theo parrish s/d

max, I don't really know how to respond. I'd just repeat that everything should be taken in its context - there is a "best" for peaktime at clubs, and a "best" for lazy Sunday mornings, and whether you like the track or not is often dependent on your exposure to those situations.

I'm again putting all varieties of music onto one one iPod and listening for the same things from them. That's what the phrase "radical subjectivity" conjures up to me: a dude with an iPod moving through the city listening to all these different kind of musics, totally oblivious to the purpose of the music, and the world around him.

-- pipecock

^ coming from a white person, i love it.

"I'm again putting all varieties of music onto one one iPod and listening for the same things from them. That's what the phrase "radical subjectivity" conjures up to me: a dude with an iPod moving through the city listening to all these different kind of musics, totally oblivious to the purpose of the music, and the world around him."

Good dog this is doing some pretty heavy leaning on the notion of subjectivity.

it's kinda like saying "what bugs me about the concept of democracy is that in the US only extremists on either side vote!"

To which everyone responds, "b-b-but what does that have to do with the concept of democracy?"

Surely the entire point of (what you are choosing to call) "radical subjectivity" as applied to music is that we are never "listening for the same things" from different pieces of music, that there are as many "best" musics for different situations as there are situations.

there is a "best" for peaktime at clubs

and is this the same whether you're at the sound factory or the music box?

and if so, could we decide which is better?

(obv. my hypothetical claim re voting patterns in the US also isn't true, I was just offering up a counter-strawman)

The thread is moving away from the issue now but one thing I wanted to add w/r/t tricky's strawsoulwoman is that she implies the assumption that anything that actually inspires good art has some kind of independent truth value - that if she tries to make "soulful" music and this results in actually good music, then her concept of "soul" has legitimacy, at least at some level.

In effect this equates sincerity with truth.

I suppose an analogy would be saying that the great works of religious art, having been inspired by the creator's relationship with God, offer some level of legitimacy to the notion of God's incontrovertible existence.

And certainly many people would say that you can't really "get" religious art without sharing in its beliefs and intentions (this is a different and more limited claim however).

For me there is no contradiction in saying I disbelieve in God but think that much religious art is brilliant. To which Michaelangelo responds ""talk to the hand motherfucker you don't know shit about God."

And certainly art criticism today does not by and large parrot the notion that the masters of the renaissance were inspired by God to greater or lesser degrees (I'm leaving aside entirely the possibility that some only painted religious scenes due to social expectation anyway) - what was once seen as divine inspiration is now considered to be a matter of technique etc.

well, i think you can find some nuance in there.

great works of religious art basically *are* the creator's relationship with god and are not just evidence of god's existence but they make up basically make up all we know about god.

that's what i think anyway.

i think roughly the same thing about soul and soul music. soul's not some thing that has any reality outside the performance of soul.

"To take a language example: little kids laugh at crap jokes. Does that mean these jokes are funny? Not really. What’s really going on is that the kids have never been exposed to the jokes before, therefore they laugh. “Knock knock” “Who’s there?” “Dr” “Dr Who?”. The first time, ha ha. Now you’ve heard it 1000 times, it’s like white noise. It’s not a matter of objective/subjective, it’s a matter of more information – being exposed to memes in the culture."

Good dog this implies that there's finally a point where you "get" humour objectively. But isn't it true that the humour value of all jokes is contextual? The "best" joke in the world starts to drag on the fifth laboured retelling, at which point the little kid's toilet humour might become quite refreshing. And there are many celebrated comedians who many people claim "aren't funny" - they're not necessarily ignorant critics either, comedians call eachother out for being not funny all the time. This is why we talk about someone's "unusual sense of humour" - humour is very deeply bound up in a person's individuality, their life experience, their cultural affiliations, their politics etc. etc.

Your notion of some sort of teleology of humour (from knock knocks to woody allen, say) doesn't reflect the existence of some sort of platonic ideal joke, just the fact that our process of education and enculturation is often very similar. Ironically, it is at the knock knock stage that humour appears most objective: that is the stage when the same joke is likeliest to be funny to the entire community of participants (little kids). As we grow older we find less and less consensus w/r/t to what constitutes a good joke.

