or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Neil Young Sucks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Neil Young Sucks - Page 2

post #41 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter


I'm uninterested in talking about your psychology. The fact of the matter is this: I am elitist about this and am unashamed of that. Some art is better than other art, and the more we democratize all of this, the worse that art will be and the more decadent the culture.

I wholeheartedly disagree. The most decadent cultures are ones that waste time worrying about taste above more important issue. The archetypal example of this is pre-revolutionary France.

Art will always exist, and it has always been that the best art of an era never really surfaces until the era has passed, when people can step back and see it for what it is, not cast in the light of temporal trends. Furthermore, art has always been the plaything of the elite, for the simple truth that the elite have the time, the money, and the education to want to put value to it. For all time, 99% of musical, decorative, or any sort of possibly artistic expression has not been great. It's the same today, and I don't think that's cause for concern.

Of course, it will be interesting to see just how well Neil Young is remembered once his living constituency dies. Quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if he's just a footnote of the greater folk movement.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #42 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
No. That is not what taste is at all. Taste is the ability to see a thing and know that it worthy of being held in high regard despite what the barbarians of the world with their Britney Spears CDs say...

You see that's just it. You'r so bigoted against people who don't like Neil Young that you just assume that our CD collections are all filled up with Britney and Beyoncé.

Maybe, if you took the time to look, you'd find that we prefer Miles Davis. Or Bartok. Or the Grateful Dead. Or Led Zeppelin.

Or all of the above.

Maybe we hate Britney, too. And we hate Michael Bolton and 50 Cent and Kenny G.

Please, don't make assumptions. It only serves to prove your ignorance.
post #43 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
It's fun listening to a bunch of Atlantic Monthly dedicates talk about taste as some unfaltering absolute. The fact is simple: your precious "taste" is merely the ability for one person to be able to understand why a thing can be held in high regard. Certainly can I understand why other people like Neil Young, given that it does have meritable elements, but I question why, since I find his music to be non-stimulating. That is, the meritable elements don't impress me.

To qualify taste as an absolute, a preferential disposisition that one either has or hasn't, is in most cases absurd. For example, your noble Hume would probably think little of Neil Young, given the dynamics of his culture and time. Does that mean that you definer of taste has no taste? Perhaps by your understanding it does.

But I digress. In America, what lies in good taste is defined not by an authority, but by wealth. Scott mentions a liking of bluegrass. I use this as an example because it wasn't really until the 90's that bluegrass was considered "tasteful" by any kind of artistic or otherwise snobby community. Its rise to prominance may largely be credited to a few, snobby, upper class liberals in the Washington DC area. Before then it was just hillbilly music, which is not to measure the quality of it, but it does brand it with a culture (West Virgina, Appalachia) that the same, snobby liberals love to lambast. It's funny how trends change.

You should really step back for a second from the culture you seem to be infatuated with, and realize just how silly it really is, to make you consider a set of preferences to be absolute. I have spent most of my life in the presence of personalities that might make the same absolutist argument that you did, except that in my case they were indeed the wealthy snobs that invent and disseminate the cultural qualifications that you end up absorbing so readily. Am I evil for choosing not to listen to the peers that I have often bested?

Wow . . . you are incredibly full of mallarcky aren't you . . .

Yeah who ever heard of David Grisman and Jerry Garcia and the musicians who influenced them froom the great tradition of Bluegrass music before the 'Latte sippers' got to them?!?!?

Yeah, no body here ever even heard of 'blue-grass' till we picked up a copy of the Atlantic Monthley in the 90s!!

Oh yeah . . . and who ever recognized the relationship of bluegrass and folk to Niel Young's music?!?!
Um gee . . . .

*

Mathematics and music . . . . nuff said . . . end of argument . . . throw the boy a shovel . . . . give him a hand, he's stuck!!!

