Stuart Gardiner wrote:
On Sun, 30 Nov 1997, Jamie Huxley wrote:
"The closest thing to heaven is rock 'n' roll"
Discuss
don't think it is possible to differentiate between rock and pop (ie popular) music. However I do think you can differentiate between rock and POP! (ie deliberately populist) music.
argh! So now we also have a distinction between Pops!! Phew... i'm not into it though. Not at all. I don't define Pop as being a shortened version of anything, be it 'popular' (where do you define the line between not popular and popular? is it in terms of 'sales', if so, what number?) nor 'populist' (by whose definition? is this also tied to sales figures? if B&S then go in to sell millions of record are they too 'populist'?). It's simply(?) a personal evaluation of the state you might be in a certain moment, in response to a stimulant.... usually aural :-) And i happen to believe it's to do with what i talked about before...
That's why B&S would say they had rock influences, because they have never written music purely because they think it will be popular (as people like the Spice Girls or Wet Wet Wet do); they write it because they like it, it does something for them.
this is cruelly unfair on Spice Girls or Wet Wet Wet, because who are you to say that when they write or perform a song it is not also 'doing something for them'? Or to the fans who embrace their noises and who also will tell you that the noise 'does something for them'? Are you calling these people stupid simply because they don't like the same music as you do? Dangerous ground...
There seems to be a great confusion over what pop means, because someone like Radiohead are popular without being populist.
ah, but they ARE... because by their very actions they conform to a set of fairly strictly written traditional rock rules. They also sell a lot of records...
Similarly Bon Jovi produce populist rock, whereas Iron Maiden simply produce popular rock. There are no clearcut definitions, no exact opposites;
but there ARE clear distinctions and exact opposites, the point is that everyone has their own idas about what they are, because everyone defines their Pop for themselves, regardless of sales figures and perceived ideas about the reasons for an artefact being produced in the first place.
Forgive my ramblings, forgive me if I appear to have contradicted myself,
contradictions are intrinsic to Pop, you have to embrace them for it to make any sort of sense... i discovered this as i grew older :-)
but I think things like this are very hard to put into words; music is all about feelings,
which is why the definitions about what makes a certain noise 'Pop' or not is entirely personal, and why global distinctions are ultimately irrevelvant.
I just think it's worth trying.
ditto. and the very fact that we try is surely proof of our continued delight at the fact that noise can make us so excited and inspired. long may it continue! keep the faith, the duke -- Tangents On-Line http://www.virtual-pc.com/tangent/ Tangents On-Paper: PO Box 102, Exeter, EX2 4YL, UK tangent@mail.zynet.co.uk ----------------------------------------------------------------------- . This message was brought to you by the Sinister mailing list. . To send to the list please mail "sinister@majordomo.net". . For subscribing, unsubscribing and other list information please see . http://www.majordomo.net/sinister . For questions about how the list works mail owner-sinister@majordomo.net . We're all happy bunnies humming happy bunny tunes. Aren't we? -----------------------------------------------------------------------