Quote:
Originally Posted by Shnabdabber
No, its not all opinion. Quality in music exists (or in Lady Gaga's case, doesn't) and while taste is certainly subjective, quality is not.
As for the comments regarding how popularity = junk, that's simply not true. There are acts out there that have had huge commercial success all the while producing art. I guess that's what's wrong with today's popular music. The bottom line to the major labels is more important than what music was intended for in the first place.
There is nothing about music that is created for the club scene that equals art. At all.
Step 1: Create simplistic beat that drunk people will be prone to dance to.
Step 2: Add meaningless, provocative lyrics.
Step 3: ?
Step 4: Profit.
It's a very standard formula that has been used over and over again. Hell, even Nicklebacks new junk is very basic 2-4 rock. Moreso than the old junk. It sucks. Why? It's easy to dance to. Add them to the group with Lady Gaga of "this has been done before". How is Lady Gaga doing anything that is progressing music forward?
And for all the people that say "if its so easy why don't you go make a number one hit?" Well I guess its cuz I don't have millions of dollars to sink into a marketing campaign. Too much of today's radio friendly music is given a fancy spit shine strait from the factory, placed in movies, car commercials, and marketed as "the new black" to young people. And then of course, everyone has to keep up with the joneses, the album moves a wack of units and if little Stacy down the street doesn't have a copy shes instantly a nerd. Does anyone here think its a coincidence that pop music is a big hit to the 16-25 year old demographic? Youth with disposable income, the average movie going crowd, ect?
I guess I look at it this way.
The book Twilight has sold over 17 million copies to date. Surely it must be great literature?
|
Twilight may be great literature to the 17 million people who bought it, who says it is not. Who decides on what is great? and how do they get to decide that?
Any type of art is completely subjective, there is no way to measure art. That can be actual paintings, music or literature.
It can be agreed upon many that certain stuff is good, and people can have opinions on what is good.
But to define certain songs/artists/books as factually better than others is ridiculous.