*

Taste is one thing, art is another:

Discernment in both is a mixture of taste and insight: which means to say that taste (inter-subjective) is guided by the reflection that art provides)

*

The band Yes is far far far superior to Rush . . . they may be willfully complex in song writing, they may even have moments of pretentiousness . . . but they don't confuse the math for the music . . . their most ponderous works (Tales of Topographic Oceans) still are motivated by a love of Rock and Roll --meaning: enthusiasm (in-theos) and movement and energy. . . . they also imbue their gigantic constructions with the spirit of experimentation . . . and even the most weighted pieces still have a bit of the funky in them . . . (all of this dissapeared, however, when Steve Howe left and 90621 happened, then they just became lame)
and
what's best about Yes: an absurd Optimism . . . even if they are really just Crypto-Christians . . . . their spirit is positive and moves with joy

King Chrimson - they had some good albums. My favorite (Starless And Bible Black) is good because it has improv and is not afraid to be imperfect . . . at this point in their career, it isn't all about being the most bad-ass set of precision instrumentalists . . . they seem to still be making music
Some of the stuff with Belew is still music . . . but then they simply become theory and forget about music . . . they devolve into the pleasures of technique and 'complexity' . . . and, consequenty the music suffers . .

but Rush doesn't come close to either band, Rush, in comparison, is like the WallMart of Progressive Rock, whereas, Yes and King Chrimson are like really good Hardware stores . . . or, they think that their 1980 Camarow is cool because its black ---
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #44 of 82
Thread Starter 
I merely said that I prefer Rush to Neil Young. Get over it, since it's not central to the discussion. If you think I'm less of a person for prefering Rush to Neil Young, also know that I prefer most Opera music to Neil Young, or for that matter that I don't think Neil Young is worse that pop music. It's just that I expected a lot more than I got.

Quote:
Mathematics and music . . . . nuff said . . . end of argument . . . throw the boy a shovel . . . . give him a hand, he's stuck!!!

You are a fool to think that music is not as much about math as it is about anything else. The entire structure of verse, the arrangement of notes and chords, and everything else is an intricately prepared table of equations. Furthermore, heavy mathematic analysis is involved in any sort of instrument making. You can take a self-absorbed road and say something silly like "music is all about the soul," and you'll be nothing but wrong. "soulful" input can create emotional value, but in the end it's just a string of notes. The whole effort of the classical movement of the 18th century was to make the least soulful music possible. Some of it is very good. Perhaps folk music is about making the most soulful music possible. The point here is that good music can be soul-less, but no music can be math-less.

So my point is that I prefer music that answers a mathematic puzzle, be it a simple puzzle or a complex puzzle, rather than music that doesn't attempt any puzzle. If that falls outside your absolutist views of taste and art, then you are free to end this dialogue, confident that you are indeed better than I am, and I will never again challenge you based on that reference point.

tonton: kudos for not being a wanker.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #45 of 82
Tonton:

I like it when you say this:

Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Please, don't make assumptions. It only serves to prove your ignorance.

And then go on to say this:

Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
[B]You'r [sic] so bigoted against people who don't like Neil Young that you just assume that our CD collections are all filled up with Britney and Beyoncé.

That's funny. Did you mean to be ironic there about making assumptions?

I'm not bigoted against people who don't like Neil Young. I simply think that some people have good taste and that others do not. The presence of Britney Spears and her ilk is indicative of the simple fact that far too many people with far too much money have far too little good taste. I would say the same thing about people who put those silly neon lights underneath their cars. I am bigoted against those people who look in the bargain bin at their local megalot CD store (these, of course, overwhelmingly being the graveyard of bad music and therefore a record of bad taste) and find everything they're looking for. Caveat: I have found some extremely good music in bargain bins, but I have to wade through the detritus of people's bad taste to find it.

Cheers
Scott
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #46 of 82
Does that mean everybody else IS a wanker? P.S I didn't mention the 't' word once, I don't mind what you do or don't like.

"Wankers talking about other wankers and wanking." XamaX

I'll never get back the time i just wasted reading that post." Miami Craig
" It's like you've achieved some kind of irrelevance zen, or...

Reply

"Wankers talking about other wankers and wanking." XamaX

I'll never get back the time i just wasted reading that post." Miami Craig
" It's like you've achieved some kind of irrelevance zen, or...

Reply
post #47 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
The band Yes is far far far superior to Rush . . . they may be willfully complex in song writing, they may even have moments of pretentiousness . . . but they don't confuse the math for the music . . . their most ponderous works (Tales of Topographic Oceans) still are motivated by a love of Rock and Roll --meaning: enthusiasm (in-theos) and movement and energy. . . . they also imbue their gigantic constructions with the spirit of experimentation . . . and even the most weighted pieces still have a bit of the funky in them . . . (all of this dissapeared, however, when Steve Howe left and 90621 happened, then they just became lame)
and what's best about Yes: an absurd Optimism . . . even if they are really just Crypto-Christians . . . . their spirit is positive and moves with joy

Are you trying to seduce me, Mrs. Robinson?

