 17 years
after they made their last record. XTC are always being cited for their
Beatle influences, where I feel ABBA are more original, their only
prototype being the Mamas and Papas, but they were folk-rock where Abba
was pop/electronics. I also doubt XTC would inspire films and plays the
way ABBA does.
Tom
>I think ABBA is worlds better than XTC, and would bet that millions
>agree, tho that's not why I think they're better, the music is just
>simply more enduring.
XTC has been around for 20 years. Sounds pretty enduring to me.
>ABBA has the no.1 album in England now, 17 years
>after they made their last record.
I thought you didn't cite record sales to support your postion.
>XTC are always being cited for their
>Beatle influences, where I feel ABBA are more original, their only
>prototype being the Mamas and Papas, but they were folk-rock where Abba
>was pop/electronics.
The Beatles are given as an influence to ABBA as well. Also, you might want
to compare the melody to Waterloo to Build Me Up, Buttercup some time.
> I also doubt XTC would inspire films and plays the
>way ABBA does.
Andy Partridge is widely considered to be a songwriter on a level with
Lennon and McCartney, ABBA is more the equivalent of Boyce and Hart. (and
no, there's nothing wrong with good bubblegum pop, until you try to claim
it's something it isn't)
What films and plays are you referring to?
Jeff
insecurity
You lost me Tom. Why is this term "insecurity"
being used so much
>>Was Wooly Bully a better record than 'help"
it was in terms of record sales if it sold better
but I'm talking of how the record companies feel
about it of course, not the general public. They
make up their own minds.
>>It was the best selling single of 1965
I didn't know that.LOL
>>saying "That this is a better record because I
enjoy it more" is a position of security.
Again you lost me Tom. Why are you using the
terms 'security' or "Insecurity' so much?
I don't follow you.
I guess I don't worry about this type of stuff when I am discussing
music with other people.
It get's into analizing one's self a bit too much
and that's not good Tom.
Jeff
I was the one who was talking about record
sales Tom. You accidently quoted the wrong
poster and are mixing in what I said with what
the other poster said. I do it too though. No big
deal. I'm just pointing it out to you what happened here.:)
Tom
>You lost me Tom. Why is this term "insecurity"
>being used so much
My point is that the reason people use statistics to support their opinion
that a certain artists is better than another is because they lack the
confidence to believe that their own feelings are justified.
>>Was Wooly Bully a better record than 'help"
>>It was the best selling single of 1965
>I didn't know that.LOL
One of the few times that the biggest selling record of the year wasn't a
number one single. (It only got to #2)
>>saying "That this is a better record because I
enjoy it more" is a position of security.
>I guess I don't worry about this type of stuff when I am discussing
>music with other people.
>It get's into analizing one's self a bit too much
>and that's not good Tom.
I don't see how you can avoid it, since both creating and listening to music
are very personal things.
One thing to keep in mind when you're talking about "the general public" is
that, no matter how successful an artist is, more people dislike or have no
interest in that artist than like that artist enough to buy one of his
records.
lennon fan
band member's endurance, I was talking about their music. I have a few
of their albums, (black sea, oranges and lemons and a couple others) and
I never listen to them at all anymore, but I'll still listen to ABBA. I
also never said I don't cite sales to support my position. I think
anything can and should be used to prove the point, even if music is a
subjective thing, there's a world of qualitative difference between
someone beating on a box and a Beethoven symphony. Continuing, year
after year high sales do indeed mean something. Not everything, but
something. It's a part of the pie.
While The Beatles truly were an influence on Abba, each album they
came out with wasn't compared to the Beatles, the way, say, XTC's albums
are (and every one they come out with gets compared to the fabs AGAIN,
ho hum). I totally disagree with the Boyce and Hart comparison, those 2
are pretty much a forgotten entity. Abba is still very much alive in the
minds of their many, many fans. and, where Boyce and Hart were pop
tunesmiths in the league of quality with, oh, say the early Monkees,
their lyrics were often trite and shallow. While early ABBA is generally
fluffy pop, the later stuff is much more serious and ambient. They now
inspire countless trance remixes. In Europe, they're probably bigger
than the Beatles. oh, and films and plays as follows:
Pricilla, Queen of the Desert. My Best Friends Wedding. there's another
one I can think of off hand, but I can't remember the title.
There's also a new play called "Mamma Mia' which is getting rave reviews
in London and is expected to hit Broadway soon. There's also another
one, but I can't remember the title of that one either, it was a few
years ago.
lennon fan
other one, but there's even 1 more that uses ABBA extensively in the
soundtrack. those other films use ABBA as central parts of the
storyline.
