Faith No More

[Cultseeker]

Everyone inclined in a certain way when it comes to what music they like. It's when the genre a band are linked to is more important than the music itself that it gets on my nerves. A prime example is the multitude of Libertine wannabe bands with inexplicably large followings.

[Simpo]

I have nothing to add except that I love FNM.

[King Blue]

CS, i really don't see your point. I wasn't trying to argue that music is completely impartial and unlinked to things outside of music.

What i was saying is people shouldn't attach themselves to a genre, as it tends to lead to them neglecting to judge a band on its musical merits, but rather what they represent and whether they fit in with the genre they associate themselves with.

Liking a band for they represent, or at least in my opinion, is stupid.

Edited April 13, 2008 by King Blue

[Cultseeker]

Liking a band for they represent, or at least in my opinion, is stupid.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Cultseeker

[King Blue]

Dude, i agree with most of what you're saying, but I think we are talking about different kinds of representations.

I am talking about overlooking a bands artistic merit simply because their perceived genre fits in with the scene they have decided to follow. It's why every movement, as you call it, ends up dying out. It gets bled dry by narrow minded morons who lap up anything that clings to the flag of that genre, instead of opening their minds and deciding to listen to something different.

I refuse to believe that bands like One Night Only can mean anything significant to anyone. They are successful though, because they conform to this utterly loathsome indie ideal. Same goes for the bands who destroyed grunge, punk etc by inundating the market with pale imitations of everything that the initial movement represented.

This is what i mean when i say liking band for what they represent is stupid. It's putting emphasis on what it looks like to others, rather than what it means to someone on a personal level.

Of course, what a bands represents to you, personally, is pivotal. I am not trying to argue otherwise. I am merely saying that judging a band by what it says about you, rather than what it says to you, is plain wrong and aligning yourself to a certain genre, and sticking to it, pretty much does that.

genres are not just labels of types of music from which you can choose from a great big catelogue of music. That would be totally superficial and so I say that people who see it this way are no fans of music

Thats the exact argument I'm trying to make, but i think perhaps the phrasing of it was poor.

[Cultseeker]

Agreed.

However, as someone of significance once said 'the money is in the hands of 15 year old girls'.

So we'll always have mainstream, conformist shite to contend with in amongst genuinely emerging, or existing free of the mainstream, music.

So my initial statement stands.

Edited April 13, 2008 by Cultseeker

[Cultseeker]

Introduce Yourself is my favourite Faith No More album.

That doesn't usually go down too well with orthadox Faith No More fans.

[funkymunkey]

Wasn't Courtney Love the original vocalist?

[0livavu]

Because they are showing an inability to discern between what they like and what they do not; what they consider music and what they do not. They are showing no preference. It's like saying I like food. Well, what constitutes food?

[funkymunkey]

The first sentence and this subsequent one both made perfect sense to me.

[pinback]

Anyone who says they like all kinds of music, doesn't like music.

[sifi]

Chuck Mosley is dead.

[sifi]

Introduce Yourself is my favourite Faith No More album.

Edited April 14, 2008 by sifimaster

[hitmanhague]

Wasn't Courtney Love the original vocalist?

[Cultseeker]

Yeah, that John Peel fellow didn't like music at all.

[hitmanhague]

I really envy John Peel for being able to like a huge variety of genres without ever feeling the need to classify them.

Didn't he like Napalm Death?

[pinback]

Yes he did. Did you notice him distinguishing between different forms and such like. Showing discrimination rather than just liking anything. Did you ever notice him doing that?

[hitmanhague]

I didn't like half the stuff he played (sometimes more ;-) ) but I respected his love and knowledge of music and got into loads of great stuff by listening to him.

[Cultseeker]

Yeah I did. But you said people who like any kind of music, not liking anything. Peel didn't discriminate against genres based on what they represented.

Edited April 14, 2008 by Cultseeker

[0livavu]

As a person, I thought John Peel seemed like a top bloke.

As someone to be influenced by in terms of music, I was never interested.

[pinback]

As a person, I thought John Peel seemed like a top bloke.

As someone to be influenced by in terms of music, I was never interested.

[pinback]

Then he is the exception. Though I've always been suspicious of him as well.

I of course refer to those in general who say that they like allsorts meaning they like anything. I'm into people who are particular, who discern, not people who are mindless when it comes to music - as I subsequently explained.

[Cultseeker]

Liking a lot of different things is not the same as being mindless

[Cultseeker]

As a person, I thought John Peel seemed like a top bloke.

As someone to be influenced by in terms of music, I was never interested.

[0livavu]

I'd go along with that.