2010-08-05, 01:25 AM
Swerve Wrote:I don't understand. You believe that there are characteristics behind "bad" music that can be recognized on some absolute level by all humans. Yet you also push the fact that music is subjective to every individual. Absolute + subjective interpretation by definition are not supposed to mix together at all. When you introduce a subjective element to an absolute, then you usually just get a subjective result. Absolutes are absolute for a reason.
Eminem in many of his songs, like "Sing for the Moment", frequently address his audience as being spoiled middle-class suburban kids. I personally have a mixed taste ranging from classical to electric pop to hip-hop. I think that the internet has been crucial in helping me develop a diverse taste in music that I would not normally access without online services. If I could propose another theory on how socioeconomic factors affect music, I would argue that the economy plays a role in determining the preference to certain music pieces.
As observed, Lady Gaga is able to take the electric thrills from her arrangement and play them as semi-classical arrangement. Why doesn't she? The New York Times in their article, "Girl Pop's Lady Gaga Makeover," the author notes that artist Sarah McLachlan attempted to set on tour with a series of introspective and thought-felt songs for her 2010 tour. The concert flopped and the article quickly compared her results with the Lady Gaga extravaganzas. In short, the author didn't note this, but it has been stated that Lady Gaga's loud electronica beat was the bourbon to nurse the wounds of a bad economy and hard times. The last thing people wanted to listen to was music that tried to encapsulate feelings, emotions, and inner introspection. When times are tough, no one has the heart to... well, listen to their heart. After all, if you're going to waste time listening to something when you're already being worked and pushed 24/7, it might as well be something loud, flashy, and entertaining. Hence Lady Gaga.
I'll respond to each paragraph separately:
1. What I meant by the "bad" song, is that you can pick out characteristics of a song that aren't good. For example, you could catch someone singing off pitch, or one of the instrumentalists not being very good/missing notes, etc etc. I guess I should have clarified.
2. I don't see the point you are trying to make. Were you agreeing with my statement? The reason that some spoiled middle-class suburban kids might like Eminem is because, well, they were raised as spoiled middle-class kids living in a suburb.
3. This is defying all logic though. If you were stressed and being worked from all levels, wouldn't the most efficient solution be to listen to something to make you relaxed? Like something calming, IE Classical music? I would hardly consider loud and flashy music soothing. In fact, it would just make you more worked up.
Edit: I guess it's really just about how your brain is wired, and also how you act/personality. I'm, for instance, a hipster/indie kid and I generally gravitate towards indie music as a result. I'm sure that you would find skaters tend to gravitate towards punk music, and so on. I believe it's the person that makes the music, not the music that makes the person. It's also about how you interpret and hear music, and what emotions certain chords evoke in you. Just my two cents.