Red Mosquito

--- wrote:Suck a dick.

So you're trying to pass yourself off as intelligent while using this kind of communication?

If you bothered reading, you'd realize that nowhere in here did I say that music is objective. It is not subjective appreciation that I take issue with; it's the naive idea that all music is good music if it expresses emotion (and variations on that idea).

And there you go putting words into my mouth. There's plenty of music that expresses emotion very well that I don't care for. So it's not my definition of good music. But far be it for me to try to convince a fan that it is no good.

But in any form of art, there are also objective standards, and if a song doesn't operate within these objective standards (creative use of line, creative use of metaphor, creative use of language, multiplicity of meaning, authenticity of voice), it's usually drivel.

Here lies the bullshit in your analysis: "creative use of..." = a subjective qualifier. "Authenticity of voice" = a subjective qualifier. Also, the generalization that a song needs to follow some kind of recipe to avoid being drivel is actually a pretty backward and limiting way of viewing things.

I will agree that for me to like a band, at a minimum the musicianship needs to be skillful at a certain level, the words need to be literate at a certain level, etc. However, those are MY standards which in some areas are lower than other people's standards, and in some areas are higher.

aurynsdad, did it bother you when they switched the actress that played the little sister on Boy Meets World?

--- wrote:Don't be so fucking dense

You're an asshole

--- wrote:It's like saying there's no way to judge a Michelangelo painting from a fingerpainting. You're just being a prick if you make that claim, in addition to the fact that you're trying to discredit an artistic form and an artist's talent.

You're an asshole, and stop putting words in my mouth

--- wrote:There is an objective element there. You'd be a moron to say otherwise.

I could say that I feel differently about poems and not be a moron. Also, you're an asshole.

The universalist, democratic view of poetry is absolute shit

So all poetry has to follow a certain set of guidelines? We sure would have missed a lot of good poetry if that were the case. Stop being such an obtuse dickhead.

Lament wrote:aurynsdad, did it bother you when they switched the actress that played the little sister on Boy Meets World?

I have no idea what you are referencing, but I imagine it concerns some stereotype you have projected upon me.

aurynsdad wrote:stereotype

aurynsdad wrote:
So all poetry has to follow a certain set of guidelines?

Words. Probably needs words.

bodysnatcher wrote:

aurynsdad wrote:
So all poetry has to follow a certain set of guidelines?

Words. Probably needs words.

Don't be so prosaic.

Can we get back to talking about how Pearl Jam sucks and trolling stip? Or at least get that PJ Harvey thing up and running...

Lament wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Can we get back to talking about how Pearl Jam sucks and trolling stip? Or at least get that PJ Harvey thing up and running...

Otherwise known as the "intelligent discussion" that people stick around RM for and what the zombie fanboys are trying to silence.

Farmer John wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Can we get back to talking about how Pearl Jam sucks and trolling stip? Or at least get that PJ Harvey thing up and running...

Otherwise known as the "intelligent discussion" that people stick around RM for and what the zombie fanboys are trying to silence.

Exactly

aurynsdad doesn't deserve this

<looks up prosaic>

Don't be fatuous, Jeffrey.

There was a brief period where I thought aurynsdad and Iholdthepain were gonna end up being exactly the same.

I'm so sorry for that, Iholdthepain. Please accept my apology.

bodysnatcher wrote:

Lament wrote:

i just wanted to see this twice on the same page

theplatypus wrote:Right NOW

That bear fucking loved that moon.

aurynsdad wrote:

--- wrote:Don't be so fucking dense

You're an asshole

--- wrote:It's like saying there's no way to judge a Michelangelo painting from a fingerpainting. You're just being a prick if you make that claim, in addition to the fact that you're trying to discredit an artistic form and an artist's talent.

You're an asshole, and stop putting words in my mouth

--- wrote:There is an objective element there. You'd be a moron to say otherwise.

I could say that I feel differently about poems and not be a moron. Also, you're an asshole.

The universalist, democratic view of poetry is absolute shit

So all poetry has to follow a certain set of guidelines? We sure would have missed a lot of good poetry if that were the case. Stop being such an obtuse dickhead.

Kaius wrote:aurynsdad doesn't deserve this

Gotta agree with this. Not a fan of this particular 'intelligent discussion' at all.