179,854Messages
9,130Senders
30Years
342mboxes

← archive index

[idm] Long-ass diatribe on pop that, once written, I can't disown enough to delete.

1 message · 1 participant · spans 1 day · search this subject
2000-07-18 19:07Matthew Korfhage [idm] Long-ass diatribe on pop that, once written, I can't disown enough to delete.
expand allcollapse allclick any summary to toggle that message
2000-07-18 19:07Matthew KorfhageDrusca <andrei@WORLD.STD.COM> wrote: >Look ! Pierre Henry, Xenakis, Cage, Derek Bailey, Ce
From:
Matthew Korfhage
To:
Date:
Tue, 18 Jul 2000 12:07:53 PDT
Subject:
[idm] Long-ass diatribe on pop that, once written, I can't disown enough to delete.
permalink · <F223iC08B4wQyk4UbVp000023d6@hotmail.com>
Drusca <andrei@WORLD.STD.COM> wrote:
quoted 15 lines Look ! Pierre Henry, Xenakis, Cage, Derek Bailey, Cecil Taylor, >Gesualdo,>Look ! Pierre Henry, Xenakis, Cage, Derek Bailey, Cecil Taylor, >Gesualdo, >Noh Theater, Peking Opera or even Bach are some examples of >stuff that's >_not_ pop. IDM/dance music/whatever is fucking POP >music. It's not >challenging music. It doesn't engage you >intellectually. You don't have to >make any effort to appreciate the >music. There's nothing challenging about A(/B) song structures or >simple, >repetitive nursery rhyme melodies or beats that stick to a >regular pulse >for 5-10 minutes, even if they're highly syncopated. >They still appeal to >your ass more than any other body part. It >doesn't matter if your mom or >some frat boy or some 12 year old girl >doesn't "get it". I'd say when you start getting into Mego type stuff > >you're starting to leave the pop realm, but is that even IDM ? And > >personally I don't even find _that_ stuff very challenging. There's >not >that much going on there beyond the surface. >But Lexaunculpt and his basic major key chord progressions isn't pop?
I think the distinction you're making here is between intuitive and theoretical (not to be confused with academic) music, which isn't necessarily the same thing as pop/non-pop or challenging/for complete simps and body-rockers. Bach, for example, might not be pop, and might have a good deal of depth, and definitely turns within a rigid theoretical/structural framework, but it currently ranks somewhere up there with easy listening on the challenging scale. Glass and Reich are challenging in a number of respects, and are definitely theoretically based (i.e. not appealing to certain intuitive aspects of how music should sound that ultimately must appeal back to a received tradition of heard music, but rather geared toward an intellectualized abstraction of structure or affect), but they're SUCH pop, at least to my ears--or, if they aren't pop, then they form the basis for much of the IDM-ish pop that comes out these days-- see: lackluster, diskont 94 era oval, much AFX. Oval, specifically, is an example that pop can be challenging, as is Slicker (these being, obviously personal examples: fanboy also wants to nominate the Slicker remixes for this year's beautiful packaging prize). Both of those are examples of things that SHOULDN'T be as poppy as they so obviously are-- that does NOT bespeak a lack of depth or challenge-- forming subtle or not-so-subtle reconceptions of what pop music CAN BE (at the elvel of the producer or listener) isn't necessarily easy, and is often much more difficult than being/experiencing sound factories, which is how my pragmatic self ends up viewing a good portion of theoretical/ experimental music, especially the academic variety. As a side note, I don't necessarily view Cecil Taylor or especially Derek Bailey as all that overwhelmingly challenging, at least in concept-- Bailey especially falls within a set genre of "experimental" that has been previously mapped out quite successfully-- i.e. Zorn's slow turnings and pastiches on conventional forms CAN be more challenging than his fairly conventional experimentalia. Dissonance vs. assonance does not determine structural or emotional challenge-- dissonance is just harder to listen to unless you have a reason. Cage, on the other hand, is quite lovely on a conceptual level, and probably has done more than anyone else this century to revise/expand what one is allowed to think about music, but the point in Cage is never the affect but only the effect. For me, the interface between intuitive and experimental, i.e. where a good portion of IDM attempts to fall, is the most interesting and challenging area, since that's exactly where your deeper (that is, emotional and bodily) conceptions of music are allowed to turn over into new places-- there is some definite challenge involved in that, even if some of it might be pop music. Pop, to me, is just a measure of immediacy. Nothing else. Babble. Babble. Long wind. Sigh.
quoted 1 line : )>: )
Well taken. Cheers, Matthew "If there's one thing I can't stand, it's up." ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org