Clarification September 28
While Aaron might be right that there is probably more value in the music of some, what I was trying to say is that although I might value something more than something else, that doesn’t mean I have to like or listen to it. Yeah, The Clash were (one of) the first of their kind. I value their contribution because there have been some good bands influenced by them. The Beatles, obviously, contributed more to modern music than anyone else ever will. Dylan pretty much began the singer/songwriter genre (or at least made it known to the masses). The difference here is that the Beatles also were good singers, pretty solid musicians, and created an enjoyable experience with their songs. I would much rather hear The Byrds play songs written by Dylan than hear Dylan ruin his own songs with his unintelligible rambling and stripped down production. (Duck, flying objects towards my head are on their way). Zepplin were influential and good musicians, good at what they do, but that doesn’t mean I like them. I respect them though. Anyone who can make that many songs out of a blues riff and extended jamming at least has the patience to think about their songs.
On the other hand, I have this desire to not like these bands. I was thinking about the first bands to do this and that, and if I should merely acknowledge this fact or if I should appreciate and celebrate it. I thought of the first Rap pioneers. I thought of The Clash and the punk scene it helped create. I then thought of the New Kids on the Block. Should I feel the need to like or even appreciate a band that is responsible for three genres of music that I don’t like or appreciate? Rap, punk and boy band. The answer is not really. I can, as a reasonably intelligent person, trace the roots of bands to their influences, but that doesn’t mean just because someone did something first I have to listen to it.
When I started writing my original response to Tarr’s first post about this, I thought we were merely writing about what we liked to listen to. Obviously there is more value artistically in some music than others as an artform. Judged by critics and society of course, all relative to the listener and its judges. When I mentioned Tom Langford I thought I’d get a comment on that one, but my point was that there are obscure artists out there that don’t fit the mold of “hip” or “indie” that indie elitists seem to ignore because their music isn’t weird enough.
I then asked myself the question, why should I like something just because it was the first even if it’s not really better? I am gonna get a lot of slack for this, but I think Ryan Adams is better than Neil Young. I honestly do. I think the Counting Crows are better than the Grateful Dead. Do I think the stone wheel is better than a rubber tire? No. Do I think an inferior first model should be valued more than its improved counterpart? No I don’t. I think the original should be revered for starting an unfinished and unperfected genre and have a spot in history reserved for innovators.
I have no idea who that other painter guy was, but I do like Rembrandt. Basically, my problem with music critics and the intelligencia is that they try to make you feel inferior if you don’t like what you’re supposed to like. If I don’t like the Clash, I am a caveman. (Sorry Cavemen). If I don’t like Bob Dylan, I’m an idiot. If I don’t like Q and Not U, there is something wrong with me. While they say each is entitled to their own opinion, they don’t really mean it. While Aaron says he doesn’t believe me or Spencer about what we like, I don’t believe him when he says that he thinks it’s ok that I like Richard Marx. I think Aaron should look to his own lyrics in Cultured Capital and apply them to the world of musical criticism and take a bit of his own advice.
What has gotten lost in this discussion, for those still with us, is the fact that I do like intelligent complex music. I like some crap that I don’t even understand. I don’t like complication just for complication’s sake though. I think there is a balance that needs to be found. Jeff Buckley combined melody and complexity brilliantly. Radiohead sometimes does it, other times they are just asses. Wilco does it on occasion but mostly just likes to hear itself make weird noises for 7 minutes of self indulgence. Whatever the case, I don’t have anything against the bands. I get annoyed with their fans. I don’t like the Grateful Dead primarily because of their fans and how great they think the Dead is. Phish fans are the same. Anyways, I could go on forever about this but I have better things to do. At least there is some healthy debate going on and I’ve found something to agree upon with Spencer. Aaron is an ass sometimes.