The Hater's Thread
- Thread starter zhao
- Start date
Exigent said:James Blunt. On the radio at least five times a day at my old job at a cafe/delicatessen, his voice grates to the very back of my skull. It´s like fingernails on denim.
Hi I´m Exi and I´m trying to kill some time in Bolivia at the moment
james blunt is pretty understandable - the dude is aural marmite - split between those who hate and those who love.
that track that goes ' i was making myself the usual cup of tea, when the doorbell strangely rang' just absolutley makes me mad!
from the 90's cant rememberwho it's by but probably a product of manchester.
Logan Sama
BestThereIsAtWhatIDo
mms said:james blunt is pretty understandable - the dude is aural marmite - split between those who hate and those who love.
that track that goes ' i was making myself the usual cup of tea, when the doorbell strangely rang' just absolutley makes me mad!
from the 90's cant rememberwho it's by but probably a product of manchester.
Dubstar
D
droid
Guest
OT - Its 'Downs Syndrome', and its a genetic disorder which has nothing whatsoever to do with drug use.
FYI - Johns post is unchanged - I accidentally hit 'edit' instead of 'quote'.
john said:
Aside from Droid's point about Down's Syndrome... no PARENT should abandon his or her child, surely?
if that's what you think -I also think it depends what you mean by 'abandon' since junkies aren't really the greatest parents
She was a junkie. Nothing good about it.. surely de facto a bad mother, citizen, driver, etc etc.. once you are an addict, its a bit pointless to discuss the result of addiction as a moral failing. It's like criticizing a midget for their jump shot.
I don't like Nico's music, btw, but what bugs me more is the glamour around heroin that the VU encouraged. bleh.
While we're hating I'd just like to say I'm hating on a lot of the haterism on this board. I think it's very nice that we've ghettoized it into a thread but it still comes flying out at such strange times in other threads it really makes posting on here less fun. Not saying I'm innocent at all, but as someone once said to me about books "there's no need to condemn the bad ones, they'll sink through history while the good ones will rise up" And I think that's very true. It's very unclear to me why people channel so much energy into condemning bad music when they could be praising and uplifting the good. Which is more effective and helpful: dissing a bad artist or reccomending a better one?
Godard said that the best criticism of a film is another film and this is something that I make a great effort to live by. I do feel strongly about music and that's why I make it. I wish some of the haters on this thread would do the same, it might help you to relax a little when you realize how hard it is to make things which fill ALL your criteria of goodness. The reason most people make bad music is because it's really fucking hard and takes a lot of focus and energy to make something good (not to mention the pure dumb luck of random inspiration), not because there's some conspiracy to shit up the world's musical environment. I think ripley's remark about a midget's jump shot is relevant here as well.
And also, John, I know Nico is a musician and therefore somehow public domain but getting on the internet and calling someone a bad mother and all that is just fucked, unless you and she were personally acquainted and you were there, and there is some urgent reason that the world needs to know. If the facts are indeed as described I'm sure she has suffered far more as a result of her own actions than you would care to contemplate. People say some wild, fucked up shit on the internet. It's one thing to say at a cocktail party, though I wouldn't, but it's another to say in a globally available, google-able print system that will probably be here for a long long time. It's one thing to say 'she was a shit musician and I hated her' but attacking her personal life is just low.
Also, saying someone did ANYTHING 'just for a fix' is like saying someone did something 'just because they were threatened with torture'. Heroin is a very powerful coercive force, it's willfully ignorant to think otherwise. I read that remark and I feel really really sorry for her. You think she did that flippantly? And sorry if this reads like jumping on the new guy but that was a whole series of boldly nasty posts, even for the haterism thread.
Godard said that the best criticism of a film is another film and this is something that I make a great effort to live by. I do feel strongly about music and that's why I make it. I wish some of the haters on this thread would do the same, it might help you to relax a little when you realize how hard it is to make things which fill ALL your criteria of goodness. The reason most people make bad music is because it's really fucking hard and takes a lot of focus and energy to make something good (not to mention the pure dumb luck of random inspiration), not because there's some conspiracy to shit up the world's musical environment. I think ripley's remark about a midget's jump shot is relevant here as well.
And also, John, I know Nico is a musician and therefore somehow public domain but getting on the internet and calling someone a bad mother and all that is just fucked, unless you and she were personally acquainted and you were there, and there is some urgent reason that the world needs to know. If the facts are indeed as described I'm sure she has suffered far more as a result of her own actions than you would care to contemplate. People say some wild, fucked up shit on the internet. It's one thing to say at a cocktail party, though I wouldn't, but it's another to say in a globally available, google-able print system that will probably be here for a long long time. It's one thing to say 'she was a shit musician and I hated her' but attacking her personal life is just low.