I'm astonished that you've tried to use humour as your example here because I can't think of any aspect of cultural life that is more obviously subjective!

BOURDIEU TO THREAD OBV!

"i think roughly the same thing about soul and soul music. soul's not some thing that has any reality outside the performance of soul."

yes I absolutely agree with this actually. Perhaps the most amazing thing about aesthetic production is that it can give life to something that may not exist independently.

I was thinking about your raising of slash fiction earlier actually. There's an underlying assumption at work when we sit down to write slash fiction based on actual fiction (rather than, say, real life celebrities) that the characters have some life outside of the artwork in which they appear. It would be absurd to say that the amount of slash fiction devoted to Spock and Kirk is testament to the fact of their existence. But I think it's true to say that Spock and Kirk have a kind of "spectral" existence in that they can enter into new pieces of art entirely independently from the circumstances of their original creation.

"the most amazing thing" is an unsubstantiated claim that I haven't thought about deeply so don't go the hack plz.

re: joeks.

oh man, my dad told the worst joke at dinner tonight.

"this guy goes out to dinner, and has a really great meal. and the bill comes back: one dollar. he figures it's a mistake, but he doesn't say anything. he feels guilty, so the next night, he comes back, but he brings his family to make up for it. they eat a lavish meal, with wine, and the bill comes back: one dollar. he can't figure it out. so the next night, he brings the whole office! and they eat a thousand dollars worth of food. and finally the waiter brings the bill around: one dollar. so he goes to the manager, and says, 'hey boss, i can't figure it out, seems like no matter what i order it comes out to one dollar.' and the manager says 'that's right.' and the guy says 'well, you can't be making any money!' and the manager says 'that's right.' and the guy says 'well, how come you're doing this?' and the manager says 'well, the owner's fucking my wife.'"

jeez, dad.

just as an example of a joke that's like, mature in every way, includes all the various adult joke-memes and structures, but totally stinks. and my dad was telling it so well, that i was totally primed for like the most hilarious punchline ever, too.

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to come up with a punchline that redeems that joke.

The build-up had me primed too and I knew in advance that I was in for a let-down!

"the most amazing thing" is an unsubstantiated claim that I haven't thought about deeply so don't go the hack plz.

when i was younger i was actually quite religious. and people around me would say things like "when we prays as a community, i can feel god in the room". and later in life, when i lost my faith in god, i realized they were right. we entered as a group into a ritual, that gave us a particular feeling, and we called that god. and i still feel that way on the very rare occasions that i attend a religious service with my parents. because we're the mystical part (that's an adjective reserved for people, right?): the power in the observance comes from our entering into a contract in the ritual. i know that because i get quite a kick out of the service, even though i don't believe in god, whereas i do believe in the ritual. and i know people who claim to believe in god but don't buy into the ritual who don't get a damn thing out of it. anyway, i hope that's clear what i'm trying to say. all we know about god is from our performance of these rituals, and so it's no surprise that we confuse our feelings during that moment with the thing itself.

^^ this is basically music consumption, right?

maybe i am getting a little carried away here

I dig that analogy.

no I think you're right vahid! And to bring the argument full-circle, the truth of "god being in the room" is basically the "truth" that I would say resides in gatekeeper militancy. It's the truth that the performance of ritual engenders belief. That belonging to a community with a shared understanding is what gives that understanding "truth" rather than truth being the litmus test for adopting that understanding in the first place.

The argument for buying into any form of gatekeeper militancy is basically the same one used to encourage non-believers to join institutionalized churches: if you act as if you belief and engage in all the rituals that reflect this, those very ritualized acts will create a sense of belief in you. And a lot of music fandom does work like this: people buy Astral Weeks (or, ha ha, Parallel Dimensions - which I do love) and listen to it again and again until they too can hear what all the great critics hear.

what did my old sunday school teacher (now sadly dying of alzheimers, i should give him a call while he still remembers me) used to say about prayer? "you know, this stuff tends to work better when you really believe in it."

the strange thing for me is my sense that certain music seems to reward this more. i have no idea if this is true, or just some weird bias. for example, underground resistance seems to reward this attitude much better than, uh, fischerspooner. though maybe with fischerspooner it's another kind of participation. maybe not so much "true believer" as "i'm in on the joke".

