I made a case against comedy music - you argued against that. The way you argue against it is to say that serious po-faced music can fall into the same pitfalls I said comedy music did. But I think comedy music has to fall into those pitfalls by definition, as its grounded in whatever it references. Shitmat might succeed in what he sets out to do, but I think what he sets out to do is much much easier and of lesser value than what a "serious, po-faced" artist might set out to achieve. It's far easier to ridicule than it is to make a serious attempt to contribute. Maybe someone could do both at the same time, but I'm dubious.
so I would totally accept this. Hawerchuk succeeds, and most of those who set out to do something serious don't, but I'm still far more interested in that slight minority of folks in that bracket who do succeed. as an aside I've never been arguing for "tastefulness" in dance music either, although it might have appeared like that I suppose just because most of the stuff I really am arguing against revels in its perceived anarchic anti-conformism (although most of the time again it just sounds contrived and slightly childish to me). If I was I'd probably just listen to new broken beat and nothing else.shonky wrote:Hawerchuk succeeds in making me laugh (which he set out to do), most of the former just leave me cold and bored (which presumably they didn't)
back to square one I guess, but I've enjoyed talking anyway. much more interesting than just bigging stuff up or down eh