On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:47:25 -0700, Gonzi 'Fresh' Merchan wrote:
quoted 7 lines Now, regarding your point about *explaining why you don't like
>> Now, regarding your point about *explaining why you don't like
>> something* - that to me is what IDM is actually about, or should be. I
>> fully agree that people shouldn't just label something garbage - put a
>> few seconds of thought into your post and *tell us why you think that*.
>> It's like those English essay exams you hated - "Why? Explain".
>
>Agreed.
From the IDM webring's home page (
http://www.gridface.com/idmring/):
"IDM is not a genre; it's a mailing list hosted by Hyperreal." I
don't know how many of you would still agree with this, but I
certainly do. So many different things pass for "IDM" - recently and
in the past.
To me, IDM has always seemed more like a club than a subset of music.
Generally, I've found people who say they like IDM to be more
interested in the techniques and/or technology used to create the
sounds, and/or the music theory the sounds represent or "push
forward". I am personally more interested in music that I enjoy
listening to, and would classify my favorites not by my technical
appreciation of them but by how often I tend to listen to them. This
would seem to indicate not how accomplished the artist was at
impressing me with a unique sound, but how that sound impressed
itself upon my mind.
The point that I'm trying to get to is that I take issue with the
exclusionist idea that everyone must fully justify what ultimately
are subjective opinions. The reason I have a problem with this is
that not everyone is fully capable of satisfying everyone else's
requirements in this regard.
For example, if I write in to the list that I just purchased some new
album, and then go on simply to say that I liked it and then compare
it briefly to some other artists -- this might not satisfy some of
you. You might want more specifics than simply "I liked it and it
reminded me of a cross between Squarepusher and Bola" or something
like that. Well, I'm sorry, but I don't have a knowledge of (or care
about) how this music is produced, nor do I have an extensive
knowledge of the history of this non-genre. Nor do I have more than
the most limited knowledge of music theory, nor can I say why I feel
Squarepusher is better than kid-606.
Such a statement would indicate an opinion anyway, not some sort of
fact. I would be saying that I enjoy Jenkinson's work more than the
kid's.
Should I be excluded from the list or harrassed because I couldn't
provide as "intelligent" an opinion as someone else would like? I
don't think so. My lack of advanced technical and theoretical
knowledge should not exclude me from expressing my likes and dislikes
with regards to new music. All you have to do is pay less importance
to my statement if it consists merely of "I didn't like this or
that." Anyway, short, negative comments are just as uninformative as
short, positive comments. If I write into the list saying "I just
got the new Bola track and I like it. Period." -- are you going to
go buy it just because of that? Of course not. It would be better
and more useful if I wrote more, but if I don't, at least you know
one more person liked this or that.
Finally, I'd like to clear up a wild misconception many people who
like IDM seem to have. The misconception I'm referring to is based
on the idea that "radical new advances in anything are usually
reacted to harshly by society at large at first, only to become
accepted later on, after the frontier has already advanced to the
next thing." Basically, this is true. But, first of all, something
new is not always an advance. Particularly in art, where ideas
evolve like species, and some are just bad and don't survive. New /=
better. Second -- and this follows from the first -- just because
people react negatively to something new does not mean it is an
advance and that they're just being closed-minded. Sometimes
something is really actually bad, even though it is new.
Perhaps "90% unlistenable" is a better thing for me to say about
Ischemic Folks than "mostly garbage," even though to me they're the
same. Regardless of how I say it, I think Ischemic Folks is a bad
release from an otherwise OK label, despite the fact that it was new
and complex. And that's how I feel about kid-606 and most of the new
"let's make noise" trend. I find it does not appeal to me, and I
don't think it's better than what has come before simply because a
lot of people don't like it.
--
Adam Piontek [
http://www.tcinternet.net/users/damek/]
ICQ: 3456339 [damek@earthling.net]
... As social beings we live with our eyes upon our reflection, but
have no assurance of the tranquillity of the waters in which we
see it. -- Charles Horton Cooley
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org
For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org