Best Ever Albums

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

SquishypuffDave — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 21:05:37 GMT

Author: SquishypuffDave

Posted: 12/20/2018 02:05

Skinny wrote:

You keep saying it's a false accusation as though you aren't an evident elitist with a proven predilection for prog.

Skinny wrote:

One can be a prog fan without being a prog snob. Fischman can't manage it, though.

Well shoot the horse and slap me silly, looks like we got ourselves a classic Nezzling on our hands!

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

craola — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 17:38:01 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 12/19/2018 22:38

baystateoftheart wrote:

@craola AfterHours thinks the Sistine Chapel is the greatest work of art, and that's what I was referring to. I have no idea what Fischman's opinion is.

well, if i didn't already look like a jerk, i guess this seals it.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

baystateoftheart — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:46:40 GMT

Author: baystateoftheart

Posted: 12/19/2018 21:46

@craola AfterHours thinks the Sistine Chapel is the greatest work of art, and that's what I was referring to. I have no idea what Fischman's opinion is.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

craola — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 16:15:31 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 12/19/2018 21:15

baystateoftheart wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

I mean, I'd love to hear how you can empirically measure quality so as to determine what art is objectively of the highest quality.

We've been trying to solve this mystery since art started, so I'd love to hear the solution to a centuries-old problem.

What is, objectively, the greatest piece of art in history? I mean, if we can objectively judge art, there must be an answer to that question? I can tell you who threw the most touchdowns in NFL history, that's measurable, I can tell you who sold the most albums in music history, that's measurable, so if quality is measurable, then we should be able to truly, officially, empirically determine what actually is the greatest piece of art of all time. Or at least come up with a top five.

The Sistine Chapel, obviously :wink:

per the culture we were brought up in, it's no surprise he thinks that. i've never been there, but i have seen pictures and have little desire to see it in person. there are a thousand works of art i'd rather see.

and rockyraccoon brought up another good point as well: cultural significance is entirely different than the fictional "objective quality". the sistine chapel is culturally significant, and that's one reason i could see myself going out of my way to see it. cause history, y'know? ahem, y'know, for something so objective and factual as the measure of greatness in art, it's funny how much ideals in art change over time. cause while the sistine chapel may be significant, if it was objectively the greatest achievement in art, we'd have example after example of artists forever imitating and expanding on this sistine thing everywhere. but as is often seen in art, instead of repetitious monotony, we see a lot of the opposite. the baroque artists were undermining the renaissance, and were then usurped by the rococos, romanticism, impressionism et al until we get to the most absurd abstract-expressionists and pop artists. impressionism was possible during the rococo era, but that wasn't the culture. rococo is possible today, and there are artists who imitate that style, but it's really not the culture of today. it's almost as though each movement makes up its own set of rules and plays up to those until it gets too stuffy.

personally, i prefer the "see spot run" equivalents of the sistine chapel - the lowbrow and the pop surrealists. you dig that chapel - that's cool. you do you. but i hope you understand that what moves you will not move everyone, and as much as you may hate it, culture informs your opinions on this more than science, meaning that preferring dilbert to the oath of horatii doesn't make anyone part of "the mindless masses", and whoever did that dilbert strip is no less a good artist. note: i don't know your opinions on these artworks or artists, but insert whichever names piss you off the most, and the point is the same.

Fischman wrote:

So tell me, Why do we never see See Spot Run in a literature appreciation class? Are all those professors who know more about literature than you or me nothing more than elitist snobs?

this is a strawman argument, for one. for two, who is to say there aren't any classes appreciating see spot run? i bet a couple of my old profs would love to talk about the book if a student requested it. there's actually a lot we can learn from that book.

Fischman wrote:

And thank you for your reference to Kayan measures of attractiveness. By your own description, you've acknowledged that that particular feature is unhealthy. By any rational measure, that "taste" would be considered problematic, even inferior. So yes, taste, as subjective as it may be, may well have an aspect of quality attached to it.

people who drink water daily have a 100% mortality rate, so drinking water daily is objectively problematic, even inferior. there have been 0 fatalities reported among people who shoot 50 grams of mercury, lead, orange juice and toilet water directly into their bloodstream on a daily basis. ok, ok, i know you're talking about causal relationships...

so you're saying long necks are problematic and inferior? that's not a slippery slope at all, and it's certainly not elitist. granted, the degrees the kayan go to pursuing that ideal looks pretty unhealthy from my perspective, but it's easy to judge that when it's not my culture (as my lifestyle must look unhealthy to other cultures/religions), and it doesn't change the fact they like long necks, a quality that in itself isn't objectively inferior. if i showed up with my short neck, i suppose i might be told that i'm objectively ugly on account of it.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Tap — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 13:59:53 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 12/19/2018 18:59

Fischman wrote:

You're still extrapolating here, and coming to false conclusions as a result.