No, really. You like jacked into my brain to compose that paragraph, didn't you?

I had no idea anyone else thought Tales was Yes' best work. After all, Rick Wakeman left the band after that record because he was sickened by its pretentiousness. Rick Wakeman! King of the pretentious himself.

But honestly, I've had only a few dozen or so non drug-enduced euphoric music moments (you know them if you've had them), and in all honesty, Tales was behind more than one. It's almost orgasmic when you get into it. In fact, I quoted the intro on my Senior high school yearbook page (every senior gets a whole page where I went to school). I guess that makes me more pretentious than Rick Wakeman.

I couldn't imagine Neil Young inducing anything other than nausea.
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
I merely said that I prefer Rush to Neil Young. Get over it, since it's not central to the discussion. If you think I'm less of a person for prefering Rush to Neil Young, also know that I prefer most Opera music to Neil Young, or for that matter that I don't think Neil Young is worse that pop music. It's just that I expected a lot more than I got.



You are a fool to think that music is not as much about math as it is about anything else. The entire structure of verse, the arrangement of notes and chords, and everything else is an intricately prepared table of equations. Furthermore, heavy mathematic analysis is involved in any sort of instrument making. You can take a self-absorbed road and say something silly like "music is all about the soul," and you'll be nothing but wrong. "soulful" input can create emotional value, but in the end it's just a string of notes. The whole effort of the classical movement of the 18th century was to make the least soulful music possible. Some of it is very good. Perhaps folk music is about making the most soulful music possible. The point here is that good music can be soul-less, but no music can be math-less.

tonton: kudos for not being a wanker.

Knowing the circle of fifths, and what chords resolve to what toni,c and why an augmented seventh feels tense etc, may have mathematical reasons for being but that is not the musical experience . . . . you can get pleasure from knowing these things and advanced music is partly involved with theoretical-pleasure but that pleasure is not the sum total of a profound musical experience
and,
much of the serial music in the early part of the 20th century dealt with mathematical systems before they dealt with the auditory experience,

But in either case (love of music theory as a system and constructed systems of music composition) music should be first

. . . . Phillip Glass turned away from his western roots (Cowell, Schonberg etc) when he heard Indian Music and realized that the dense aparatus that often accompanyed his previous influences got in the way
Just as Steve Reich disavowed the systematic music of Schoneberg and Cage because the pleasure of the system was not itself evident in the music and as music

Falling in love with the description of the mathematics of chord progressions and 'difficult' rhythms (to steal from Allan Watts here)
is like eating the menu and not the meal
You end up Hungry


...

Just one thing I noticed . . . its funny that when you decide to comment on Wanking, you nicely changed your location from reading 'something wanker' . . . was it too close to home?!?!

BTW - Nietszche's fantastic remarks on opera are worth looking at . . . what was it he called it? something like 'silly bourgeois goobledy-gook' . . . . but that's just Nietszche . . . I kind of like opera . . . especially the parts where they are singing lines of dialogue with nary a line of musical accompanyment . . catching up to the plot . . .. that stuff is a laugh riot!!
[/devil's_advocate]
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #49 of 82
Quote:
Posted by Midwinter
But it's not. When you do that, when you buy that Britney Spears CD or download that version of Rush's "Trees" from the iTMS, you retard the arts, tarnish the virtues, and confuse the manners of your country.*

Sure as hell sounds like you're assuming we who don't like Neil Young are busy buying Britney and Rush (sorry, Spline).
post #50 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
I wholeheartedly disagree. The most decadent cultures are ones that waste time worrying about taste above more important issue. The archetypal example of this is pre-revolutionary France.

Well, I think what you're talking about is libertinism rather than decadence. But I would ask this: If they were more worried about tase (which, as I have argued above, is directly tied to the national morality), what are these "more important issues"?

Quote:
Art will always exist, and it has always been that the best art of an era never really surfaces until the era has passed, when people can step back and see it for what it is, not cast in the light of temporal trends.

This is largely a result of art and taste being democratized. In such cases, we don't even know what is good when we are saying it is good, and so the absence of good taste requires that we languish among our Britney Spears CDs.

Quote:
Furthermore, art has always been the plaything of the elite, for the simple truth that the elite have the time, the money, and the education to want to put value to it.

