Television #3 Vs. Van Halen #73 Vs. Indie Music Cred Conditioning

i would just like to point out, in a general sense, that there are many arguments, the individual parts of which can be disproven when considered individually and seperate from the others, that nonetheless stand and are correct when taken as a whole.

......but it IS OK to start a thread where everyone gets to bash on Dave Matthews Band.

Contradiction? Hypocricy? Huh?

PS I think DMB sucks, but that's just my opinion....

But when people respond by disagreeing and forming some sort of argument in opposition to what you initially suggested, you act shocked. If you make a claim here or anywhere else on an open web board, generally speaking you can expect some people to disagree with you.

x-post: the person who most consistently misses the point on this thread is you, jsoulja. You didn't just question the place of a Television album on a music list, you presented a psychological theory about what led to it being chosen.

The thing I am shocked about is how so many people found it unfair for me to dare suggest that Television's place on that list was somehow a form of indie rock name-dropping, and that this concept itself could not possibly have been attempted by the likes of Pitchfork staffers. I just don't think it's a crazy idea.

And yes, Marcel, there IS some conditioning involved with DMB. Sure, I think they suck, but the frat stigma attached to them also plays a part, even if you never heard the music.

Amongst a stack of CDs purchased in the midst of two very fair and even-handed ILMers not even a month ago, one of them saw a Death Cab CD in my pile and immediately said "You're getting that for your girlfriend, right?" Right there you have an example of conditioning. And I'm guilty of it, too.

Van Halen, according to jsoulja's assumption (which I agree with) that many Pfork writers grew up with it and absorbed it way before ever hearing of Television (unless, of course, there are millions of undercover TV fans openly listening to Van Halen).

Extrinsic: Originating from the outside; external.

As in, "Television, on the other hand, probably came to them through magazines, friends, or other sources, all of which probably made great mention of the band's cult status and pretensions to high art. Unlike candy, Television might not have been easy to swallow."

I do like to use big words a little too much sometimes, but most of the times they do make some sort of twisted sense.

(None of which should be taken to mean that there's anything wrong with VH or liking them.)

(OT: OK, Chuck, you're right about "Cold As Ice".)

Yes, that is also a possibility. That's pretty much what happened to me. I'm just suggesting that Pfork writers' early infatuation with Van Halen, fueled by heavy radio play, seems to have much less impact on the top 100 list than their later discovery of Television.

Perhaps all the writers were indeed bright young things and recoiled from cock rock to embrace other sorts of music, but this entire thread has to rest on some basic assumptions, and I don't think it's a lost cause to assume that many Pitchfork writers like Van Halen, considering it beat almost thirty other great 70s albums. The question originally posed was "why TV over Van Halen, at such a numerical distance?"

If any of those writers "recoiled" from Van Halen, why does it belong on the list at all? And does anyone here really think the Pfork writers included that album because it was brainy? Um..."the worth in aerobic kicks and bare-chested catsuits" is the band's primary attraction, followed closely by the "big-grinned spirit." I'm not seeing any intellectualizing in that description.

Sundar: when I say "intrinsic" I mean that bond that people develop with massively popular songs during their childhood and early adolescence. Some of us may have started upon the road of music geekdom earlier than others, but it's a fair bet that anyone in my generation will remember Kriss Kross as being more of an impact on them than, say, Pavement. At least, until they got older and wiser (or discovered the revolutionary efficiency of wearing their pants with the zipper in front).

I do count anything foisted upon us by popular culture as more "intrinsic" simply because it's part of that cloud of white noise that surrounds us - most of it bad, but some of it good. I do think that even today people don't hear about Television from mainstream media, their knowledge of the band is much more filtered through friends, specific magazines, discussion boards, etc. Van Halen = populist, Television = elitist. I haven't read anything here that changes this basic assumption yet.

It's the same idea that Vice Magazine is built on. To label someone or something elitist often overlooks the context in which that judgement is made and within a circle as small as alternative music journalism, thumbs-up to Van Halen = elitism within the wider circle of alternative music fans.

New thread:

"Van Halen AND Television?" Are P-fork elitist trying to have it both ways?

First post:

"this thread is a dud no matter which side of the argument you take

Player Piano Gamelan"

over and out

Why is this even worth speculating about? As I pointed out yesterday, Television placing at number three was due to six voters out of fifteen putting MM in their top 15 (four out of fifteen in their top ten). Does it not suffice to think that MM is one of the great punk albums and one of the great guitar albums of the '70s?

And what's with this use of the term "elitist?" Liking Television is not intrinsically "elitist."

One only "tends toward elitism" if one is actually being elitist in liking something that's less popular. Obviously, it's not a given. A different term or way of talking about it would be in order.

is there anyone who debates this?

That said, I think I'm being unfair on myself. I conditioned myself againt it because I thought it was crap.

I love Marquee Moon a lot and it wouldn't surprise me that it turns up on lists higher than Van Halen. Particularly in the UK, where I think I'd be right in saying that TV ver more popular than Van Halen at that time.

I suppose it comes down to whether or not you believe people are telling the truth; and that's tricky.

Er.

I believe it was added to the Rhino reissue of the CD a couple years back, but it does pre-date MM by a couple of years.

Did I miss something there?

Carry on... ;)

Van Halen do strike me as an '80s metal band, in spirit if nothing else.

actually, i don't mind Van Halen (diamond dave era) much anymore.

And yet, Van Halen hired Marquee Moon producer Andy Johns to summon some big drums for their F.U.C.K. LP. Does that throw a wrench in things, or settle the score? Well, either way...

It's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to comeIt's undeniable that Van Halen dominated the course of rock music for almost a decade to come