The music/religion analogy works very well - the context is the thing.

I'm just wary of the alternatives though - the last thing dance music needs a criticism that doesn't go to church on Sunday mornings

Tim F. acts as though the "community" comes to a shared understanding arbitrarily. That is not the case, the values and interests of the community manifest themselves in its output. It isnt one person or even a small group of people who make the criteria for something being "good", it is a huge group of people and experiences of those people (some of whom could be dead if the community has existed for a substantial amount of time). This means it can and does change with time, that is the nature of it. But what I feel has happened in the case of the popularity of some musics is that these values are ignored by people outside the community who try to get in on their idea. This can sometimes lead to interesting results, other times to derivative but inferior copies. I think you can guess which I feel is more prevalent. That music which comes from outside the community is then judged by that community's standards, some is adopted and becomes part of that community's constant inner dialogue. That which is not assimilated back into the community often comes back claiming the name given to it but without the values that come with that name. It seems obvious to me why that would irritate people.

This is not to say that an individual or even a subgroup of that community doesnt disagree with the community at large's decision, but that still doesnt change the decision.

This can sometimes lead to interesting results, other times to derivative but inferior copies.

i think you're being too harsh here. the belleville three were just teenagers with some cheap machines. they can't really be blamed for not producing "proper" italo; they were just too far removed from that community to really understand its values and heritage.

For me, despite believing in the subjectivity argument, I can see the merit and usefulness of deliberately blinkered gatekeeper viewpoints in developing an aesthetic among a group of artists.

HOWEVER I have to say that it's the whole "black urban realness" thing as a filter for what's good that really squicks me out in this whole debate. Now 'objectively' there's probably no reason for this being a WORSE filter than some kind of nerdy jazz purism, but 'subjectively' I find the raising up of black poverty as some kind of fount of all that's true and beautiful musically to be kind of disgusting.

http://i207.photobucket.com/albums/bb115/melsfashion/peep_show_s4_ep1_jez_shotgun_400x25.jpg

"Being black isn't about the colour of your skin, it's about vibe, about hanging out, kicking back smoking a number, fighting prejudice and negative stereotypes wherever you find them, yeah?"

"i think you're being too harsh here. the belleville three were just teenagers with some cheap machines. they can't really be blamed for not producing "proper" italo; they were just too far removed from that community to really understand its values and heritage"

I thought he was talking about Burial and 2-step.

speaking of, vahid did you know that Kode 9 is now producing UK funky house?

That Dr Who joke is never not a classic.

I have a virtuoso ear. It can play the violin.

What is Kode9 funky house like? I thought he was all about the 8bit-wonky-aqua-crunk these days?

It took me so long to read this thread it's moved on, but anyway:

If person B says ok its not an objective fact, then there is room for dialogue. Perhaps even a beer.

Can't A win B over to A's point of view. or vice versa. They could hold the same subjective view.

It's all about shared subjectivity , isn't it? That's why we talk about records. Both in the sense of having similar notions of what sounds good, but also in seeking to hear things from another person's perspective - sharing in their subjectivity.

Pipecock (and actually Tim, when talking about how TP is part of a tradition even if sonically he represents a break in that tradition) are also both onto something as regards to communities - these are examples of larger shared subjectivities, that, as Pipecock says, might have disagreements or exceptions, but represent a "way of hearing" as much as they do a list of approved artists or techniques or sonic signatures or clubs/studios/labels.

I actually like good dog's definition of "radical subjectivity", priveliging your own personal taste to the point where you make no effort to engage with the subjectivity of the producer or the listening community of a piece of music/genre

That makes it sound like a bad thing, but it's often a radical approach that can highlight elements of the stuff you're listening to that might not have been focused on (or "there" at all, if we're going to be really subjective) by the original - can I say "listening community" again? (Not sure that's quite right, but you know what I mean). Beat diggers are an example.

Anyway, general point is that saying "musical taste is subjective" is kind of unarguable, but is surely a starting point to a conversation, not it's end-point.