Tom
<The band has been around for 20 years, but I wasn't talking about the
band member's endurance, I was talking about their music. I have a few
of their albums, (black sea, oranges and lemons and a couple others) and
I never listen to them at all anymore, but I'll still listen to ABBA.>
Funny, I'm just the opposite.
I
<also never said I don't cite sales to support my position. I think
anything can and should be used to prove the point, even if music is a
subjective thing, there's a world of qualitative difference between
someone beating on a box and a Beethoven symphony. >
But that has nothing to do with sales. The difference can be described in
musical terms, or it can be described in terms of a subjective response,
neither sales nor popularity polls have anything to do with either.
<Continuing, year
after year high sales do indeed mean something. Not everything, but
something. It's a part of the pie.>
What? That a record is better marketed? That it has a good critical
reputation? That it's periodically fashionable?
< While The Beatles truly were an influence on Abba, each album they
came out with wasn't compared to the Beatles, the way, say, XTC's albums
are (and every one they come out with gets compared to the fabs AGAIN,
ho hum). >
It's easy critical shorthand. XTC=Beatles. The same way that Paul McCartney
writes lightweight love songs. Usually, the comparisons result in the
judgement that XTC's records are of the same quality as the Beatles, few
people have said that about ABBA.
<I totally disagree with the Boyce and Hart comparison, those 2
are pretty much a forgotten entity.>
huh? They were among the major pop songwriters of the sixties. Their songs
are still covered today and heard on the radio much more than ABBA.
<In Europe, they're probably bigger
than the Beatles. oh, and films and plays as follows:
Pricilla, Queen of the Desert. My Best Friends Wedding.>
You said they inspired the films and plays. They didn't insipre either of
those.
There's also a new play called "Mamma Mia' which is getting rave reviews
in London and is expected to hit Broadway soon. There's also another
one, but I can't remember the title of that one either, it was a few
years ago.
70s nostalgia is big now, or hadn't you heard? A good part of their
revival, (not all) has to do with camp appeal.
Jeff
feelings are justified.
I don't lack the confidence at all Tom and if it
weren't for the Beatles of being the best selling
artists off all time, I WOULDN'T even bother
thowing out this type of information regarding
record sales as my argument for anything. I
do it to post it as a fact for all of those that aren't
aware of this cause I feel it needs to be mentioned. As far as what
other artist sold better than an other artist, I wouldn't do this cause
I don't really care you know. As you say Tom, the music is what's
important.
>> I don't see how you can avoid it since both
creating and listening to music are very personal things.
Woh Tom. You sound like a very deep thinker
like me and I keep thinking I'm the only one.LOL
>>One thing to keep in mind.....
Tom could you please rephrase the last part of
this. I have read it over a few times and would
like to comment if I could, but the way it's worded, I don't quite
understand any of it.
Thanks.
lennon fan
many times in newspapers in England and the Netherlands, though I
personally would disagree. I'm diehard for the fabs and always will be.
I don't think Andy partridges' lyrics are all that great, XTC get
plenty of marketing AND critical raves and their records STILL don't
sell that well, which doesn't prove your point about sales being
meaningless. Most artists that I know tell me sales are EVERYTHING.
Critical reviews and a few underground fans doesn't pay the rent.
Artistic value being in the eye of the beholder. Periodically
fashionable? Hardly. The love of that group has never stopped. Every
time yet another compilation appears, sales go through the roof. and to
prove sales are indeed important, for example, you could create the best
record ever known to mankind, but if nobody hears it or buys it what
difference does it make to anyone but you? Sales are indeed a gauge of
success. also, I believe sales over a long period of time prove the
artistic value of a piece, even if you don't like that particular art.
As for the inspiration of ABBA in the films I mentioned, I disagree
with you completely there. How much more inspirational can you be to a
plot than have a large segment of the film revolve around you? and camp
factor? yes, they're very big in the gay community, but that doesn't
mean that they aren't deeply loved there too, I know for a fact many gay
people who simply love abba (and fleetwood mac, but that's a different
story). No matter how much people want to take these underground groups
and proclaim them 'like the Beatles' it almost always falls flat on it's
face, and many people who are generally into the underground have
psychological problems from my vantage point. I was around it for too
long not to notice, and fortunately always tried to keep a distance.
Long after the craze for the '70's has died down, people will still be
very into abba, especially in Europe, because they only marginally broke
here, but they're still big, even here, and the collectablility of their
records (worth much more than XTC can ever hope to be) is a marvel.
