Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Radio & Music >

Musical bigotry

No star here laces

11:08 / 05.10.01

Okay, I had what I thought was an interesting point in the currently uninhabited electronica thread, so thought I'd resurrect it here. Maybe it's actually really dull and I should shut the fuck up.

quote:
I'll freely admit to being a music bigot, and quite possibly a music racist as well. You're right in that I was joking and not joking - that is pretty much my personal opinion of electronica (that it is wanky pretentious music for cunts) dismissing musical styles out of hand and that (b) my opinions are based on noreal knowledge of the genre. Any comments made are therefore made fully in the
knowledge that they won't be convincing to anyone.

Anyways more on this genre thing (cos it's more interesting than trading recommendations for the nth time, no?). As I said, I know that there is no point in dismissing genres and that there is loads of good music out there in every style. But I will always still choose to stick within relatively narrow musical boundaries and to spend time searching out the obscure and ignoring the popular because I think life is more interesting that way. To me, great music and interesting new styles come to a certain extent from a narrowness of mind and an immersion in one particular musical area.

Cross-pollination is interesting, but I think of it like entropy: if you cross-pollinate forever you come up with featureless mush. That's why a lot of 80s pop (and I mean the kind that you get on movie soundtracks to films like 'Bachelor Party' not the fun sexy stuff) is so dreadful - it has a little bit of punk, a little bit of disco, a little bit of ska and the end result is 100% excrement.
I feel myself weakening as I age (been listening to a bit of Whiskytown and Old
'97s cos Kali goes on about 'em so much) but I think it's important, dammit, that I keep buying trainspottery hip-hop and ignoring guitars, and Rizla keeps buying anything shouty and nothing melodic etc. etc. Vive la difference 'n all that.

So the basic point being musical bigotry is essential to diversity and continued emergence of cool new stuff. Views?

Regrettable Juvenilia

11:27 / 05.10.01

Um - okay. We've had this conversation/debate/argument several times before I believe, both online and off. But to sum up my take on this in a quick and slapdash manner:

For musicians/artists themselves, both cross-pollination (ie, embracing a wide variety of influences) and tight, narrow focus (sticking very rigidly to one sound or genre or whatever) can have either productive or unproductive results.

However, as a listener, I think it's just self-defeating to deliberately restrict the kind of music you listen to. As a moody spotty indie boy I used to do it a lot, and probably still do it too much, but it's a fairly pointless attitude that relies largely on a fundamental misconception of the way popular music works (ie, the erroneous idea that distinct lines can be drawn between different musical genres, that they don't all exist as part of one continuum, bleeding in and out of each other). Obviously there just isn't time to become familiar with every kind of music out there, and it's natural to become obsessed with and want to immerse yourself in one kind of music for a certain length of time. But not for the rest of your life.

Personally, when I hear what I perceive as, say, a techno influence in a hip-hop track, or a rock influence in an r'n'b track, or whatever, and it's done well, it's one of my favourite things in music.

Oh, and Rizla's into lots of hip-hop now y'know (correct me if I'm wrong Riz), so get with the programme...

11:31 / 05.10.01

"To me, great music and interesting new styles come to a certain extent from a narrowness of mind and an immersion in one particular musical area. "

Can you expand on this?

I can see how great music can come out of such an approach - by pushing an existing form to the limit, seeing what extremes you can push it to (though of course it can lead to some horrible rubbish too - "how many time signatures and references to elves can we stick in one song?" etc). But I can't think how it leads to the generation of new ideas. Can you explain that?

[Side issue - you realise you've effectively called expressionless, Runt etc c****?]

11:36 / 05.10.01

S'ok, Sav. I know TM doesn't mean it like it sounds.

deletia

11:44 / 05.10.01

I think there may be self-esteem issues at work here, too. By narrowing his focus to an area in which he can collect and tabulate everything relevant or important, the hip-hop, or techno, or shoegazing trainspotter provides hirself with a role and a competence. The music is, if not secondary, perhaps supplemental to the fundamental instinct at work.

12:02 / 05.10.01

Flyboy:
"However, as a listener, I think it's just self-defeating to deliberately restrict the kind of music you listen to."

