Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- From: Will Tingle <Will@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:58:15 GMT
An infinite number of primates hammered away at an infinite number of typewriters. L. Ross Raszewski <lraszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 09:39:21 GMT, Will Tingle
<Will@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
An infinite number of primates hammered away at an infinite number of
typewriters. Roderick Stewart <escapetime@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
I'm surprised that more people who listen to pop music don't feel patronised
and insulted and object
Unfortunately most people who listen to pop music only do so BECAUSE its
popular - and in the same way that they have been told what to listen
to, they are also told not to care about the DJ yammering over the
outro.
It's not as simple as that. If it were, there *wouldn't* be pop
music.
I'm not entirely sure that that's true - It always seems that the singles which get a lot of advance play get into the charts when released. You could say that that's because people hear it, and like it, but at the same time these record NEVER fail - it could be that radio one DJs have an uncanny ability to predict musical trends; but it certainly appears as though the set them.
Also lets remember the time that poop idol did that god awful thing where they had 2 bands, and the one that got the xmas number 1 would be declared the winner - there was absolutely NO QUESTION that it would be one or the other...
THe popular music would be something that can be produced
entirely by synthesizer by monkeys
No comment.
Pop music is "pop" because it has been carefully designed to avoid
bothering as many people as possible.
You can, as with television and the "Least Common Denominator"
argument, see this as "THey dumb everything down to appease stupid
people." That probably makes you feel good about yourself and smugly
superior to everyone else.
"The only truly bad art" and all that...
Or you can look at it the other way, and decide that we live in a
fairly amazing time in history because the people who produce content
are actively trying *not to exclude people*. THey're saying "Hey,
let's make something that won't upset anyone so that even the lower
third od man who is not all that smart can enjoy it"
I'm a Darwinian, what can I say?
--
The more I see of my dickhead half brother...
....the more I think Cain was onto somthing!
Will Tingle
Remove YOUR.PANTS to e-mail
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- From: pbowles@xxxxxxx
- Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- References:
- Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- From: L. Ross Raszewski
- Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- Prev by Date: Re: The Times reviews "Partners in Crime"
- Next by Date: Re: Dawkins, Davies and daughters
- Previous by thread: Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- Next by thread: Re: Another pile of BBC DOG ***
- Index(es):