Knock Knock

Who's there?

Uncle

I'll just finish this myself. Worst Joke ever:

Who's there?
Knock Knock
Who's there?
Uncle
Uncle who?
Knock Knock
Who's there?
Uncle
Uncle who?
Knock knock
Who's there?
Aunty
Aunty who?
Aunty'you glad I got rid of all those uncles.

OBJECTIVELY

I might go to Plastic People to see Theo Parrish next Saturday. If not then, then next month, maybe. He's got a residency till the new year, hasn't he?

"For me, despite believing in the subjectivity argument, I can see the merit and usefulness of deliberately blinkered gatekeeper viewpoints in developing an aesthetic among a group of artists."

Absolutely, but what is left to develop w/r/t Detroit techno? I mean, I like some Omar-S and Luke Hess too but I don't think you could claim that they're "pushing things forward".

At this stage the cranky defence of the detroit techno community's values is almost solely about stamping out heresy.

"What is Kode9 funky house like? I thought he was all about the 8bit-wonky-aqua-crunk these days?"

On the basis of the track I've heard it's kinda what you'd expect - a bit more serious and abstract, no vocals and vaguely dark ambient whining. His funky house name is Frankie Solar but I don't know the name of the track.

I totally agree Tim! But that's the crux of this isn't it? The disagreement doesn't stem from objectivity vs subjectivity at all but from the particular case of detroit and all the crap that goes with that.

None of us would be getting riled about this if we hadn't endured 15 years of people carping on about Detroit being the acme of excellence in electronic music confounded with all sorts of horrible exoticised nonsense about blackness and soul etc.

The 'objective' argument one could raise here, I suppose, is that clubs full of 'heads' tend to be really sucky places to have a fun night out at due to the aesthetic problem of being surrounded by ugly bearded men in shapeless brown clothing.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/f123/katiezo/marchb/VinceGallo.jpg

"But what I feel has happened in the case of the popularity of some musics is that these values are ignored by people outside the community who try to get in on their idea. This can sometimes lead to interesting results, other times to derivative but inferior copies. I think you can guess which I feel is more prevalent."

http://flickr.com/photos/1115/905544504/

http://www.residentadvisor.net/photos/2008/us080718dubwar/02.jpg

"i have a goddamn right to hate mainstream gay club culture and the music that is played there."

I think he's doing Elephant Man's step pon chi chi man dance there.

This is not to say that an individual or even a subgroup of that community doesnt disagree with the community at large's decision, but that still doesnt change the decision.

-- pipecock, Thursday, July 24, 2008 2:47 AM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Link

"the" decision

this sentence is so reverent of 'the community' as if it thinks like a hivemind or some shit. J@cob otm about weird 'black urban' fetishization. im not saying folks should be ignoring the dynamics at work w/in the community that created the music by any means but only playing by those (perceived) rules is nonsense. Was ron hardy playing by the 'rules' of the community when he dropped nirvana in the middle of a set? fuck "the decision"

sorry forgot we're on lighthearted topics now :D

any community will have contradictory values within it, i think the responsibility to 'understand' that community's values and the inherent dynamics of the way ppl will react to one thing or another is the responsibility of the dj playing records for that community, not the responsibility of a message boarder getting off on telling ppl how truly down he is by dismissing music based on his perceptions of how 'the community' would react to something, eh comrade?

http://uzar.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/chairman_mao1.jpg

"This is not to say that an individual or even a subgroup of that community doesnt disagree with the community at large's decision, but that still doesnt change the decision."

We all saw how well The Committee worked for jungle. Maybe we need that in other genres?

haha

even if we take 'the decision' to mean 'how things pan out' (how the track in question is ultimately used) pipecock is acting like 'the decision' is the result of some sort of impossible-to-describe characteristic of blackness expressed through tastemaking rather than a community engaging in a discourse similar to this one

I think they've got a LiveJournal community they use to hash out any decisions.

The Committee (Pipecock 1 and Pipecock 2 are circled for ease of reference):

http://newtone.dyndns.org/photo/06_09_02/idjut.jpg

Wha? Is that Villalobos below Pipecock two? Say it ain't so.