While I largely agree with you, I think there can be benefits. From the listener/fan's point of view there is something to be said for devoting yourself to a scene. It's a great feeling to belong to a tribe (part of that good feeling may be to do with what Tann talks about above). I'm not sure that it's neccessary for you, as a tribe member, to reject other forms of music altogether, but my gut instinct tells me it probably helps. And I think it's probably good for music as a whole to have healthy 'scenes' and underground movements with commited members whose interest goes beyond just liking the music. That's when you get, er, 'cultures', rather than just fads.

I think you're right, though, about it not being sustainable. It's a young person's game, I reckon. As you get older you find your interests widening and it feels artificial to deliberately deny yourself the pleasure of listening to other sounds. I remember standing at the counter of a 2nd hand record shop and the crusty old lady behind it telling me, as she handed me the thing I'd just bought "if it's not rock and roll I'm not interested. I only listen to rock and roll, everything else is shit." I still think that was both sad and cool.

No star here laces

12:07 / 05.10.01

Ouch.

What I mean, Sav is the way that whenever a 'new' style emerges (and yes, Fly, clearly all styles are a continuum, as are colours, but we find it a useful shorthand to refer to 'red', 'green' etc. as well as 'rock', 'hip hop') it tends to do so from the hands of enthusiasts of a previously defunct style.

Examples might be the invention of house by disco fanatics updating their sound for the late 80s, the development of that pariah of the dance scene, hardcore, into jungle around '93-'94 when it was out of the public eye, and the current crop of nu-metal. What these all have in common is somewhat obsessive enthusiasts refining and distilling a style until it becomes something different.

The single best examples being that monumentally monomaniacal and focused musician James Brown working out what he liked about soul music and creating funk in the process, or late '70s funk enthusiasts taking the 'best' bits of the records and repeating them over and over to create hip hop.

And Fly, we have sort of had this debate before, but I guess the reason I got thinking about it again is that it occurred to me that, whatever you do, you always miss out.

If I weren't so busy digging around for obscure disco and hip hop I might find out about fantastic new guitar bands. But then I wouldn't be finding all the gems that are buried in charity shops and specialist retailers. There's too much out there to know it all, so why not restrict yourself a bit? It's more interesting that way.

And Haus, with respect, that argument is bullshit. The careful cultivation of catholic 'good taste' is just as much an exercise in self-validation. The rash of studied 'eclecticism' among djs, which always seems to involve the same records, puts the lie to the notion that only the single-minded interest can be anal.

Regrettable Juvenilia

12:07 / 05.10.01

Aha, Sav, but in any given scene the really cool kids think the scene's shit and claim to listen to something completely different...

12:26 / 05.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Flyboy:

Oh, and Rizla's into lots of hip-hop now y'know (correct me if I'm wrong Riz), so get with the programme...

Well, I own, lesee, 8 hip-hop albums, 1 single and 2 compilations, so I guess I'm getting there. Most of them are old classics rather than current big hitters though, so i dunno if I count as being 'into' it as such, but i like lots of it..

I'll repeat my conviction that, while the majority of stuff I listen to is obscure noisy guitar shit, there's no genre of music that I flat out DISLIKE.

It's a pity 'eclectic' seems to be such a dirty word, cos I'd like to be it..

I don't have the time, money or expertise to get into, say, funk or reggae or whatever, but that doesn't mean I'm opposed to it, it just forms part of the massive oceon of pop culture that i haven't got round to yet.

As to the stay pure / mix it up argument ..well.. there's good music and there's bad music, isn't there, and I think the difference between them has a lot more to do with the spirit and intention behind the music and a lot less to do with the genre in which it's expressed..

if that means anything.

deletia

12:26 / 05.10.01

I only like Chimney factory.

Ty: Quite so. Because such a schematic approach to eclecticism is a part of a stratifying impulse. My collection is bigger than his. My collection is more obscure than his. My collection has a better collection of Todd Terry white labels than his. My collection is more eclectic than his. Is there an essential distinction?

No star here laces

12:39 / 05.10.01

Yes there is, because you were implying that only in seeking to define boundaries to ones taste does one attempt to correct personal failings by buying music.

