Hilary Duff: Joy for pre-teens, not just Humbert Humbert

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (876 of them)

I'm not talking so much about smirking appreciation though - unless you think this is a derivation from the gay man's appreciation of kitsch - most of my gay friends (myself to a lesser extent) really do honest to goodness love even the worst kylie singles, there's not really anything ironic about their appreciation, even thought there's a level of deliberation and self-awareness

Oh, I know: I was imprecise. I meant that as these ideas disseminate into culture at large they become debased, and at their most debased they assume the oh-so-hip distance I described. I would never suggest that you (or I, for that matter) love Kylie "ironically," whatever that means.

(My moment of pop transfiguration occurred over "Careless Whisper" and Debbie Gibson's "Out of the Blue)

― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 22:41 (sixteen years ago) link

i was lucky enough to have gay best friends in high school. no need to hide my bananarama love.

― scott seward, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 22:44 (sixteen years ago) link

my best friend lance was the only person on earth i could talk to about various forms of pop until i met chuck! it was hard to find wide boy awake fans before the internet.

― scott seward, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 22:46 (sixteen years ago) link

'you're beautiful' is a good tune man

why hate

― r|t|c, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:02 (sixteen years ago) link

Late to the party but…
Teenpop is the only ILM thread I actually read because of it's assorted earnestness/frothiness/focus etc. 696 has it nailed I think about legitimacy, in that the teenpop thread - by virtue of the pool of posters - has created a 'safe' environment where the songs can be explored without having to fight the first battle of 'why do you think this is worth discussing?'. And since such critical space, (esp in an ILM context) is rare, there is a certain amount of defensiveness when the activities of that 'safe space' get questioned/attacked outside the thread. After all, without the teenpop thread, where will any of us get to talk about these things? (aside from dabug's blog comments, etc). Is there even anywhere else?

i dont think this is true really. Esp. not the part i bolded. I think we just write about it differently in other parts of ILM. There's a tendency for folks in the rap thread to say things like "[x] is actually pretty good!" with might have a degree of faux-surprise in it, like who is really surprised by good things coming from random places after having been thru the whole anti-rockism thing before? People in the rolling hip-hop threads talk about snap and backpacker shit in the same thread, and generally seem to have an openmindedness about different kinds of music being taken seriously.

― deej, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:15 (sixteen years ago) link

"WHICH might have a degree of RESTRAINED faux-surprise," i should say

― deej, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:16 (sixteen years ago) link

deej what on earth do you think the last 300 posts have been about if not whether teenpop is worth discussing or not? if that's not the issue and we've all been there and done that w/ the rockism argument (which is patently not true, you and i may have but ilm 2007 seems more behind than ever on it, some of the evidence being on this very thread) then why are people so bothered by the teenpop thread's existence?

― lex pretend, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:23 (sixteen years ago) link

also i am going to go to sleep now.

― lex pretend, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:23 (sixteen years ago) link

there were problematic parts of a couple people's arguments but i don't think myself, or Al, or jess, or Dom, or whoever else were being rockist when we were explaining why we aren't engaged by the teenpop thread. Of course the music is 'legitimate' to enjoy - in fact, most of us said that we enjoy a fair amount of it. our issues were with the tone of the thread, the tone of the criticism, the amount of focus and the style of writing that seemed over the top.

― deej, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:25 (sixteen years ago) link

Now there is earnestness in the teenpop thread that you don't get elsewhere, that i agree about. but ilm is largely open to people saying shit like 'this paris hilton song is pretty good,' or they were until paris hilton became a running joke for lexbot

― deej, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:27 (sixteen years ago) link

no offense

― deej, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:33 (sixteen years ago) link

xpost

Pleasant dreams, Lex.

Teenpop is very much worth discussing, and I (partially) said way, way upthread that my handful of occasions wading through the 2006/2007 teenpop threads have been, on the whole, more enjoyable than actually wading through the music.

I just turned 44 recently; I've been aware of listening to music for 41 years; I've been passionately listening since around the time of the first Ramones LP. Anything new that I hear in the pop/rock space has to compete with my personal elephant-in-the-room: that last 30+ years of passionate, omnivorous listening; my own subjective canon. (The young target-audience doesn't have to deal with such an elephant, I'd imagine.) The artists discussed in the teenpop thread fail my tests, so far. But please keep discussing.

(And, yes, Mingus wipes the floor with everybody discussed in this thread.)

― mark 0, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:37 (sixteen years ago) link

Of course the music is 'legitimate' to enjoy - in fact, most of us said that we enjoy a fair amount of it. our issues were with the tone of the thread, the tone of the criticism, the amount of focus and the style of writing that seemed over the top.

So you're saying that teenpop music is legitimate, but the teenpop thread discussion is illegitimate, ie, not what you consider to be 'proper' in tone, focus and style?