Early records by the members before joining the group routinely go for
hundreds of dollars, a sum not likely to be paid for flash-in-the-pan
acts, unless we're talking obscure doo-wop or Jazz. Usually, records
develop their lasting collectable market by being A. a great song in an
early or rare pressing, or B. an extremely collectable artist who has
enduring value. Rare abba pressings also go for mega-bucks and this is
not a trend that shows even a hint of slowing down, quite the contrary,
the group gets bigger all the time, and I remember back in the late
'80's, before the '70's revival, when the '60's revival was going on,
Abba was still extremely collectable. (not the everyday albums, but
pressings from obscure parts of Europe, foreign language versions, rare
mixes and pressings). I bought Lyka, the first album by Benny and Bjorn,
(with Agnetha and Frida on background vocals) for $40 in 1983, the year
after they broke up. Of course you can't touch it for under 100 now. I
thought it was a bargain then, and saw a few abba records in the $100
equivalent range then too. yep, sales mean A LOT.
Tom
>I don't think Andy partridges' lyrics are all that great,
You're in a minority among people who are familiar with them, but that's
your taste.
> XTC get
plenty of marketing
By not having a label for six years? Nonesuch wasn't exactly pushed at the
time either. The last time they had marketing behind them, and even this
would be debatable, was in the early 80s.
>AND critical raves and their records STILL don't
>sell that well, which doesn't prove your point about sales being
>meaningless. Most artists that I know tell me sales are EVERYTHING.
Sure, it's their living, but it doesn't make them proof of artistic quality.
>Critical reviews and a few underground fans doesn't pay the rent.
>Artistic value being in the eye of the beholder.
That's my point. Paying the rent doesn't have a thing to do with artistic
value.
Periodically
fashionable? Hardly. The love of that group has never stopped.
This is simply incorrect. They were forgotten for years, until they were
revived in the early ninties.
<Every
time yet another compilation appears, sales go through the roof. and to
prove sales are indeed important, for example, you could create the best
record ever known to mankind, but if nobody hears it or buys it what
difference does it make to anyone but you?>
And how does that prove sales have anything to do with artistic value?
> Sales are indeed a gauge of
>success. also, I believe sales over a long period of time prove the
>artistic value of a piece, even if you don't like that particular art.
In other words, since Stephen King has been popular since the seventies,
he's the most talented writer around today?
<As for the inspiration of ABBA in the films I mentioned, I disagree
with you completely there. How much more inspirational can you be to a
plot than have a large segment of the film revolve around you?>
They are being used as a plot device. That doesn't mean that they were the
impetus for the creation of the movie, which is what calling them the
"Inspiration" means.
<No matter how much people want to take these underground groups
and proclaim them 'like the Beatles' it almost always falls flat on it's
face, and many people who are generally into the underground have
psychological problems from my vantage point. I was around it for too
long not to notice, and fortunately always tried to keep a distance. >
Many people who are into ABBA have psycholgical problems. Many people have
psychological problems.
This was supposed to be a friendly debate, but now that you're implying that
someone who prefers "underground" music to the most popular music around
does so as a result of psychological problems, I'm left with with the
impression that you're the one who has pproblems with opinions that conflict
with your own, and that you're probably not a very likable person.
That was such a cheap (and unjustified) shot that I don't even want to
continue responding to your post.
lennon fan
fine, I don't really care, but someone needs to tell you.
1. If you would have understood my first post, I said that abba
inspires films and plays, and inspire does not mean that it must be
central, or the only focus of the plot. There are many levels of
inspiration.
2. wether you think I'm likable or not is irrelevant, I'm sure many
wouldn't like you either, with your smug and condecending tone, but I
have many friends, thanks much.
3. if no one ever hears a piece of art created by it's creator, no
matter how good, it's artistic value is negligable, because nobody
cares.
4. Having worked in the music field for many years, I've seen the
underground, and proportionately, I believe they have more psychological
problems as a whole. I also believe most people who look at them feel
the same way, but I've had enough contact to have 1st hand knowledge. It
has nothing to do with underground music itself, as that could be
anything unpopular, just some of the people who generally 'live' in that
place. i wasn't referring to you, or all underground folk, but
hmm....must've struck a nerve.
5. You are the one who is wrong, abba was huge throughout Europe during
the 80's, they were never even remotely forgotten, and if you would
have been there you'd know that. In 1983 many of the people I met and
discussed music with loved them, and told me repeatedly about them
winning the Eurovision song contest in '74. It was still a very big deal
for some reason. I go every year, and abbamania has never shown any
signs of slowing.