This is clearly not the case. Good evidence for it is that the keenest contributors to the endless lists of songs type threads on this board are often those who deny any particular musical affiliation. As far as I can see the only purpose of these threads is to show off one's fantastic good taste and to get a frisson of validation when a self-defined peer group agrees with you.

In a society of consumers people attempt to express and define their individuality and worth through possessions, and music is a particularly good example of this. It is noteworthy that people in 'worthwhile' professions such as teaching and medicine rarely seem to have an obsessive interest in music, whereas those of us with shitty commercial-sector capitalist running-dog jobs frequently do. This, to me, demonstrates that when one has no need to justify personal worth this activity is unneccessary.

But single-genre obsessives are only a subset of this phenomenon and not its entirety, therefore it is not logical to conclude that it is the single-mindedness that defines the compensatory nature of music purchase.

If you need any more evidence, look here.

And I bet you £20 I've got more Todd Terry white labels than you, and am therefore more of a man. So there.

12:58 / 05.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Tyrone Mushylaces:

In a society of consumers people attempt to express and define their individuality and worth through possessions, and music is a particularly good example of this. It is noteworthy that people in 'worthwhile' professions such as teaching and medicine rarely seem to have an obsessive interest in music, whereas those of us with shitty commercial-sector capitalist running-dog jobs frequently do. This, to me, demonstrates that when one has no need to justify personal worth this activity is unneccessary.

Nice theory and all, but, um, don't people obsessively buy records primarily because they obtain great pleasure from listening to them?

I know I do, and it's only when the music becomes irrelevent and one becomes *shudder* 'a collector' that theories like the above begin to come into play.

No star here laces

13:03 / 05.10.01

They do and they don't.

Why, for example, do you not just listen to the radio, listen to cds in your friends rooms and spend all your money on going to gigs?

Answer: because you like to own music, not just listen to it.

deletia

13:08 / 05.10.01

It is of course possible that teaches lack the money and doctors the time to arse about looking for Franki Knuckles originals....

13:10 / 05.10.01

Growing up in a relatively mixed neighborhood it was easy to learn about rock and hip-hop. I still remember the first time I heard urtis Blow Rappin Basketball. And when my friend Paul first moved from Chicago to Dallas to across the street from me he brought his tape collection and boombox (complete with a Mr. T "I pity the fool that touches my Radio" sticker) with him. He had sooo many tapes. Shit I've never heard of since. L.A. Dream Team? We rocked that shit for hours while playing Intellivision.

[Second long rambling part deleted- a shortened version will return tomorrow]

I'm rambling. Its 8am and I need to go to bed.

I guess what I am trying to get at is I don't see how anyone can completely devote themselves to one musical genre. All I want is some new shit to grab me by the gut and make me say "Oh shit! Did you hear that!" If you're open to new things that feeling can come from anywhere. Do you really get that much enjoyment out of the obscure rap track that no one knows about? Do you think a jazz or punk track could give you the same feeling?

13:15 / 05.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Tyrone Mushylaces:

Why do you not just listen to the radio, listen to cds in your friends rooms and spend all your money on going to gigs?

Answer: Most of my friends like DMX. The radio plays crap I can't stand (for the most part). And a gig woln't fit in the car on a Sunday afternoon.

13:29 / 05.10.01

What about all the musicians and listeners who simply don't care about genre? Different attitudes to categorisation are still only one way of viewing and creating music.

13:32 / 05.10.01

It's not so much about "ownership" of music per se, but convenience and context--and about the peculiar relationship we have with music: having particular tunes available at a time and place of our own choosing.

When I'm sad on a cold, rainy Sunday, I want to listen to Sketches of Spain in my bathrobe, drinking hot mulled cider by the wood-stove: I don't feel like getting dressed, ringing up a friend and schlepping my miserable self to his house to hear the record.

We do like to listen--but we don't want to surrender our choice as to where, when, and how. Ownership is simply a means to that end, a necessary evil.