Yes. All the more reason to trust them when they tell you what is good and what is not.

Quote:
For all time, 99% of musical, decorative, or any sort of possibly artistic expression has not been great. It's the same today, and I don't think that's cause for concern.

I'm not concerned with the production of bad art. At least people are attempting to produce art. I'm concerned that people do not realize, immediately, that it is not good art.

Quote:
Of course, it will be interesting to see just how well Neil Young is remembered once his living constituency dies. Quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if he's just a footnote of the greater folk movement.

That's possible. It's also possible that Bartok will fade from memory as a collector of quaint folk music.

Cheers
Scott
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #51 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Sure as hell sounds like you're assuming we who don't like Neil Young are busy buying Britney and Rush (sorry, Spline).

Sorry if I was unclear. "You" in that sentence is second-person plural. The generic "you." "People." "Barbarians."

However you like.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #52 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
Falling in love with the description of the mathematics of chord progressions and 'difficult' rhythms (to steal from Allan Watts here) is like eating the menu and not the meal
You end up Hungry

I like that. It reminds me of those people who believe that poetry can be interpreted purely through scansion, or of my friends who used to say "OOh! Listen to this! It's a bar of 7/8 followed by a bar of 5/4!!"

If I might provide my own mantra here: Complexity only for the sake of complexity is not art. It's masturbation.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #53 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Are you trying to seduce me, Mrs. Robinson?

No, really. You like jacked into my brain to compose that paragraph, didn't you?

I had no idea anyone else thought Tales was Yes' best work. After all, Rick Wakeman left the band after that record because he was sickened by its pretentiousness. Rick Wakeman! King of the pretentious himself.

But honestly, I've had only a few dozen or so non drug-enduced euphoric music moments (you know them if you've had them), and in all honesty, Tales was behind more than one. It's almost orgasmic when you get into it. In fact, I quoted the intro on my Senior high school yearbook page (every senior gets a whole page where I went to school). I guess that makes me more pretentious than Rick Wakeman.

I couldn't imagine Neil Young inducing anything other than nausea.

No, I didn't say it was their best album . . . just that it, despite its apparent huge-ponderousness, is actually a decent listen, and, still has its roots in rock-and-roll: ie: funky, sexy, energy.

nd Neil is ALL about that energy, (as well as the sentimental side that is about straight-farward emotions, disected in a brutally honest yet precise ways) . . . his rock-and-roll is definitevley NOT about being anything other than Rock-and-roll: chaotic, noisy, jamming . . . from the pelvis . . . and even somewhat dumb (he is actually surprisingly intelligent as a person though)

When he rocks its like a bunch of boys in a garage, doing nothing but . . . . but . . . . rocking . . .

Not rocket science . . . just great RockandRoll


RE: YES -- I surprise myself and listen to alot of YES these days . . . Its funny, but some of the stuff that I liked in High School, but then thoght of as ponderous while going through my Punk phase in the early eighties, I could now imagine some post-punk bands doing as covers . . . in other words (like stuff on Relayer) it is complex and difficult to play but has the energy of Rock . . . it Rocks!!

ANd their first two albums are also really great.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #54 of 82
Question for Midwanker (sorry, couldn't resist):

If we don't buy Britney CD's and download Rush (personally I think that Neil Peart is an amazingly accurate, but consequently an amazingly boring drummer), and we also don't buy any Neil Young, do we still "retard the arts"?

I think the person that says full stop, "If you don't like Neil Young [or Jackson Pollock, or Louis XIV furniture, or IM Pei] then you have bad taste" without knowing anything at all about what that person does like, is the one who's retarding the arts.
post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Question for Midwanker (sorry, couldn't resist):

Ah, a dick joke. That's funny, in a kind of bourgeois way. Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Quote:
If we don't buy Britney CD's and download Rush (personally I think that Neil Peart is an amazingly accurate, but consequently an amazingly boring drummer), and we also don't buy any Neil Young, do we still "retard the arts"?

No. It is enough simply to avoid the proliferation of bad art.

And I agree with you about Peart. He's as mathematical in his playing as he is mathematical in his soulfulness. And if someone could keep him from reading any more Ayn Rand or being so bloody sincere in his lyrics, I'd appreciate it.

