Why so much people attack-Post-Grunge? - Music

Pentagonal

Ad hominem attacks are the domain of simpering fools with no other leg to stand on but the pillar of bile that continuously emanates from their mouths, a testament to their decaying self-image and brittle psyche.

...and don't even get me started on hypocrites.

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

Gowi wrote:

No, it wasn’t an ad hominem. But it seems you are using that as an excuse to ignore the points within the dialogue.

You are nitpicking and not truly understanding the points, even if ad hominems or other improper debate techniques are used or not.

Look, there’s a difference from understanding the utility of genre and subjectively not using them. If you read back into your posts you completely dismiss them because you perceive them as “stupid” — which just seems an infantile way to enter into a conversation about genre. Music Development and Music Journalism go hand-in-hand and has been such since long before the twentieth century. Just because you dislike them due to your own preferences, misunderstandings, or perceptions doesn’t give you the right to dismiss them in such a “dogmatic” way. What is wrong about not placing any value goes into this, of course. Putting no value leads to a complete lack of regard for the developmental and observational history of modern music (and going beyond that). It’s one thing to prefer not to use genre in conversation or for personal use and another to dismiss it as stupid and pointless. As aforementioned it lacks historical awareness; creating a bubble of ignorance because it is comfortable and I’m not a fan. Just because you don’t care doesn’t give you right to rewrite or outright ignore history to your own person comfort. Now, that’s stupid.

As for the inane “aren’t we just sharing opinions?” inquiry; let me put this out here. Opinions can be wrong and not everything in life is subjective. This may not be the case in application to a conversation about genre but it is true. Every time somebody tries to switch gears with a “Isn’t this just opinion?” it feels like an infantile way to get their own opinion in being seen as correct when it has been challenged or disproven. Of course the majority of forum discussions are opinion (unless stated otherwise), that’s a damned fact. We don’t have to have “in my opinion” at the end of every post to symbolize this.

As for Bowie: as mentioned before this post, artists are not limited to one genre. Genre is not so static and overwhelming that it is used as such. David Bowie was an artist who made various styles of music which is often the case that people refer to him as a “art rock” or “art pop” musician in historical context since he goes far beyond his early trappings of glam rock and such.

Thanks, I actually really liked this reply. And thanks for not just saying you're dumb therefore I'm right.

I totally agree I was being one sided, looking back on it. I claimed that I believe in pluralism and yet declared genre "dumb" which is totally dogmatic. I should have said Genre doesn't do anything for me personally. I gain very little from Genre, not Genre has no place ever. Maybe if I learned the difference between this blues and that blues, it would change my music appreciation of the different types of blues, but I feel it won't.

Another thought I had though is that when I go into a record store I rarely if ever see deeper Genre organization than something like: Classical, Jazz, Rock, Hip/Hop and R&B, etc. I never see Delta Blues or Post-Hard Core. I mean I'm looking at bigger stores like Ameoba Music, Randy's Records, doesn't matter which shop, they didn't take the effort to label something very specific, except maybe their world section by country.

As for music-journalism or anything academic to do with music (where it sounds you are coming from), it makes perfect sense to catalog and define every bit of music types. I tend to think I love music history, but I don't care much past the classification of Baroque for example... I don't care if it is middle Baroque or early Baroque... it's just Baroque to me. But somebody might care, and I should respect that. But you'd have to be a professor of music to listen to Baroque music and really be able to identify well, this is early Baroque because they aren't using blah blah, and this is middle Baroque music because of this... just by listening to it. It's at that level that I feel Genre gets silly for me as I am not a professor of music. That's all I was getting at and used extreme statements that maybe didn't fully reflect how I feel. Maybe you and others get off on being able to listen to blues music and identifying this list when you listen to it... but I don't really. I feel it is a bit excessive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_blues_genres

On the note of early, middle and late baroque, I realize those aren't genre's but periods, but nobody really uses these Genre's/Styles in even a Music 101 class, and really I bet an average PhD student of music wouldn't know all of these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_m...rms_by_era

I wonder if just like these terms our sub genre's in 200 years will be simplified into something easy to remember and most people won't even know what Delta Blues is... it kinda already is happening when people say 60s music for example.

I really appreciate your comments and feel we reached an understanding at some level at least. You may have more respect for me, or you may think I'm a complete idiot, but thanks for actually having a conversation.

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

Pentagonal wrote:

Ad hominem attacks are the domain of simpering fools with no other leg to stand on but the pillar of bile that continuously emanates from their mouths, a testament to their decaying self-image and brittle psyche.

...and don't even get me started on hypocrites.

Haha, I wish I could write this well Smile

.