6. Because S. King is popular over a long period of time doesn't mean
he's the 'best', just artistically valuable, and this was my point.
7. I know many people familiar with both bands, and it's pretty evenly
split as to who favors which band. While I like some of partridges'
lyrics, I find some of them highly disagreeable and find his style to be
TOO influenced by the NY Dolls, the Beatles and a couple others. can we
say 'derivitive'? They're also a cutout bin staple. In many ways it's
crazy to compare the 2 bands, because stylistically they're so much
different. But they did have promo push from Geffen.
8. I have no problem with opinions contrary to mine, I see them all the
time in usenet. I just disagree, it's as simple as that really....you
were the one to insinuate that abba wasn't as good as XTC, and I
disagreed. judging from your increasingly hostile responses, it seems
to me YOU are the one who has a hard time dealing with it. Cheers!
Danny Caccavo
(PolyPam) wrote:
> Right now The Beatles are of course the top classic group, but as far as best
> album it's going to Pet Sounds, and song "Good Vibrations". Oh dear. This is
> just preliminary. Tomorrow will be the official final nominations. Get your
> votes in!!
Ya know, "Pet Sounds" is a cool album, but have you noticed how much hype
it's gotten in recent years?
I have the box set, and I gotta tell you - the liner notes are complete
trash. All we hear is what a genius Brian was, and what a great album Pet
Sounds was.
Yes, it's an adventurous, unique album. Has some wonderful tracks, some
forgettable ones.
It's one of those albums that's better in retrospect. At the time,
practically no one I knew had the album, or if they had it, they didn't
play it.
FWIW, which isn't much...<g>
DC
--
Danny Caccavo
"Where's Elvis?"
na
lennon fan wrote in message
<20684-37...@newsd-241.iap.bryant.webtv.net>...
obviously, you don't know how to understand what you've read. that's
fine, I don't really care, but someone needs to tell you.
>1. If you would have understood my first post, I said that abba
inspires films and plays,
crap. they get used in films. big deal.
>and inspire does not mean that it must be
>central, or the only focus of the plot. There are many levels of
>inspiration.
please give an example of a film plotted around an ABBA song. please. i
need the laugh
>2. wether you think I'm likable or not is irrelevant, I'm sure many
>wouldn't like you either, with your smug and condecending tone, but I
>have many friends, thanks much.
>3. if no one ever hears a piece of art created by it's creator, no
>matter how good, it's artistic value is negligable, because nobody
>cares.
define negligible if you can.
>4. Having worked in the music field for many years, I've seen the
>underground, and proportionately, I believe they have more psychological
>problems as a whole. I also believe most people who look at them feel
>the same way, but I've had enough contact to have 1st hand knowledge. It
>has nothing to do with underground music itself, as that could be
>anything unpopular, just some of the people who generally 'live' in that
>place. i wasn't referring to you, or all underground folk, but
>hmm....must've struck a nerve.
dont kid yourself. you were just being stupid is all.
>5. You are the one who is wrong, abba was huge throughout Europe during
>the 80's, they were never even remotely forgotten, and if you would
>have been there you'd know that. In 1983 many of the people I met and
>discussed music with loved them, and told me repeatedly about them
>winning the Eurovision song contest in '74. It was still a very big deal
>for some reason. I go every year, and abbamania has never shown any
>signs of slowing.
i can't believe that someone actually hold abba up as consequential
musically.
>6. Because S. King is popular over a long period of time doesn't mean
>he's the 'best', just artistically valuable, and this was my point.
wrong again. he got as much art as your big toe.
>7. I know many people familiar with both bands, and it's pretty evenly
>split as to who favors which band. While I like some of partridges'
>lyrics, I find some of them highly disagreeable and find his style to be
>TOO influenced by the NY Dolls, the Beatles and a couple others.
NY dolls? are you fukin nuts?
>can we say 'derivitive'? They're also a cutout bin staple. In many ways
it's
>crazy to compare the 2 bands, because stylistically they're so much
>different. But they did have promo push from Geffen.
you must be in the industry given your understanding of the medium
Tom
<. If you would have understood my first post, I said that abba
inspires films and plays, and inspire does not mean that it must be
central, or the only focus of the plot. There are many levels of
inspiration. >
No, but it does mean that the creation must be a result of ABBA's existence,
that's what "Inspire" means. If a writer said "I like this music, I'm going
to write a movie around it" that would be inspiration. If that same writer
was working on a movie and worked ABBA into the plot because he was already
using pop music and liked ABBA, that wouldn't be inspiration. If ABBA
happens to be played on the soundtrack or in the movie, that also isn't
inspiration.