The key you're missing is that I don't make such comments about all or any or even most music that doesn't appeal to me. So there's not a one for one correspondence between music I don't care for, and music against which I express a negative opinion.

if I just blindly lambasted anything I didn't like, then you might have a point. But that's not the case.

You don't have to do that to exhibit snobby behavior tho. You can have a quiet tolerance for all sorts of things that you hate, but once you start talking about mindless masses, you're invoking a superiority over some people.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

baystateoftheart — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 12:13:03 GMT

Author: baystateoftheart

Posted: 12/19/2018 17:13

RockyRaccoon wrote:

The Sistine Chapel, obviously 😉

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

RockyRaccoon — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 11:25:02 GMT

Author: RockyRaccoon

Posted: 12/19/2018 16:25

I mean, I'd love to hear how you can empirically measure quality so as to determine what art is objectively of the highest quality.

We've been trying to solve this mystery since art started, so I'd love to hear the solution to a centuries-old problem.

What is, objectively, the greatest piece of art in history? I mean, if we can objectively judge art, there must be an answer to that question? I can tell you who threw the most touchdowns in NFL history, that's measurable, I can tell you who sold the most albums in music history, that's measurable, so if quality is measurable, then we should be able to truly, officially, empirically determine what actually is the greatest piece of art of all time. Or at least come up with a top five.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

RockyRaccoon — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 11:16:27 GMT

Author: RockyRaccoon

Posted: 12/19/2018 16:16

Fischman wrote:

So tell me,
Why do we never see See Spot Run in a literature appreciation class?
Are all those professors who know more about literature than you or me nothing more than elitist snobs?

Because it's not a class specifically focused on appreciating children's literature? And are we talking about cultural significance or quality? Because it's sounding like you're talking about the former. And I mean, if The Hungry Caterpillar had more of an effect on you when you read it than The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, I think you're perfectly justified in saying "I think the Hungry Caterpillar is better than James Joyce."

I mean, you're reaching pretty hard here man.

But let's continue with the example and extrapolate it to movies - there are movies made for children that are also well-made movies (i.e. many Pixar films). Couldn't we appreciate Toy Story just as much as we appreciate Tarkovsky? Sure, of course we can.

You cannot objectively measure quality because everyone has different criteria of what is "good" and what is "bad."

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Skinny — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:54:44 GMT

Author: Skinny

Posted: 12/19/2018 15:54

Fischman wrote:

It must be hard going through life making unfounded assumptions.

You'd know.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Fischman — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:53:16 GMT

Author: Fischman

Posted: 12/19/2018 15:53

Skinny wrote:

It must be strange to have such unshakeable faith in the idea that all your opinions are actually fact.

It must be hard going through life making unfounded assumptions.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Skinny — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:41:54 GMT

Author: Skinny

Posted: 12/19/2018 15:41

It must be strange to have such unshakeable faith in the idea that all your opinions are actually fact.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Fischman — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:57:01 GMT

Author: Fischman

Posted: 12/19/2018 14:57

Tap wrote:

talking about music that does not appeal to you as being for the mindless mobs is textbook music snobbery. and hey there can be some value to that, there's an interview on the best show where tom scharpling talks to james murphy about how record store jerks saved their life, it's a really great listen. but in this case, describing interests people here may have as mindless can end up being considered hostile.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Fischman — Wed, 19 Dec 2018 09:51:55 GMT

Author: Fischman

Posted: 12/19/2018 14:51

craola wrote:

Only if you're making them evaluate things on your terms, which defeats the purpose. I skimmed amazon and imdb ratings, and there were plenty of folks rating See Spot Run a 5-star film while giving "classics" 3s and 4s.

No, no, no, my man. Art is ENTIRELY subjective. There are some nurture involved, sure, that may impact certain demographics, but that doesn't detract from the subjectiveness of it all.

In traditional Kayan culture, unnaturally long necks are seen as attractive, so women stretch their necks to make them longer, causing permanent damage. Are long necks objectively more attractive? I've never thought so. In ancient Chinese culture, women wrapped their feet to try to make them small and sexy. My grandmother-in-law's feet were mutilated to meet this "objective" image of beauty that was prevalent at the time. Americans seem to think the big bosom is what it's all about. Whatever it is you see as objective is a facade. It's nurture.