― Poptext, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 23:52 (sixteen years ago) link

i dont think folks consider it 'illegitimate,' more 'corny,' 'creepy,' 'humorless,' etc etc etc

― deej, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 00:06 (sixteen years ago) link

I dunno Deej, I don't mean to single out Alex but even a fairly innocuous and tossed off statement like:

"every time I start to see someone's point, they rep for something like "Beat Of My Heart," which is one of the worst songs I've ever heard."

... implies to me that the basis for determining whether what people say in (or in defence of) the teenpop thread is legitimate depends on his decision of the worth of the music involved.

The equivalent would be me saying "you know, I could almost appreciate why people might take hip hop seriously and discuss it in a thread, until I hear someone rep for "Laffy Taffy", which is one of the worst songs I've ever heard."

As if someone liking a particular song could crucially undermine the legitimacy of an entire discourse around a genre.

― Tim F, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 00:19 (sixteen years ago) link

In sum, why do I, as someone who likes some teenpop, have to answer for every sceptic's non-enjoyment of a given example of the genre?

― Tim F, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 00:21 (sixteen years ago) link

i don't know if that equivalency holds up, because i don't think al was questioning people taking teen pop seriously or discussing it in a thread - it wasn't the concept that bothers people, its the execution.

― deej, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 00:34 (sixteen years ago) link

but i'll let him defend himself

― deej, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 00:35 (sixteen years ago) link

I don't think the "point" Al almost was getting was "taking the genre seriously and discussing it in a thread."

― da croupier, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 01:06 (sixteen years ago) link

Now it's been like 400 posts without getting past "creepy." I'm really getting exasperated about this! No one has made an argument actually originating from the thread for humorlessness, creepiness, frothiness...and I didn't even think corny had come up until now, but no examples of that, either. (Unless the music itself is what's corny, in which case, I'll just echo what Tim said.)

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 01:09 (sixteen years ago) link

(sorry, 500.)

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 01:09 (sixteen years ago) link

really, the problem is that some ILX yuksters are unsurprisingly making fun of some rather earnest people, who are unsurprisingly taking it rather seriously.

― da croupier, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 01:20 (sixteen years ago) link

Not exactly. I can sort of brush off pedophilia accusations that I know are idiotic (though, again, I've also run across some fairly serious accusations of this, though not necessarily by anyone on this thread). But there really does seem to be a genuine, pervasive sense among a lot of non-posters that there's something inherently creepy about what we're doing over there! Like just under the surface, something disturbing is happening. I think I have every right to take this seriously, because (1) it's being charged (fairly) seriously and "felt out" (fairly) seriously ("hm, let me try to more eloquently articulate why I think these guys [and gals] creep me out..."), and (2) the underlying point -- that, even if there's not something wrong with what we're talking about, there's something wrong with how we're talking about it -- is completely the opposite goal (as I see it) of the thread existing in the first place. I.e., it's a place where we can try out ideas (about a wide range of music) without an accusatory or arms-crossed skeptical or uncomfortable tone mucking up the flow of conversation or personally offending anyone. (And yes, I do get personally offended when people even jokingly refer to me as a pedophile, or when they indirectly call me "creepy" without making any kind of legitimate argument for creepiness; I don't think this is just how "rather earnest" people tend to react.)

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 01:29 (sixteen years ago) link

Damn I thought I was done with this, obviously not, but what the hell...I also take the charge of humorlessness seriously! (I'm very serious about humor.) Like, I can't even make an X-FILES joke around here without a handy link to Wikipedia to explain the joke I was trying to make. (Confusion, maybe, fine, but that Skye pic is GOLD.) We were imagining a Takashi Miike/Kelly Clarkson collab the other day over there. That's funny!

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 01:38 (sixteen years ago) link

it's a place where we can try out ideas (about a wide range of music) without an accusatory or arms-crossed skeptical or uncomfortable tone mucking up the flow of conversation or personally offending anyone.

yeah, good luck with that.

― da croupier, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:00 (sixteen years ago) link

yeah I wasn't using "Beat Of My Heart" as an example of why all teenpop's crap/not worth discussing, just saying that every time someone seemed to be talking some sense, the example they'd hold up in a positive light would be the last possible song I'd think of as a credit to the subgenre.

― Alex in Baltimore, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:30 (sixteen years ago) link

(We've been having pretty good luck with it! I've never heard complaints like this within the thread itself, despite the fact that some of the people voicing their concerns here post there occasionally. But then I don't think you'd get too far with most of these arguments on the teenpop thread.)

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:37 (sixteen years ago) link

I wouldn't post negative stuff there because it would spoil the sanctity of the thread.

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:39 (sixteen years ago) link

yeah, fwiw, i don't want to seem chickenshit for only voicing these opinions outside the actual teenpop thread, but it does feel at least slightly less rude than coming in and fucking shit up in there with this kind of long debate. contrary to the impression i might've given the lex or whoever, i have no problem with the thread existing and don't wish to shut it down. (xpost)

― Alex in Baltimore, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:42 (sixteen years ago) link

sanctity of the thread

Oh c'mon, it's not like I'm talking about it like an island paradise here (maybe comparatively). I don't think there's anything wrong with a place where there's very little unpleasant skepticism (not to say there isn't plenty of skepticism, just that posters are trying to understand each other's terms rather than immediately trying to figure out what's WRONG with what the other person is saying without reading carefully, or at all) or snark or accusations being flung around all over the place.