2. wether you think I'm likable or not is irrelevant, I'm sure many
wouldn't like you either, with your smug and condecending tone, but I
have many friends, thanks much.
My smug tone? I'm not the one that implied that not liking what I like is
the result of a mental problem.
3. if no one ever hears a piece of art created by it's creator, no
matter how good, it's artistic value is negligable, because nobody
cares.
NO, it's commercial value is neglible. There is a difference.
4. Having worked in the music field for many years, I've seen the
underground, and proportionately, I believe they have more psychological
problems as a whole.
And your years in the the psychiatric industry qualifies you to make this
statement?
I also believe most people who look at them feel
the same way, but I've had enough contact to have 1st hand knowledge. It
has nothing to do with underground music itself, as that could be
anything unpopular, just some of the people who generally 'live' in that
place. i wasn't referring to you, or all underground folk, but
hmm....must've struck a nerve.
Oh, that's a mature debating technique. If you didn't think it was relevant,
why did you bring it up? (and I didn't say you were referring to me, I
thought you were speaking generally and found it offensive just the same)
5. You are the one who is wrong, abba was huge throughout Europe during
the 80's, they were never even remotely forgotten, and if you would
have been there you'd know that. In 1983 many of the people I met and
discussed music with loved them, and told me repeatedly about them
winning the Eurovision song contest in '74. It was still a very big deal
for some reason. I go every year, and abbamania has never shown any
signs of slowing.
Perhaps you're right, at least in your circle of acquantances, I was
speaking of the United States. They were never taken very seriously here and
were mostly forgotten until recently.
6. Because S. King is popular over a long period of time doesn't mean
he's the 'best', just artistically valuable, and this was my point.
Commercially valuable, yes. But what gives it artistic merit. You haven't
told me how having a large audience changes the artistic value of a work.
7. I know many people familiar with both bands, and it's pretty evenly
split as to who favors which band. While I like some of partridges'
lyrics, I find some of them highly disagreeable and find his style to be
TOO influenced by the NY Dolls, the Beatles and a couple others. can we
say 'derivitive'? They're also a cutout bin staple.
NY Dolls? Do you have any examples? "Cutout bin staple?" What does that have
to do with the music? Many cutout bin staples have poven to be very talented
and influential. Big Star and the Move for two.
<In many ways it's
crazy to compare the 2 bands, because stylistically they're so much
different. But they did have promo push from Geffen.>
Not huge, but Geffen made some attempt to promote them. That was 10 years
ago, and they did have a minor hit as a result. ("Mayor Of Simpleton")
Surely you'll agree that they never had the marketing push that ABBA had.
8. I have no problem with opinions contrary to mine, I see them all the
time in usenet. I just disagree, it's as simple as that really....you
were the one to insinuate that abba wasn't as good as XTC, and I
disagreed. judging from your increasingly hostile responses, it seems
to me YOU are the one who has a hard time dealing with it. Cheers!
I wasn't hostile until you brought up psychological problems. Again, if you
don't think there's a correlation to an appreciation for underground music
(and I wouldn't put XTC in that category except for a small percentage of
their work, mostly their first two albums) why did you mention it?
lennon fan
music. Muriels wedding used abba as a major focus of the film. My best
friends wedding, while I haven't seen it, supposedly has a lot devoted
to abba impersonation. This isn't just background, it's important in the
storyline. A film plot can have many twists and turns and can have many
inspirations as to what brings it about, not just one idea.
As far as commercial vs. artistic value, in many cases, they're one in
the same imo. while we already discussed that artistic value is in the
eye of the beholder, if 1,000,000 people hold an art object in high
esteem, and 1 person at home holds their piece of art in high esteem,
the art loved by a million has more artistic value, at least to the
million, and sheer force of numbers makes it more relevant. This is a no
brainer, unless you want to be abstract and say 'all art has artistic
value' or think only what you like has artistic value.
I have experience in the psychiatric field, but that is not what made me
make that statement. Since, oh, I don't know, 1974 or so, every other
week, some new band is proclaimed 'the next beatles' by the underground
(and sometimes overground) press. People who live in that space, the
underground, (a broad term, granted), and by the underground I mean the
ones who really live it, look like it's Halloween 365 days a year,
mutilate themselves and distort their appearance to be as ugly as
possible, black, black black and more black, hardcore punk, goth etc.
yes, I think many of these people have emotional problems. I can't for
the life of me see why this is offensive (except maybe to them). we all
have our opinions on who we find 'sane' or not. I think continuous
disply of extreme appearance highlight emotional turmoil from within. I
really can't buy into the notion that they're just as normal as everyone
else, in general. as i've said, I've seen it too much, for far too many
years. I work with hundreds of people, and don't find the level of
emotional instablility that I find heavily infiltrates that group.
