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

x-post: Yeah the "sold out" thing was a little tongue-in-cheek too. But did they go in a much more mainstream direction after their first album?

Stupid. Of course it's because of conditioning. Taste is because of conditioning. Your thesis sucks because a) 'types' of music cred conditioning (ie the indie type) would be so hard to define that they're usless and b) you're making typical assumptions about a list that was compiled from many sources and generalizing about the "majority" of voters

Sorry to get all sociological on you indie fuxx, but this thread is so fucking tired

For the record, I much prefer Tom Verlaine's guitar playing to Eddie Van Halen's, and that's why I like Marquee Moon better. Although, on a cursory listen I might enjoy VH better, I've spent years falling in love with the performances and songs on MM and I don't think I would bother putting the same effort into Van Halen.

And yes, ranking Television so high simply reflects current tastes among the hipster set. In the unlikely event that prog becomes chic and there's a huge revival, you can bet Genesis and King Crimson would be near the top of the list with Caravan and Gentle Giant ranked high. But because punk, post punk, and glam are the chief influences of many of the current indie bands we're all supposed to praise, the heroes of those scenes will sit on the throne.

Personally, I hate Van Halen, but that's pretty subjective. The idea of making a list to reflect my tastes seems like an idiotic waste of time. But so long as we read Top 100 lists, critics will produce them.

I can intellectualize music on my own time- why subject the world to it unless it has a genuinely constructive purpose?

As long as we're willing to call these lists conversational entertainment, I'm ok with them

i can relate to the general premise above because i think mm is the "get out of jail free" cred card to play in crit monopoly. it's one of the man goober things you use so you don't have sit there trying to roll doubles and eventually pay $50 when you can't think of anything more shocking or noncanonical to put down in a top 100 list.

i actually prefer richard hell and voidoids better, but hey, my point: "HOT FOR MOTHACRACKIN TEACHER!"

dude,
m.

Sonny A. is OTM as far as taste is concerned, though this quote is missing an important part of the entire indie "psychological profile" (at the risk of being arbitrary). Sure, an up and coming indie/hipster/intellectual music listener will probably know a great deal about Marquee Moon's reputation even before they hear the goddamn album, and will therefore be pressured in some unmeasurable way to like it.

But an equally important part of taste-making is not just what you're pressured to listen to, but what you choose to listen to in the first place. As Sonny points out, everyone will devote different amounts of time to different bands based on individual taste. I used to listen to Sgt. Pepper while doing art projects in high school, and no matter how much I read about George Harrison's noble experimentation with the sitar, I refused to listen to "Within you/without you" after a few times. It might be the greatest song on the album if I give it time - I really don't know, or care. But the point is, musical taste is not just about what groups one is pressured to like; it's about the time and effort you want to invest in listening to music for appreciation as opposed to pleasure.

You say that "an equally important part of taste-making is not just what you're pressured to listen to, but what you choose to listen to in the first place." But how is this choice made? You have to hear about an artist first somewhere.

I just find the suggetion that there are people who read about Marquee Moon, buy it, don't really like it, and yet nevertheless represent it as being great to be questionable. Are people that cowed by others' opinions that they don't venture to speak up for themselves?

People aren't universally cowed by others' opinions but there's certainly a degree of uniformity involved. And if you're self-conscious to any degree whatsoever, you're going to feel somewhat defensive about making a top-100 albums list, and you will put certain albums in there no matter what. Who was surprised by London Calling?

I suppose when I say that it's important "what you choose to listen top in the first place," I mean that even aside from all the outside factors, on some gut level people's musical taste is based on what they like. No matter how influenced you are by critics, you might prefer 80's indie to 70's punk, or whatever. Every time you make a choice as to what to listen to, or what to purchase, you're making an equal choice to NOT listen to or purchase something else.

Um, yeah Tim, they are. Look at the entire fucking Democratic Senate during the Clinton impeachment, the certification of the 2000 election, the signing of the Patriot Act, the drum beat to war with Iraq. Educated people quite often roll over for fear of being the only voice of dissent.

So we can assume that via the inclusion of plenty of Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, and the like, Pforkers (at least I'm not calling them "Porkers") probably caught on to the rock/metal dynasties far ahead of the likes of Television, Wire, and the like

I don't think this naturally follows. Not necessarily anyway, because it probably does for some people. I got into both Led Zeppelin and old REM around the same time and loved both. The glossiness, the 'party mentality', the flash, and the near-total absence of blues or folk roots in VH makes them somewhat alien from both. Someone who values looseness, improvisation, earthiness, and noise in rock could easily find lots to love in Zeppelin and Hendrix as well as Husker Du and Sonic Youth but not necesarily in Van Halen.

jsoulja, I think this just happens to be your perspective. There has been no talk about HOW the first Van Halen album is thought to be better than Marquee Moon. I haven't heard the VH album in a long time, but if asked for an immediate reaction, I'd say that I honestly think that Marquee Moon is better.

And your comparison of critics to politicians was loaded.

By the way, we're talking about only six pitchfork writers out of fifteen who had MM in their top 15, four of whom had it in their top 10.

X-POST

That's actually really surprising. It seems that almost everyone I know in their 30s who's not an ILx poster was into them. And a lot of people in their 20s seem to be into the Hagar era. Are you in the UK? Did they not make as big a splash there?

Excellent point. So how does it end up #3? Even if you do the math, there had to be some allowances somewhere in the equation, and that is the heart of what I'm arguing.

And fine, even if you don't agree with me, it's lame to say the thread is a dud, because you were or are reading it.

Major problems I have with ILMers:

-Not enough response arguments or backing up of declarations.

-Making your argument "Yeah, well that's YOUR opinion!" (So weak...)

-Disclaiming the thread with "This thread is a dud." (Ok, off you go....)

Marquee Moon > Bitches Brew and Exile On Main St. = BULLSHIT

No fucking way that record is better than those two (among others), nor did it have anywhere near the impact, either at the time or posthumously. There you have two major milestones in music history by artists that Television can't even come close to touching. Really. It would be like saying Bret Easton Ellis's "Less Than Zero" is a better and more relevant existential novel than Camus's "The Stranger". Or easier: it's like saying that Dr. Octagon's debut (me being lazy) tops Paid In Full and It Takes A Nation....

Nope. No way. Not even close.

I really wanted to make my point with Van Halen alone, but there it is. Definitive proof. Sorry to the doubters and haters, but you LOSE.

When I heared Marquee Moon for the first time (ten stars for the single in Record Mirror (top mark was five)), it spoke to me directly. It took no smokes.

A friend bought the Van Halen album round, yes about the same time. I have no recollection of the album itself, only I remember thinking "This is well done, but I don't like it much".

I didn't not like it because it was well done, btw.

Van Halen always struck me as pathetic cock rock. That they are even being mentioned in the smae breath as Television puzzles me. But horses for courses eh?

fite!

yeah, "right now" is ASS PIMPLE CHEESE on crackers. indie cred aside, television on their worst night ever (drunk, asleep, and quadraplegic) is > van hagar.

seriously tho, the fist pumping fury of "hot for teacher man"... how can that be dull? have you no gutt? you're not deaf by chance? joke! bad joke. sorry. you're entitled to level it of course.
m.

oh boy.
m.

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