Quote:
I think the person that says full stop, "If you don't like Neil Young [or Jackson Pollock, or Louis XIV furniture, or IM Pei] then you have bad taste" without knowing anything at all about what that person does like, is the one who's retarding the arts.

How can telling people what is good retard the arts?

Cheers
Scott

PS
Off to the airport to pick up relatives who are visiting. I'm not ducking out of this discussion, which I think is fascinating, but I may not respond very quickly.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #56 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
. . .

Stop being so juvenile. I used Opera as an example of a genre that is often disliked. Furthermore, I don't find it necessary to adhere to a philosophy simply because some generally insightful philosopher made a comment somewhere about something, which is certainly a central aspect of this debate.

To scott: I am having a lot of fun with you, because you're so unbelievably synthetic. First off, you lead me to believe that you're from a humble southern upbringing, only to cap off a series of generally elitist arguments with the phrase, "Ah, a dick joke. That's funny, in a kind of bourgeois way." To that I ask: have you done so well for yourself that you are now a wealthy man with time to spend on the whimsies of the elite, or are you merely pretending?

Ultimately, since you find that "wealth is authority," you either have wealth, and thus authority on the issue of taste, or don't have wealth, and thus don't have authority on the issue of taste. I guess the alternate profile, and the worst forecast, is that you could just be one of those unfortunate lackies who listens to NPR and subscribes to their every idiom without falter. I choose not to worship others, but instead to make my own decisions, particularly in matters of personal preference. This would indeed be "democratization," and you may hate it, especially because I may well have more cultural clout that you do.

When I mention "worrying about more important things" I am of course refering to sustainability and development. The French aristocrats overlooked these, and their empire crumbled into a pool of their own blood and barrels of fine wine. How much of their art and metrics of good taste were destroyed in the collapse?

So, feel free to cling to your metrics, but tastes and metrics of good taste always change, leaving you with nothing but remnants of the past. If it's change you fear, then I'm afraid you have lost the battle, because change is one of the inevitibilities of the nature. That is why I called you synthetic.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #57 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Stop being so juvenile. I used Opera as an example of a genre that is often disliked. Furthermore, I don't find it necessary to adhere to a philosophy simply because some generally insightful philosopher made a comment somewhere about something, which is certainly a central aspect of this debate.

To scott: I am having a lot of fun with you, because you're so unbelievably synthetic. First off, you lead me to believe that you're from a humble southern upbringing, only to cap off a series of generally elitist arguments with the phrase, "Ah, a dick joke. That's funny, in a kind of bourgeois way." To that I ask: have you done so well for yourself that you are now a wealthy man with time to spend on the whimsies of the elite, or are you merely pretending?

Ultimately, since you find that "wealth is authority," you either have wealth, and thus authority on the issue of taste, or don't have wealth, and thus don't have authority on the issue of taste. I guess the alternate profile, and the worst forecast, is that you could just be one of those unfortunate lackies who listens to NPR and subscribes to their every idiom without falter. I choose not to worship others, but instead to make my own decisions, particularly in matters of personal preference. This would indeed be "democratization," and you may hate it, especially because I may well have more cultural clout that you do.

When I mention "worrying about more important things" I am of course refering to sustainability and development. The French aristocrats overlooked these, and their empire crumbled into a pool of their own blood and barrels of fine wine. How much of their art and metrics of good taste were destroyed in the collapse?

So, feel free to cling to your metrics, but tastes and metrics of good taste always change, leaving you with nothing but remnants of the past. If it's change you fear, then I'm afraid you have lost the battle, because change is one of the inevitibilities of the nature. That is why I called you synthetic.

So, according to you the French Aristocracy crashed because of bad art?!?!
Forget all of the deep historical iniquities, economic dysfunctions and etc . . .

Oh yeah . . . and let's not forget Chardin, Fragonard, Greuze, Lebrun, Boucher . . . sure, they might have been teh lackeys of the moneyed . . . but they were great painters
Besides, who's griping about the revolution as if some grand edifice that needed sustaining had fallen into a worse state . . . I seem to think that the Revolution harkened a better form of Government (after some trials) even if it runs counter to my old-family connections . . . .