When an audience appreciates a work of art over a long time, (years),
whether we like it or not, it has artistic value, at least to them. If
enough people feel the same way, it will become ingrained into the
culture, and it's art value can't be denied. There are all kinds of
'high' and 'low' art. we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
as far as xtc and NYD's, I remember reading Partridge used to copy them
lots, and their first albums in the late '70's I think show this
influence heavily. Later, they seemed to take a more underground
brit-pop beatleish stance, but everytime I hear them now it's like 'oh,
they got that from that song, and that song, and so on. I pulled out my
old foundations album for a quick tour of 'buttercup', and while I find
the rhythm section has a few similarities. mainly tempo, the melody is
very different: Waterloo rocks harder. just look at the difference in
the syllabic opening lines: Why don't you build me up build me up
buttercup baby just to let me down let me down hangin around again worst
of all worst of all (note the call and response)
and:
my my at waterloo napoleon did surrender.
oh yeah, and I have met my destiny in quite a similar way. The history
book on the shelf is always repeating itself. (I think these are clever
lyrics, actually) and for the chorus: waterloo, I got the feeling you've
won the war.
waterloo, promise you'll love me forevermore.
(interesting and odd to rhyme war and more, but they are Swedish and
that oddness is what really makes them appeal to me, call it quirky pop)
there's no call and response, and the melody is quite different. also,
the lyrics are nowhere near as banal. a better comparison would be 'ring
ring', from their first album, to the phil spector wall of sound, like
'be my baby'. this influences Waterloo too, you can tell by the density
of the instrumentation.
Tom
<I have experience in the psychiatric field, but that is not what made me
make that statement. Since, oh, I don't know, 1974 or so, every other
week, some new band is proclaimed 'the next beatles' by the underground
(and sometimes overground) press. >
Always overground, that's called marketing. Your point being?
<<People who live in that space, the
underground, (a broad term, granted), and by the underground I mean the
ones who really live it, look like it's Halloween 365 days a year,
mutilate themselves and distort their appearance to be as ugly as
possible, black, black black and more black, hardcore punk, goth etc.>>
None of which applies to XTC.
<yes, I think many of these people have emotional problems. I can't for
the life of me see why this is offensive (except maybe to them).>
Psyciatric evaluations based on superfical knowledge? You make accusations
of emotional problems and only mention appearance as justification. Are you
sure you can't see why it's offensive?
<as far as xtc and NYD's, I remember reading Partridge used to copy them
lots, and their first albums in the late '70's I think show this
influence heavily.>
Not at all. The New York Dolls were essentially a straight Rock and Roll
band, one step in a line from Chuck Berry To The Rolling Stones, to the
Dolls, to the Sex Pistols. The early XTC albums were more influenced by
Capt. Beeheart and dub reggae, creating a more abstract, dissonant sound. I
don't doubt that Andy Partridge was influenced by the Dolls when he was
starting out, but that influence doesn't show on the albums.
(interesting and odd to rhyme war and more, but they are Swedish and
that oddness is what really makes them appeal to me, call it quirky pop)
If you don't hear similarities in the melody, fine. I do, but we have
different ears so I won't argue that. As a writer though, I can't agree with
your opinion that "war" and "more" is unusual. They look different on the
printed page, but the sound is a perfect fit.
Keno
davisk wrote:
>
> I think what's wrong with things today is that people are trying to quantify
> peoples feeling by using statistics as a guage. Maybe the feeling is if we
> can scientifically determine what people are thinking, that can be used to
> perhaps create an even better rock group, or something. I say, forget polls.
If that is the case, and I think sometimes it is, then I'll agree. But that is not
always why one conducts a poll. It sure isn't why I have polls on my web pages. I
just want to know how my fellow fans feel about the band and nothing else.
>
> I myself go through phases of interest in music - one day I might think a
> particular James Brown record is the coolest thing ever recorded, and then a
> few days later, I decide that I really really like 'I Want You (She's So
> Heavy)'. Overall, I still like the stuff I listen to, but to single any one
> song or one person out as my favourite of all time - that's dependant on what
> state of mind you're in (although, I must say, that the Beatles will always
> be my favourite group, polls or no polls).