[ 05-10-2001: Message edited by: Jack Fear ]

13:35 / 05.10.01

Tyrone>
Re: new ideas - Ah, got ya, cheers for the explanation. Yes, spot on, though I'm not convinced that it's the only way etc, will think about that later.

Flyboy>
Heh, true. But remember, "really cool kids" = "tossers". It's the uncool ones who keep a scene alive.

I don't know if this is going off at a tangent or not, but what do people think about the current state of things as far as tribes and scenes goes? And the future? I just found this in my 'saved messages' pile (I write posts at work in Pegasus mail so it looks like I'm emailing someone about important business). I was going to post it to a thread that Plums started about tribes ages ago, but didn't finish it.

"Bah, we're buggered these days, aren't we? Everyone wants to follow their instinctive urge to be recognised and loved by others, but nobody wants to be classified and pinned down. If you allow that to happen then not only do you lose credibility as an 'individual' but you risk having the piss taken out of you and being made to look a twat by a misanthropic media. I'm always saying this, therefore it is true: whatever tribe you subscribe to, be it a 'lifestyle' thing or a political/sexual one, there'll be a hundred thousand commentators analysing it and ripping it apart in public. No one is safe! In fact, the more trivial and mundane the basis for your tribe, the more webpages you'll find devoted to pouring scorn on it ("Dear reader, I nearly fell over the other day when I saw someone walking up the road in a pair of shoes... ...Send in your pictures of shoe-wearers and we'll put the funniest ones up on the site!")

The overall effect is a gradual decrease in available options for self expression, consumption and behaviour in general. I confidently predict that by about, ooh, this time next week, music will be a single monotone (fashion will dictate that the pitch is modulated by one nano-hrtz every year)."

No star here laces

13:39 / 05.10.01

These are all good points. And undoubtedly the most important thing about owning music is to enjoy listening to it. I overstated the case in order to refute Tannhauser more emphatically.

But I'd maintain that it does have a significant social function as well, and that a lot of that has to do with constructing an identity. That identity could equally well come from one genre or from a broad musical appreciation.

The argument about genre is, I think a separate issue from the argument about the social significance of buying music.

Expressionless, you are of course correct. When I say I only buy hip hop and disco, I'm actually lying. I only buy 'zootch' which is my own made-up word for what I like, and therefore no use whatsoever in this discussion. It has very rigid boundaries, but they are my boundaries, not from the music press or whatever.

13:57 / 05.10.01

It's just that I have a hard enough time trying to conceptualize what music actually is . I'm finding it impossible to empathise with this debate because the more I think about it, the more I realise I don't have any comprehension of its perimeter, let alone internal subdivisions.

14:07 / 05.10.01

Seems to me that music is just another arena to play out the main argument that's going on here, eclecticism vs. specialism.

I agree wholeheartedly with this:

quote:Originally posted by Flyboy:
For musicians/artists themselves, both cross-pollination (ie, embracing a wide variety of influences) and tight, narrow focus (sticking very rigidly to one sound or genre or whatever) can have either productive or unproductive results.

But not with this:

quote:Originally posted by Flyboy:
However, as a listener, I think it's just self-defeating to deliberately restrict the kind of music you listen to.

That is, what's good for the artist is good for the aficionado. Apart from this fine point, what Flyboy said above.

What can't be true is that everything good, or nothing good, comes from an eclectic or a specialist approach. Anything can be fucked up, after all.

Jack The Bodiless

16:44 / 05.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Tyrone Mushylaces:
...Clearly all styles are a continuum, as are colours, but we find it a useful shorthand to refer to 'red', 'green' etc. as well as 'rock', 'hip hop'...

This indeed a Truth. It's when you start thinknig in that shorthand that things fuck up.

Labels (white or otherwise) are there for our convenience. We're not here for their convenience. I like anything I like, personally - if it wasn't for people like my brother, I'd still have terribly restricted taste, because I'd only ever listen to one band. Which a mate got me into.

Bottom line is that straight guitar rock is beautiful when it's done beautifully, and a crazed mash of punk, disco, gabba and lennox-pop is also beautiful when done beautifully. And as long as the music you listen to still moves you, why would you want it any other way? I got into hip hop at my own speed, and into the stuff that I liked, not all of the stuff that expressionless owns (which is a shitload). It's all relative, baby. Rather like your mother. Who is fat. See what I did there?