If qualities of greatness in music was objective, it would all start to sound the same after a while, wouldn't it? If X+Y+Z=perfect, everyone would do that, but it's really not.

And then there's all these weird, nonsensical opinions that float around my head. Like, I think "rock-a-bye baby" is a GREAT song - a classic. I friggin hate "twinkle twinkle little star". No reason for it so far as I can tell....

But back to my own stretch of examples, I like to close my eyes and imagine how sexy a long-necked, heavy-chested woman with tiny feet would look. She wouldn't be able to stand up, head and breasts reaching for the ground with feet totally unable to support her. It does nothing for me. Something as basic as human attraction isn't even remotely universal in part because our culture indoctrinates us into thinking one thing is better than another.

So tell me,
Why do we never see See Spot Run in a literature appreciation class?
Are all those professors who know more about literature than you or me nothing more than elitist snobs?

And thank you for your reference to Kayan measures of attractiveness. By your own description, you've acknowledged that that particular feature is unhealthy. By any rational measure, that "taste" would be considered problematic, even inferior. So yes, taste, as subjective as it may be, may well have an aspect of quality attached to it.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

RoundTheBend — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:44:52 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 12/19/2018 04:44

Tap wrote:

Can I get an Amen?

I hope this resolves nicely, like tritone to a major 3rd. 😄

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

RoundTheBend — Tue, 18 Dec 2018 23:42:41 GMT

Author: RoundTheBend

Posted: 12/19/2018 04:42

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Except those are measurable skills? The sports to music analogy is not a good one. There are statistical ways to determine that Ryan Tannehill is worse than Tom Brady, there's not really a comparable way of measuring whether an album is "good"

Except for sales baby!

I mean, uh... hehe

Just kidding... I'll see myself out.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Tap — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 23:36:06 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 12/18/2018 04:36

talking about music that does not appeal to you as being for the mindless mobs is textbook music snobbery. and hey there can be some value to that, there's an interview on the best show where tom scharpling talks to james murphy about how record store jerks saved their life, it's a really great listen. but in this case, describing interests people here may have as mindless can end up being considered hostile.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

elo269megv — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 22:52:07 GMT

Author: elo269megv

Posted: 12/18/2018 03:52

Fischman wrote:

Appealing to the mindless masses is "doing something right" if that something is making a quick buck. If something right means making quality music, well that's something else.

Look, to avoid unnecessary offense, please understand that people like what they like and that's perfectly okay. My point with the admittedly harsh statements above is just to point out that popularity does not necessarily equate to goodness. If you dig something, that's great. Dig it and stand by it with pride and authority. That carries more weight than trying to dredge up cliche justifications that are really no justification at all.

Not sure how this thread became targeted at Fischman, or where this came off as snobby...Made for an interesting read of back and forth banter, so thank you for that. But can we agree a majority of these major publications' year end charts are horrendous? Surely users from this site could compose better comprehensive lists, but then again, that'd be subjective too

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

RockyRaccoon — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 21:08:19 GMT

Author: RockyRaccoon

Posted: 12/18/2018 02:08

Fischman wrote:

RockyRaccoon wrote:

Fischman wrote:

Even closer to pure art, one need not be William Faulkner to know that Victor Hugo wrote greater literature than Tom Clancy... even though the latter has sold a lot more books.

I mean, in your opinion, sure. I know plenty of people who would prefer Clancy to Faulkner. Shit, my wife read Faulkner and hated it, and I can promise you she'd tell you she prefers Nicholas Sparks to Faulkner.

But I assume all those people are part of the mindless masses and their opinions don't matter.

Hell, I prefer Clancy to Faulkner. But I at least have the intellectual honesty to not claim that Clancy is somehow "better" in any objective sense or even good. It does hit a certain spot that lots of of people enjoy and that's fine. It's just not justification for calling it great literature.

You’re talking as if there is some objective way to measure the quality of art.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

craola — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 19:35:15 GMT

Author: craola

Posted: 12/18/2018 00:35

Fischman wrote:

But even art has principles and application of said principles. To make the example even more extreme, nobody would say that "See Spot Run" has as much artistic merit as any of the classics. Nobody. So clearly, there is some stratification, even in art, which is admittedly mostly subjective.

Re: Stereogum & Pitchfork 2018 charts: ridicolous

Tap — Mon, 17 Dec 2018 19:14:15 GMT

Author: Tap

Posted: 12/18/2018 00:14

but you put prog as the best music. it makes sense to associate your snobbery with your enthusiasm for prog, especially when it's such a common phenomenon. though of course there are the non snob prog fans as well, you guys are cool.