Agree. But its cool to see if others throughout the years also are this way. I
change my mind a lot too on what might be my favorite song but its funny that some
don't. I remember back in the 70s when radio stations ran the top 100 songs chosen
by their listeners, the two top songs would always seem to be Stairway to Heaven &
Freebird. A few months ago a station in Colorado ran this same type of poll and I
was surprise to see those same two songs still at the top of the list.
Keno
Keno's John Lennon Web Site:
http://www.keno.org/lennonhomepage.htm
lennon fan
someone by their daily appearance . It's not like I've never spoken to
them, far from it. I've just never bought into that stuff about not
judging a book by the cover. The cover is what interests me to either
purchase, or leave alone. It almost always contains information about
what is contained within. I dont see people being any different in that
regard, and I certainly don't find it offensive that people make these
judgments. I think millions of people look at people and make
psychiatric judgments about them everyday.
Tom
<y'see, I think you can most certainly judge the mental stability of
someone by their daily appearance . It's not like I've never spoken to
them, far from it.>
You've never even spoken to someone and you think you can judge their mental
condition?
< I've just never bought into that stuff about not
judging a book by the cover. The cover is what interests me to either
purchase, or leave alone. >
People aren't books and you don't purchase them.
Jeff
You got that right. To add a little humor here.
Several years ago I had a couch that needed
to be removed from my apartment cause every
time you sat in it, something would stick you.
I couldn't remove it myself. I could barely pick
up one end of it, so I asked a friend in the maintenence department to
help me. He stopped by my place by himself, and I was
stunned when this guy picked up this couch
of mine by HIMSELF as if it were as simple
as picking up a plate of food, and he carried
it to the dumpster. To look at this guy,you
would have thought he'd needed 3 other people
to help him.:)
Beatlesfan14
I have totally same feelings sometimes, but the only thing is that I
have absolutly no idea who James Brown is but I do know who James
Taylor is. I llisten to him a lot!!! The beatles have been my favorite
band for 3 years and I almost know more than my mom. I was 8 when I
first started to like the Beatles! Iwasn't even born in the 1970s so I
have almost no idea what you were talking about. I am also a big Star
Wars/ Yankees fan and I am so excited that the new movie will be coming
out soon!!!!!!!
-Beatlesfan14
--
Posted via Talkway - http://www.talkway.com
Exchange ideas on practically anything (tm).
davisk
No way! You've never heard of James Brown. "Good Gawd!". If you've heard
that song "I Feel Good", you've heard of James Brown. He's the Godfather of
Soul, The Hardest Working Man In Show Business, The New New Minister of Super
Heavy Funk! All kidding aside, when you get older, you'll know him by name.
James Taylor is good, too. "I've seen Fire, and I've seen Rain..." ;>)
davisk
>
>
I hate to say it, but I'm probably one of those millions of people. I took a
first year course in Psychology when I was in University, and ever since
then, I look at people differently. It's not a continuous thing, though.
Only overtly unusual behaviour I am wary of, like someone who is a close
talker - I hate that. It's an invasion of your personal space. If you've
know them for sometime, like a good friend, then it can be OK, but someone
who you just met is in your face - very uncomfortable. I usually can sense
if there is something 'off' with someone - I don't know what it is, vibes
perhaps? There's an instinct that says you gotta be careful with that
particular person, so keep back and observe how that person behaves. If I
see they're cool, then I relax, but if they've got serious problems, that's
something that's always in the back of my mind when I interact with them.
What was the question, again? ;>)
Jeff
I'm not trying to pick a fight here but everybody
is guility of doing till our last days on earth. There isn't a point
when we just look out our
car windows for example and don't see a person and think this person
might be homeless
or whatever, and all of a sudden we just say to
ourselves 'I'm no longer going to think this' like
there is a stopping point or something. It's a
very continuous thing thoughout a person's life
time whether they will admit to it or not. Everybody is guility of it.
lennon fan
to their intentions and mental stability, just try this simple test:
walk into a bank with a ski mask on. the analogy to books is a good one,
I never made up that original famous quote, just said that I disagree
with it. Of course people aren't books, but the similarity is striking
as far as appearance and desirablility to either get to know better, or
leave alone. it's quite simple, and frankly, I think anyone who doesn't
take people's appearance into account when coming into contact with them
is asking for a whole heap o' trouble.
Wim Koppers
popular than the beatles? The ppl in my class like the Beatles..not abba..
