This seems to be an underlying theme in a lot of threads - Does Formalism have a place in pop music criticism?
On the one hand, I understand that a purely formalist critique is too narrow - that historical and sociological factors have to be involved in a well rounded analysis. However, I feel that pop criticism has swung so far in the other direction that the music itself is being devalued.
Is a critical discussion of technical matters like melody, rhythm, harmony, chord progressions, technique, technology, production, songwriting, arranging, performance less valid than the sociological/political ramifications of the music(ian)? Do the formal considerations detract from enjoyable or meaningful criticism?
I personally wish there was more criticism dealing with how the music itself functions and how that generates meaning for the listener. Does anyone else share that view or is formalism dead in the water?
On the one hand, I understand that a purely formalist critique is too narrow - that historical and sociological factors have to be involved in a well rounded analysis. However, I feel that pop criticism has swung so far in the other direction that the music itself is being devalued.
Is a critical discussion of technical matters like melody, rhythm, harmony, chord progressions, technique, technology, production, songwriting, arranging, performance less valid than the sociological/political ramifications of the music(ian)? Do the formal considerations detract from enjoyable or meaningful criticism?
I personally wish there was more criticism dealing with how the music itself functions and how that generates meaning for the listener. Does anyone else share that view or is formalism dead in the water?