If you post something negative about an ARTIST there, you're just part of the conversation. This happens all the time. If you post something negative about a poster, or about something the poster has said, you'd better have an argument to back it up, or at least be engaging with said argument and not just a vague (and probably uninformed) idea that there's something wrong with the person.

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:47 (sixteen years ago) link

And I know I'm clogging this thing up with plenty of my own posts about this when I could have just gone back to the teenpop thread already, which otherwise is pretty much the only place I post around here (to avoid wasting people's time who honestly don't care so much; this thread is obviously an exception). Anyway, Alex, I appreciate you having this conversation, because this is as close to an "outside world" as the teenpop thread tends to get, and if there's animosity or incredulity or a general feeling of "creepy" here, I really want to know why.

What I don't want to happen is for some people to say "fine, whatever" and go back to what they were doing, and other people say, "post where you wanna post, free country" and have the central issues that have come up over the course of this thread just go back to being unspoken and implied, coming out occasionally in jokes.

I'd LOVE for more negative things to happen on the thread (there are plenty of negative opinions already) -- but on the thread's terms, which means you have to really justify "creepy" or "humorless," preferably by quoting an example of it at least once. One reason it's so insular lately is because of this weird sense of trepidation people get to entering it at all. Or not wanting to post something there "on principle," though they might like some of the music discussed there, when there really isn't much of a principle involved.

― dabug, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 02:54 (sixteen years ago) link

http://sandbox.thehold.net/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=142&threadid=565

― bobby bedelia, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 03:09 (sixteen years ago) link

the creepy accusations don't actually bother me - look who is making them! inadequates like dom and personality vacuums like bobby bedelia. though maybe this is because they're probably not aimed at me (unless accusers are really thick) (so i guess they might be after all).

but ilm is largely open to people saying shit like 'this paris hilton song is pretty good,' or they were until paris hilton became a running joke for lexbot

explain how paris hilton is a running joke for me? i think the album is amazing - i've seen much worse crap get gushed about far more on ilm. it's hardly the only album i've raved about excitably!

also is anyone actually going to respond to what tim f said?

― lex pretend, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:45 (sixteen years ago) link

its a running joke because any thread with paris on immediately becomes a lex thread. she should hire you!

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:52 (sixteen years ago) link

So... music has nothing to do with context?

I would think that music has one context: silence. All other notions of context are tied to things that are tangential to the actual music.

My concern is far more with all those pitched and non-pitched notes (some of which themselves may spawn internal contexts -- e.g. chords, rhythms -- for other notes) than with those things that are tangential.

(To belatedly answer your question.)

Lex: Tim F said a lot of things. I've already denied being Michael Franti; can you be more specific?

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:52 (sixteen years ago) link

^^^ umm context is tangential, or at least not central. thats why its called context!

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:54 (sixteen years ago) link

Tangents to tangents, then.

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:55 (sixteen years ago) link

i like my dinner, the fish and rice is the main thing. to be honest i really like tilapia with rice and thats what im most concerned with. much more so than tangential things like the onions and the mushrooms

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:55 (sixteen years ago) link

perhaps i will eat a piece of fish by itself tomorrow

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:56 (sixteen years ago) link

i heard a song on the radio the other day, i felt sad all of a sudden. ambushed by unexpected emotion

it was the song that was playing the day i met her:(

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:57 (sixteen years ago) link

We've strayed far from the actual notes.

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:58 (sixteen years ago) link

i think it must have been the diminished fourth that got me though. i hated that bitch

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:58 (sixteen years ago) link

yea exactly, i realised soon after it was ridiculuous!

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 05:58 (sixteen years ago) link

Diminished fourths don't get 600 posts.

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:00 (sixteen years ago) link

no but what i mean is. i thought i felt sad because a song reminded me of something (this nebuluous 'context', or personal identification/resonance or some bullshit), when, really, that had nothing to do with it. it was simply the notes, as i was telling geir the other day

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:02 (sixteen years ago) link

and she wasnt even that pretty, if im being totally truthful

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:03 (sixteen years ago) link

My notion of "context", admittedly, comes more from software than from whatever it was they slipped into your meal.

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:05 (sixteen years ago) link

But hopefully it explains the disconnect betwixt me and Mordecai, and betwixt me and you.

― mark 0, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:06 (sixteen years ago) link

ok, sorry, missed that bit:)

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:06 (sixteen years ago) link

no not necessarily. can you explain what it is you are thinking is tangential then?

― 696, Wednesday, 16 May 2007 06:07 (sixteen years ago) link

Skipping 776 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.