You may or may not have more 'cultural clout' but your prose is by far more wooden than any other AI poster I've come across in a long time . . .

and as far as 'cultural clout' is concerned . . . . that is a good question: what exactly would confer 'cultural clout' if not actual work in a the 'culture industry' --by which, of course, is meant that complex of interrelated activities that generate the products by which the 'culture' gets to reflect on its own creations, through its creations . . . -why yes, of course!-
And if memory serves me correctly Midwinter is in fact ensconced in a concrete manifestation of such an activity: institutionalized-cultural-self-reflection . . . . I guess that kind of confers some measure of 'cultural clout' . . . . rumor has it that he actualy produces products involved in the activities of culture itself, that he is a cultural producer . . .

Hmm . . . whoda thunk>
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #58 of 82
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
So, according to you the French Aristocracy crashed because of bad art?!?!

No. It was because they were too wrapped up in themselves, and in fulfilling their "tastes," to realize that they were in trouble. In the end, a lot of hard work and good art was ruined for this shortsightedness. I'm not sure how you extrapolated what you did.

You don't need to prove to me that you know the names of good artists and contributors of modern philosophy. As impressive as it may be, it's nothing but peripheral, and it hasn't helped your argument for the simple fact that your argument was founded on a misinterpretation.

Quote:
but your prose is by far more wooden than any other AI poster I've come across in a long time . . .

It is true that long sentences and commas have fallen out of favor, but they are useful tools for arguments as they can well separate the questions, points, and lead-ons. It may also be true, though, that "the democratization of taste" has killed the long sentence.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #59 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
No. It was because they were too wrapped up in themselves, and in fulfilling their "tastes," to realize that they were in trouble. In the end, a lot of hard work and good art was ruined for this shortsightedness. I'm not sure how you extrapolated what you did.

You don't need to prove to me that you know the names of good artists and contributors of modern philosophy. As impressive as it may be, it's nothing but peripheral, and it hasn't helped your argument for the simple fact that your argument was founded on a misinterpretation.


It is true that long sentences and commas have fallen out of favor, but they are useful tools for arguments as they can well separate the questions, points, and lead-ons. It may also be true, though, that "the democratization of taste" has killed the long sentence.

Long sentences and wooden prose are not the same thing. Just as good music and theories about good music are not the same thing.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #60 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by Splinemodel
To scott: I am having a lot of fun with you, because you're so unbelievably synthetic.

I have no idea what that means.

Quote:
First off, you lead me to believe that you're from a humble southern upbringing

Indeed I am. Plantersville, Mississippi. Around 1,000 people. One Baptist church. One Methodist. When they don't have enough people to make a congregation at one, the all have church at the other. I can show you pictures if you don't believe me.

Quote:
only to cap off a series of generally elitist arguments with the phrase, "Ah, a dick joke. That's funny, in a kind of bourgeois way."

You have to admit that a dick joke in reference to my nick, which is taken from the main character of a delightful piece of sensation fiction by Wilkie Collins from the 1860s, is an awfully bourgeois thing to do.

Quote:
To that I ask: have you done so well for yourself that you are now a wealthy man with time to spend on the whimsies of the elite, or are you merely pretending?

I'm doing pretty well, thanks. The wife and I are comfortable. We like our 70 year-old house. We like our jobs. The more troubling thing for you ought to be your assumption that people from humble Southern origins cannot go on to become elitists about art.

Quote:
Ultimately, since you find that "wealth is authority," you either have wealth, and thus authority on the issue of taste, or don't have wealth, and thus don't have authority on the issue of taste.

In America, yes, wealth = authority. Just look at Paris Hilton. But my remark was flippant and written in haste, and it wasn't clear enough that I was noting that in a capitalist system like ours, wealth does, in fact, equal authority. Even in art.

Quote:
I guess the alternate profile, and the worst forecast, is that you could just be one of those unfortunate lackies who listens to NPR and subscribes to their every idiom without falter.

Why can you not stay on topic? This isn't about me listening to NPR. This is about me saying that there is art that is good and there is art that is bad and not being namby-pamby about it or my elitism.

Quote:
I choose not to worship others, but instead to make my own decisions, particularly in matters of personal preference.

Um. Great?

Quote:
This would indeed be "democratization," and you may hate it, especially because I may well have more cultural clout that you do.

I seriously doubt that.

Quote:
So, feel free to cling to your metrics,

Thanks. I'll be hanging out with Matthew Arnold in the back room.

Quote:
but tastes and metrics of good taste always change, leaving you with nothing but remnants of the past.

Like good art?

