But who says that those critera of "up-to-date-ness" or being in the "now" have any use for the people who like Banhart? The whole point I was trying to make is that the concept of being up-to-date is something that has no value to me at all as a music fan. Newness says nothing about the quality of the music regardless of whether or not the perceived newness is as you say supported by aesthetic criteria.
It's not like Reynolds is saying "y'know guys, I was really into dance music but now it's not moving fast enough so I'm gonna drop it all and get into speed metal/folk/etc!"
Well, maybe he should! I guess there are three possibilities as a listener here. You can decide that the music you're listening to is not mutating and moving fast enough and move onto something entirely different. You can remain faithful to a narrowly-defined aesthetic and simply lament that your chosen genre has ceased to grow and change. Or you could give up this whole idea of constant progressive change completely. The first two choices ultimately don't seem that different to me.
― walter kranz (walterkranz), Wednesday, 2 February 2005 22:05 (nineteen years ago) link
― youn, Tuesday, 22 November 2005 13:03 (eighteen years ago) link
― blunt (blunt), Tuesday, 22 November 2005 21:50 (eighteen years ago) link
Good times.
― Pete Scholtes, Wednesday, 23 November 2005 05:10 (eighteen years ago) link
― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 23:33 (eighteen years ago) link
― Konal Doddz (blueski), Tuesday, 14 March 2006 23:36 (eighteen years ago) link
WAHT IS DAHANCE MUSIK MADE?
― gershy, Sunday, 16 September 2007 02:50 (sixteen years ago) link
mayahoo, mayahee, mayaha, mayahaha
― hstencil, Sunday, 16 September 2007 04:11 (sixteen years ago) link