In Reply to: Re: Other classic rock groups with lame lyrics... posted by regmac on April 25, 2006 at 11:20:07:
Gee, I would never have known you were straining hip to bring the name of the guitarist in that rather bloated & overplayed outfit known as...oh, never mind. Yr lack of acumen in reading comprehension is not my problem. Yr presence on this board in spite of yr disdain for what it is that's discussed here somehow strikes me as at least as "childish" as you say rock music is.Hmmm?
Unless you make no bones about being a troll, then that you would post here at all is what's soaring over my head. But while we're on THAT topic...
>>"Someone who knows what it's like to listen to people go on about how nobody will be listening to the likes of Duke Ellington or Miles Davis a generation from...awhile ago."
>Oh, dear. I hope you aren't referring to me. If so, you have it exactly backwards.
Of course that would be yr assumption. Disabuse yrself of this, if you would, and try reading more carefully this time.
You clearly have not spent enough time in the presence of people who speak of Duke Ellington & Miles Davis, as you speak of rock music. People who say that jazz lacks the sophistication of classical music, that it is for children, that it's not even music, and, to be damned sure, nobody will be listening to it 50 years from now, or 100 years from now.
If I hadn't spent time listening to these condemnations of jazz then I might find it difficult to believe that people actually felt this way. But while their numbers have dwindled as time has passed, they're still around. They're known as classical snobs. And they would reject out of hand yr contention that Duke Ellington & Miles Davis even belonged in the same sentence with Beethoven & Bach, and would certainly take you to task for it.
This might make you wonder why they couldn't recognize jazz as worthy, since you are perfectly capable of seeing the worth in both. Ah, but rock...now THAT stuff, that's for children, as you say.
But...these people think & say the exact same thing of jazz. Oh, no, what to do?
How are you going to convince them that Ellington, et al, are worthy?
You can't.
So I won't bother going to any further lengths to explain to you that yr snobbery suffers from not having been out-snobbed, that yr knowledge of exactly what topics constitute rock lyrics is mind-numbingly deficient, or that something is not so merely because you say it is.
You'll just have to figure that out on yr own. But I'm feeling generous, so I'll drop one little hint for you here. Take note of the links on this page, if you would. It might be a little much for you, musically, but such is the peril one encounters when faced with the reality that even 'unsophisticated rock music' sometimes makes for serious, theory-based music criticism.
"...one gets the impression that they think simultaneously of harmony and melody, so firmly are the major tonic sevenths and ninths built into their tunes, and the flat submediant key switches, so natural is the Aeolian cadence at the end of "Not a Second Time" (the chord progression which ends Mahler's "Song of the Earth")."
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Okay, troll - J 14:36:08 04/25/06 (11)
- Nice post J - Sugardawg34 20:43:32 04/26/06 (0)
- Re: Okay, troll - regmac 15:09:46 04/25/06 (9)
- Well, that's typical... - J 16:50:46 04/25/06 (8)
- Re: Well, that's typical... - regmac 17:56:34 04/25/06 (7)
- Re: Well, that's typical... - Sugardawg34 21:05:20 04/26/06 (0)
- so here's a question - tunenut 21:16:53 04/25/06 (0)
- Re: Well, that's typical... - J 19:49:43 04/25/06 (4)
- Re: Well, that's typical... - regmac 08:17:42 04/26/06 (3)
- Re: Well, that's typical... - J 14:01:43 04/26/06 (0)
- ain't it fun? - tunenut 13:39:10 04/26/06 (0)
- Art is subjective - meisterkleef 12:45:28 04/26/06 (0)