Satie

For the record I agree with you that the incredibly fine distinctions between sub-sub-genres in rock music is a tiresome epidemic. For the record, I know a handful of very prominent ethnomusicologists through my job, and I've never heard them expand on genre beyond general classification except in written work when put to a specific purpose. The music library for my job at a public radio show dedicated to American vernacular music is organized as you describe record stores. I feel that the vast majority of rock genres suffer not just from excessive founderism that makes people inflate the differences between sub-sub-genres but also excessive reliance on sociological rather than musicological data points to differentiate genre classifications.

All that said, I still think that there is a happy medium between a master list of blues and Baroque sub-sub-sub-genres that is obviously encyclopedic in nature and not grasped or even INTENDED to be grasped by a single individual or represented in formal organization or something and incredibly general "record store" organization or no organization at all as far as accessibility for intuitively finding music that sounds like whatever you like. But I can understand conflating a frustration with snobs and navel-gazers (even if some of these folks are made of straw Wink

) with dismissing the whole system, as I've frequently had clashes on music forums over an iota of difference in opinion about how something should be classified. There is a level where genre classification, particularly in pop music, loses its utility. But there's also a level where it's for my money pound for pound (note for note?) the best way to find new music and understand music history in a quick but effective and accurate way.

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

Satie wrote:

For the record I agree with you that the incredibly fine distinctions between sub-sub-genres in rock music is a tiresome epidemic. For the record, I know a handful of very prominent ethnomusicologists through my job, and I've never heard them expand on genre beyond general classification except in written work when put to a specific purpose. The music library for my job at a public radio show dedicated to American vernacular music is organized as you describe record stores. I feel that the vast majority of rock genres suffer not just from excessive founderism that makes people inflate the differences between sub-sub-genres but also excessive reliance on sociological rather than musicological data points to differentiate genre classifications.

All that said, I still think that there is a happy medium between a master list of blues and Baroque sub-sub-sub-genres that is obviously encyclopedic in nature and not grasped or even INTENDED to be grasped by a single individual or represented in formal organization or something and incredibly general "record store" organization or no organization at all as far as accessibility for intuitively finding music that sounds like whatever you like. But I can understand conflating a frustration with snobs and navel-gazers (even if some of these folks are made of straw Wink

) with dismissing the whole system, as I've frequently had clashes on music forums over an iota of difference in opinion about how something should be classified. There is a level where genre classification, particularly in pop music, loses its utility. But there's also a level where it's for my money pound for pound (note for note?) the best way to find new music and understand music history in a quick but effective and accurate way.

Very well said. I also wish I could write as well. Maybe I should give the bolded statement above more of a shot ... my experience with it hasn't been good, so just like any classical conditioning, I stopped doing it.

mickilennial
The Most Trusted Name in News

Gender: Female
Age: 35
Location: Detroit

I try my best not to act like I’m some academic professor (whilst I’ve done a lot of informal studying, it has never been in a classroom) because it is as pretentious as it is counter-productive towards having a dialogue. If I ever cross the line by your perception do let me know so I am aware I’m acting as such. With that said, no I don’t feel like you are a “complete idiot” though I was a bit frustrated with the conversation when I initially wrote that post and wasn’t sure how I could put it in proper wording. With that said, I don’t think genre simplification will really happen as long as we have music appreciation classes, music nerds who dive into all of the knowledge available to them, and books about music. When I first started learning and perceiving all of this mess of genre and style development I was thirteen years old but I was also an introvert. I get the impression you had a more lively social life at the same period and perhaps that plays a role as well. The librarian versus the social butterfly, maybe.

On the subject of record stores, I’ve walked in ones with simple systems (rock, metal, blues/folk/classical, alt/indie/punk, international, and pop; these are the sections of my favorite record store) and more advanced systems. I’ve found it really useful to blind purchases albums more often in the alt/indie/punk section as those suit my taste far more actively.

I took a public MA class once and the instructor actually did touch on a decent deal of these bits that you link, oddly enough, but they weren’t in fine detail as individuals who came in students were more interested in modern music developments. I imagine a university level course would go into greater detail but that’s me presuming. You’d have to ask someone who has taken such classes.

RoundTheBend
I miss the comfort in being sad

Location: Ground Control

Gowi wrote:

I’ve found it really useful to blind purchases albums more often in the alt/indie/punk section as those suit my taste far more actively.

Looks like I'll have to try this... I usually have checked it on the internet first, but I wonder if that's robbing me of an experience that allows me to truly appreciate the random find. Some random finds I actually like but don't revisit for whatever reason. Not sure if it is me not putting in enough effort or if the music itself isn't that memorable.

Glad we came to some crossroad.

Also now that I pay more attention to the list, I'd about 1/4 of them I remember from my Music 101 course, so it's totally possible that an actual student of music would know all of them.

undefined

Pentagonal wrote:

Ad hominem attacks are the domain of simpering fools with no other leg to stand on but the pillar of bile that continuously emanates from their mouths, a testament to their decaying self-image and brittle psyche.

...and don't even get me started on hypocrites.

hehe