17:08 / 05.10.01

How fat is she?

19:13 / 05.10.01

I'm not racist towards music racists. Just because you only like certain kinds of music doesn't mean I don't like you. I am not a hypocrite. I am an open minded music listener, who is open to all music listeners of our world. I am opened to other open minded music listeners and racist music listeners. I will not discriminate.

[ 05-10-2001: Message edited by: Rage ]

23:19 / 05.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Tyrone Mushylaces:Yes there is, because you were implying that only in seeking to define boundaries to ones taste does one attempt to correct personal failings by buying music.

This is clearly not the case. Good evidence for it is that the keenest contributors to the endless lists of songs type threads on this board are often those who deny any particular musical affiliation. As far as I can see the only purpose of these threads is to show off one's fantastic good taste and to get a frisson of validation when a self-defined peer group agrees with you.

There is another purpose to list making (at least, as far as I am concerned). One of my first ever posts to Barbelith (back when I was Body Cav) involved me asking whether there were any musicians interested in making music. I still haven’t found those musicians. But I’m still naively and passionately setting about making a band for the purposes of changing the world.

I know I’m stoopid. But at least I’m stoopid with a vision.

My point is, posting a list of current favourites or all time personal classics is my way of showing my colourful plumage in order to attract a prospective mate. I need like-minded people to make music with (I’m just a drummer. Not many people would want to listen to sixty minutes of solo skin-battering expressionless). Showing lists of your influences is a time-honoured means of attracting compatible musicians.

Maybe I should just start a “Musicians Wanted” thread. That’s if I didn’t despise the word “musician.”

Molly Shortcake

06:41 / 07.10.01

For alot of folks, their only exposure to techno is really predictable generic dance stuff played in clubs. Usually when I pop in something like Plaid, Velvet Acid Christ, Haujobb, etc - they're really impressed. I'm assuming similar circumstances hold true for most forms of music.

05:25 / 08.10.01

I'm a fucking huge musical bigot. Mediocre "heartland" rock can go die under some sort of rock, same goes for "progressive" house music. Yeah, I'm sure there's great artists in the genres that I hate, but you'll never see me at any sort of emo show (unless the emo band is opening up for a band that I like, and even then I may not go, cuz I don't wanna suffer through an hour or so of shit [the obvious thing would be to go later, but shows don't start on time a lot 'round these parts, but sometimes they do, highly unpredictable], and I don't like the emo kids that much, but it's not as intense as my dislike for skinheads, who can keep me from seeing a whole show I like). I don't get into genres easily either, cuz if I'm just getting into something, or if I'm gonna try to get into something, I'm afraid that, since I don't know dick about the music, I'm gonna buy something godawful. So then I get another Iggy bootleg.

Graham the Happy Scum

13:39 / 08.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Cop Killer:
Yeah, I'm sure there's great artists in the genres that I hate, but you'll never see me at any sort of emo show (...) and I don't like the emo kids that much, but it's not as intense as my dislike for skinheads, who can keep me from seeing a whole show I like).

Heh. Well, usually that wouldn't stop me, because I know in my mind that I'm cooler than them anyway...

09:13 / 09.10.01

Cooler than them, so what, it's this fear I have because I have so little faith in them, I'm afraid that they'll do something so stupid that I'll get in trouble.

13:18 / 19.10.01

There's a great essay on THIS VERY SUBJECT by Simon Reynolds, here:
http://members.aol.com/blissout/purefusion.htm

It's SR re-examining his anti-purist stance and wondering if there isn't something to be said for it after all. (Btw, Tyrone, he mentions gabba, of which he's a big fan.)

14:59 / 19.10.01

quote:Originally posted by Cop Killer:
[QB]you'll never see me at any sort of emo show QB]

Not even Weezer????

I pretty much disagree with you on the emo tip, CK, but I will say if one of my roomates plays the new Jimmy Eat World CD one mroe time I'm very tempted to throw it against the wall and watch it break into little pieces...