Quote:
If it's change you fear, then I'm afraid you have lost the battle, because change is one of the inevitibilities of the nature. That is why I called you synthetic. [/B]

Ah. No. I don't fear change. I fear that we have a culture where no one much cares about what is good art anymore, and where, for instance, no one flinches if I say "It is bad taste to dress yourself in a Hello Kitty leisure suit" but people get all bent out of shape when I say that "It's bad taste to listen to X."

I say again: I am an elitist about this, and I am unapologetic about it. Some art is better than other art, and apparently people need to be told this.

Cheers
Scott
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #61 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
In America, yes, wealth = authority. Just look at Paris Hilton.

You have to admit that Paris Hilton has decent taste in clothes.
post #62 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
I say again: I am an elitist about this, and I am unapologetic about it. Some art is better than other art, and apparently people need to be told this.

Some people evidently need to be told that Nick Drake is unquestionably better art than Neil Young.
post #63 of 82
Here's my take about taste and art. I think it comes down to a concept that the powers that be try to tell us doesn't exist: mastery.

You master your art or if you can't you pretend to - it's as simple as that. 'Taste' is being able to tell the difference when the faker tries to palm you off. It doesn't mean you like the real thing necessarily but it does mean you can tell the difference.

Of course these days, commercialism dictates that mastery takes too long and people just aren't up to it so they go the pretending route and teach everyone that's all there is with a slew of BS like Idol and Pop Stars ad nauseum.

There is a story about Picasso that relates how he was asked to draw something for someone and he just drew a line across a piece of paper and handed it to him saying '$5000 please'. The other guy said 'what ? $5000 for that ?'. Picasso said 'yes, it took me forty years of practice and devotion to art to be able to draw that line.' Someone like Hirst (the ultimate faker and exemplar of bad taste) could well draw an exactly similar line. Indistinguishable even.

But he ain't no Picasso.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Some people evidently need to be told that Nick Drake is unquestionably better art than Neil Young.

You wouldn't be saying that if Drake had lived to do another 20 years of albums.

Neil Young just went on too long - if he'd have died after Harvest he'd be in the Pantheon but that just proves he is a true artist - only manufactured pap can keep going indefinitely. It's like plastic.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #65 of 82
I'd have him dying after 'Rust Never Sleeps'. It seems that after that he's done too much looking back. I think when 'Harvest Moon' came out I quit paying attention.
The soul album and 'Greendale' peaked my interest so maybe he's coming out of it.
post #66 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
You have to admit that Paris Hilton has decent taste in clothes.

She should keep her clothes on. She's ugly and way to skinny.
Níl aon tinteán mar do thinteán féin
Reply
Níl aon tinteán mar do thinteán féin
Reply
post #67 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
I'd have him dying after 'Rust Never Sleeps'. It seems that after that he's done too much looking back. I think when 'Harvest Moon' came out I quit paying attention.
The soul album and 'Greendale' peaked my interest so maybe he's coming out of it.

FYI: it's "piqued my interest."
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #68 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
You have to admit that Paris Hilton has decent taste in clothes.

She wears clothes? I really just want to know what the hell is wrong with her NECK. In every picture of her, she looks like her neck broke and her head flopped over.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #69 of 82
I often wonder if anybody actually did the safety dance.
orange you just glad?
Reply
orange you just glad?
Reply
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
FYI: it's "piqued my interest."

d'oh! spell check doesn't work when you use the wrong word but spelled properly.
post #71 of 82
I had to read this thread because I'm a moderator and I have to make sure everyone is playing by the rules and I have to say I want to punch you all until you fall down and then urinate on your faces.

This is the dumbest goddam thread in the history of mankind and I hate you all.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #72 of 82
Mastery? perhaps, but not of such easily definable things as mere technique . . . there are innumerable other qualities that make art great art . . . and mastery of technique is most definitely NOT one of them . . . . fluidity and mobility in technique is good, but that alone does not make a great artist.

That is why people like Al Dimeola, Neil Peart etc etc will never be great artists . . . they are merely technitions.