The ppl I talk to like the Beatles more than Abba so am I in the wrong
europe or something?
Jaimy K.
lennon fan wrote:
> Many euro critics have thought Abba better than the fabs, I've read this
> many times in newspapers in England and the Netherlands, though I
> personally would disagree. I'm diehard for the fabs and always will be.
>
> I don't think Andy partridges' lyrics are all that great, XTC get
> plenty of marketing AND critical raves and their records STILL don't
> sell that well, which doesn't prove your point about sales being
> meaningless. Most artists that I know tell me sales are EVERYTHING.
> Critical reviews and a few underground fans doesn't pay the rent.
> Artistic value being in the eye of the beholder. Periodically
> fashionable? Hardly. The love of that group has never stopped. Every
> time yet another compilation appears, sales go through the roof. and to
> prove sales are indeed important, for example, you could create the best
> record ever known to mankind, but if nobody hears it or buys it what
> difference does it make to anyone but you? Sales are indeed a gauge of
> success. also, I believe sales over a long period of time prove the
> artistic value of a piece, even if you don't like that particular art.
>
> As for the inspiration of ABBA in the films I mentioned, I disagree
> with you completely there. How much more inspirational can you be to a
> plot than have a large segment of the film revolve around you? and camp
> factor? yes, they're very big in the gay community, but that doesn't
> mean that they aren't deeply loved there too, I know for a fact many gay
> people who simply love abba (and fleetwood mac, but that's a different
> story). No matter how much people want to take these underground groups
> and proclaim them 'like the Beatles' it almost always falls flat on it's
> face, and many people who are generally into the underground have
> psychological problems from my vantage point. I was around it for too
> long not to notice, and fortunately always tried to keep a distance.
>
Jeff
oh! I'm in the wrong group.:)
na
lennon fan wrote in message
and walking into a bank with a ski mask on is a good test of this?
Tom
<<to prove how people judge people on a daily basis and make judgements as
to their intentions and mental stability, just try this simple test:
walk into a bank with a ski mask on. the analogy to books is a good one,
I never made up that original famous quote, just said that I disagree
with it. Of course people aren't books, but the similarity is striking
as far as appearance and desirablility to either get to know better, or
leave alone. it's quite simple, and frankly, I think anyone who doesn't
take people's appearance into account when coming into contact with them
is asking for a whole heap o' trouble. >>
There's a difference between taking their appearance into account and
diagnosing them with "psychological problems. We're not talking about simply
deciding if you want to get to know someone here, were taking about a
judgment on their mental state, which their appearance does not qualify you
to do. You said you were in the psychiatric industry, do you think any
licensed analyst would approve of you doing so?
Here's another old line for you. You say everyone does it. If everyone
jumped off the George Washington bridge, would you jump too?
lennon fan
you deserve to be thought of as one.
na
lennon fan wrote in message
I disagree completely. You continuously look like some kind of loony,
you deserve to be thought of as one.
hey man, when you're flaming someone, it's always a plus to include a
reference to the target.
don't you think?
davisk
The world has become a fast-paced crazy place. You never know what the
person beside you is thinking. They might just be going to work, or they
might be conceiling a gun, ready to pop off a few rounds as soon as someone
makes what they perceive is a threatening gesture. Not all homeless people
are homeless (at least not where I'm from). Some are just people who want to
target gullible people for money, some are drug addicts who can't hold a job
so they have to get the money wherever they can. And those bloody squeegee
kids - they do it because they don't want to work at a McDonalds during the
summer. Just too many wackos out there to be naive and think that everyone
in the world has good intentions. You can't be a Gomer Pyle, or else you'll
end up being taken for a ride.
Jeff
is a good test of this
Cmon Nicky.LOL
Jeff
What? Do you realize what you just wrote above? That makes no sense.
Jeff
No cause this group is not set up for target practice.:)
Jeff
And don't you think I know all this? This thread
is totally wacko, and you missed my point. Some poster ( maybe it was
you i don't know)
was commenting on the fact that we all make
judgements about, for and agains't others just
by glancing at them. Then another poster wrote
something about stopping doing it. Then I again
responded back by saying as an example that
looking out a car window and seeing what we
perceive to be a homeless person doesn't just
stop one day like we can just shut off out minds
and say "ok today we are no longer going to make that kind of
Judgement.'
That's all I was saying and then you write all this other stuff that has
nothing to do with my point, cause there is no need to try and educate
me and the others about the wacko's of the world. We see it, are in it
and it's with us all everyday, but your posting had nothing to do
with the simple point I was trying to make.