Also, saying someone did ANYTHING 'just for a fix' is like saying someone did something 'just because they were threatened with torture'. Heroin is a very powerful coercive force, it's willfully ignorant to think otherwise. I read that remark and I feel really really sorry for her. You think she did that flippantly? And sorry if this reads like jumping on the new guy but that was a whole series of boldly nasty posts, even for the haterism thread.
SIZZLE said:
this blanket generalisation is entirely inadequate and is indicative of a naive fantasy which omits many factors in the business of art, music, film, etc.
how can you say that when so many talentless morons with connections and a knack at shameless self promotion "make it" and even ensure their place in history, while innovators who refine and polish their art with blood and tears for years are sometimes left to die penniless and alone (just look at some of the greatest jazz musicians of last century - Charlie Parker, Eric Dolphy, Nina Simone, the list goes on and on)?
and to this you respond that even though they didn't get the recognition they deserved during their life time, people did realize that their art was great afterward. but the truth is that what "society" considers great art is not always on top for its artistic merits alone, but involves a lot of politics.
Picasso was more flamboyant, and thus is remembered much more than his partner Braque, who some say was the true innovator behind cubism.
why is a timeless hiphop masterpiece like Showbiz & AG's Good Fellas lost in obscurity, while a ton of rubbish gets paper?
the classic "master" paintings from Renaissance may be the best pieces from that time, or may have arisen through the ranks because of other reasons - the right family, the right lover, the right patron, the right church, etc, etc.
Last edited:
corneilius
Well-known member
music you hate!
Any and all commercial music, whose prime aim is to earn a living or to gain a profit. Back in the day, yer average native could sing, play and perform as and when needed. And do it brilliantly. All these pussy types, who 'earn' a living from entertaining, and do fuckall else are a complete waste of space.
If you're worth anything real you will contribute to the community first, then, when it's time to rest, you sit down and entertain yerself, or others with something you do for the JOY of it.
Any and all commercial music, whose prime aim is to earn a living or to gain a profit. Back in the day, yer average native could sing, play and perform as and when needed. And do it brilliantly. All these pussy types, who 'earn' a living from entertaining, and do fuckall else are a complete waste of space.
If you're worth anything real you will contribute to the community first, then, when it's time to rest, you sit down and entertain yerself, or others with something you do for the JOY of it.
corneilius
Well-known member
art, truth and power.
As regards 'art' it's a load of cobblers. Rockefeller, and others plunged a fortune into creating an art establishment that made abstract art the most important, well paid form of expression, across the various media, simply to pre-empt the art of honesty, the art of rebellion, the art of speaking truth to power.
The Great Masters were nothing but a bunch of well-paid hacks whose sole purpose was to glorify their masters, to reinforce their power over the serfs they screwed. Useless tossers. So what if they could draw really well?
Da Vinci might have been a 'genius' but he was fuckall use to the community, he didn't stop a single crime against humanity, did he? No, he made a living serving a bunch of nefarious criminals. Just like so many today.......... if it looks pretty, ask the question, does it really help? Is this going to improve the prospects for humanity, for the millions of people who literally starve ot death every year. If it doesn't it's shite. It's useless. It's a complete waste of time.
Fashions are a mechanism for the elites to test whether or not the conditioning is working.
Time to get real folks!
As regards 'art' it's a load of cobblers. Rockefeller, and others plunged a fortune into creating an art establishment that made abstract art the most important, well paid form of expression, across the various media, simply to pre-empt the art of honesty, the art of rebellion, the art of speaking truth to power.
The Great Masters were nothing but a bunch of well-paid hacks whose sole purpose was to glorify their masters, to reinforce their power over the serfs they screwed. Useless tossers. So what if they could draw really well?
Da Vinci might have been a 'genius' but he was fuckall use to the community, he didn't stop a single crime against humanity, did he? No, he made a living serving a bunch of nefarious criminals. Just like so many today.......... if it looks pretty, ask the question, does it really help? Is this going to improve the prospects for humanity, for the millions of people who literally starve ot death every year. If it doesn't it's shite. It's useless. It's a complete waste of time.
Fashions are a mechanism for the elites to test whether or not the conditioning is working.
Time to get real folks!
patrons or not, the process of creativity is inherently anti-establishment and anti-fascist, because it involves imagination and improvisation with no regard to boundaries, borders, and rules.
it is the only act which completely affirms our humanity, it is the only place where we can experience true "freedom", our only weapon against omnipresent, invisible power, and thus, in the face of global oppression, disasters, starvation, unrest and chaos, art-making is one of, if not THE most important activity we can engage in.
it is the only act which completely affirms our humanity, it is the only place where we can experience true "freedom", our only weapon against omnipresent, invisible power, and thus, in the face of global oppression, disasters, starvation, unrest and chaos, art-making is one of, if not THE most important activity we can engage in.