What needs to be mastered is the fit of craft to voice (meaning - expression) and have that matched with insight and reflection
. . . a natural unforced understanding of their own medium in its relation to the artist's manner of reflective being in the world.
That doesn't mean to say that the artist needs to self-consciously understand how they do what they do, but that what they do has a deep measure of reflectivity on the world, and the deep form of a culture


High art/low art
-- great art does NOT need to be high fallutin - Folk arts can best manifest a form that reveals a culture to itself or to time and others . .. sometimes better than the products of the so-called High Institutional traditions of art . . .

even Pop forms can best the supposed sophisticates at the game of High Art . . . however, usually Popular forms result merely in mimicking the shape of a culture at any given time and don't accede to the level of reflexion
But High Art that uses Pop as a tool in its game is often far more sophisticated and 'high' than supposedly 'pure' forms of High traditional art . . like 'High Modernist' Painting, or music.

ALSO --this hardly needs to be said, but I'll say it anyway, a strong work of art need not be 'tasteful' . . . . . the 'Tasteful' is teh realm of bourgeois pablum . . . the 'beautiful' -as in teh daily usage of the term, as in 'boy that sure looks great' is antithetical to the work of high art -- it usually means the merely pretty and devolves into ordinary and mainstream sentimentality and emotionalism . . . in other words Kitsch
Not to sell Kitsch as crap . . . but kitsch doesn't go down the long road . . . it just doesn't get there

Not to say that Kitsch can't be used as a tool . . . as with Pop . . . .

anyway . . . enough for now
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #73 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
I had to read this thread because I'm a moderator and I have to make sure everyone is playing by the rules and I have to say I want to punch you all until you fall down and then urinate on your faces.

This is the dumbest goddam thread in the history of mankind and I hate you all.

Thank you.

Saying Rush is preferable to or better than Neil Young and not admitting Neil's talent and great work is simply asinine and pathetic.

[groverat edited this post for obvious reasons.]
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
. . . they may be willfully complex in song writing, they may even have moments of pretentiousness . . . but they don't confuse the math for the music . . . their most ponderous works (Tales of Topographic Oceans) still are motivated by a love of Rock and Roll --meaning: enthusiasm (in-theos) and movement and energy. . . . they also imbue their gigantic constructions with the spirit of experimentation . . . and even the most weighted pieces still have a bit of the funky in them . . . (all of this dissapeared, however, when Steve Howe left and 90621 happened, then they just became lame)
and
what's best about Yes: an absurd Optimism . . . even if they are really just Crypto-Christians . . . . their spirit is positive and moves with joy


No mention of Close to the Edge?

DOUBLE BLASPHEMER!!

....and that's 90215......Rabin's intentions were like communisum...a good idea that didn't work. Although, if you can find 9021LIVE the B side has a great [technically] great guitar solo by Ravin, not bad, (for a South African)

I can't really do too much with Anderson's lyrics, I think he's too busy mixing metaphors to say much of anything, although, on tab of Airplane it makes alot more sense -- (and almost too intense.) Setting aside the lyrics, their musicality is really in a class by itself, Squire bringing the Bass in front....Wakeman, and the rest grooving on the title track of Close to the edge....for a mass-produced band, they raised the bar to a point that probably hasn't been reached since in that genere. I think you're being too hard on Rush, especailly from a technical standpoint. They pretty much lost whatever they had going for them after Hold Your Fire but I thought Grace under pressure and Signals bordered on the pertinent.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #75 of 82
I can't believe I agree with every nuance of every statement in a multi-paragraph post by DMZ.
post #76 of 82
I once heard Anderson explain Roundabout, it was all so simple, it's about driving out of the swiss alps.

much of tales from topographic oceans is written in haiku.
post #77 of 82
In all this talk about Rush vs. Neil Young, it turns out that Rush covered two Neil Young songs on their latest album.

Does this mean they actually have good taste?

post #78 of 82
I'm assuming your refering to Mr. Soul & For What It's Worth
For What It's Worth is a Stephen Stills song. But that doesn't make it any less cool.
post #79 of 82
It's Buffalo Springfield.

I assume Neil Young had at least some part of it. No?
post #80 of 82
Oh yeah, I didn't mean to imply you were off your nut. Young wrote "Mr. Soul", and Stills wrote "For What It's Worth". It was the great Buffalo Springfield indeed, who also had Jim Messina and Richie Furay who went on to start the Poco, who's EPIC releases are very underated.
Crazy Eyes by Poco is a great listen if you ever want to explore the roots of the dreaded california country rock explosion. They had a really good live album too. This is the early Poco not the Poco which would score top ten hits in the early eighties. Furay & Messina had left by then.


for what it's worth
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Neil Young Sucks