thread to dis hyped releases that you don't get/don't like/wanna complain about

that's a fair point

the "poptimism" of tv criticism would be e.g. critics who point out that we shouldn't automatically assume that the "prestige" television shows are more important or more worthy of consideration than, say, a trashy sitcom or drama.

Any critic who would think or practice the *opposite* POV is a v poor TV critic... just sayin’.

rockism of sitcoms is like, knee-jerkedly asserting that the british version is better or something

i guess so. that doesn't seem like a privileged position though, just an ignorant one. i don't feel like it's oppressive in any way.

whereas as a high school student i definitely felt like there was some kind of hazy consensus that pink floyd was important in a way madonna wasn't, or whatever. so that kind of attitude was worth challenging.

I listen to a podcast where the guys are sort of sitcom “rockists”; they make fun of The Golden Girls (of all things) and think that Married With Children was “dumb, lowbrow” humor, or something.

To return the topic: in high school, I read the NY Times Arts & Leisure section religiously; and I feel like Pareles and that crew treated the big new pop releases just as “seriously” as they did rock releases. Maybe it’s a newspaper thing in general (as opposed to the “music press”), but they definitely didn’t “privilege” rock, from what I can remember.

bc what is the "pop" in poptimism if it doesn't mean affirming popular taste over the critics? in the instance of early 2000s music criticism, this was the progressive attitude. it's not always.

FFS this was never what poptimism was about.

Please read the following articles from the Poptimist column before condescending to explain to everyone what the term means:

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/6608-poptimist-4/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/6772-poptimist-11/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7189-poptimist-18/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7549-poptimist-19/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7681-poptimist-23/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7760-poptimist-25/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7836-poptimist-31/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/7848-poptimist-32/

https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/8724-take-me-to-the-river/

Read all of them actually (and as much of 'Popular' as you can) but these are the ones that provide the broadest sense of what I would consider a 'poptimist' approach to music taste from the critic who arguably best exemplified the approach.

Tom's column was really the best thing ever wasn't it

i guess so. that doesn't seem like a privileged position though, just an ignorant one. i don't feel like it's oppressive in any way.

― Trϵϵship, Sunday, December 9, 2018 11:57 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

it's not about "oppressive" though. i feel like ur anachronistically trying to re-write history where poptimism is a direct precedent to late '10s online woketivism, when it really wasn't about that and there's no direct line to be drawn between the two

feels inconceivable that something at the level of quality of Tom and Nabisco's columns a decade ago could exist on the internet today, when they were for largely taken for granted at the time

I wish Tom Ewing had never stopped writing those.

Does he write any variation of that column nowadays? I think he retired from music criticism a long time ago but I’m not sure.

it's not about "oppressive" though. i feel like ur anachronistically trying to re-write history where poptimism is a direct precedent to late '10s online woketivism, when it really wasn't about that and there's no direct line to be drawn between the two

― flopson, Monday, December 10, 2018 12:21 AM (nine minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i'm not saying that, but definitely for its advocates poptimism was a more cosmopolitan attitude and it was supposed to shake off the scleroticism of how people had been thinking about music and culture. so it targeted a certain set of critical prejudices.

it just seems like it's a concept that makes sense within a particular dialectic and outside of that things get messy

i'll read some of those tom ewing columns. i have enjoyed his writing in the past but it's been a while since i read his work.

I agree with flopson.

The other important thing to note about woketivism is that in a lot of poptimism vs rockism debates it's arguably more on the side of rockism than poptimism.

Although of course there's also non-woke current music writing which is basically just celebrity gossip or stanning.

But the important thing about all three trends is that, for the most part, they signify at least in part a focus on the "real" personality of the pop star, whereas a certain throughline of poptimist criticism was that, to the extent personality mattered, it was largely imagined personality as signified by records and music videos.

Like, if you wanted to find the very opposite of current trends (and which also sheds some interesting light on what's changed in the last 18 years) it would be this earlier and quite-difficult-to-track-down Ewing piece on Jessica Simpson:

https://web.archive.org/web/20010411132451/http://www.netcomuk.co.uk:80/~tewing/jessica.html

The other important thing to note about woketivism is that in a lot of poptimism vs rockism debates it's arguably more on the side of rockism than poptimism.

i think that's what this thread by Whiney was about thread to track Poptimism 2.0

that whiney thread is the only time i've seen someone seriously argue in favour of the strawman poptimism of "poptimism should mean liking things because they're popular" everyone was complaining about earlier

xpost yep totally.

Also I would like to point out that I was OTM in that thread.

Another "founding text" for me:

https://web.archive.org/web/20010419013349/http://www.netcomuk.co.uk:80/~tewing/realfake.html

The future hot takes
And stupid mistakes
The future me hates you for

Treeship if you're seriously trying to claim that the current state of music journalism is the result of critical positions thrashed out 10-20 years ago, and not a result of the complete destruction of the economic models of both journalism *and* the music industry over that period, then you fundamentally don't understand anything you're handwringing over.

There's a reason we get 200 hot takes every time Taylor Swift opens an envelope and it isn't because editors and music journalists decided that rockism needs to stay in its box where it belongs. It's because the advertising model is completely fucked and as a result the insatiable traffic machine needs to be fed.

If you want to make this beyond tedious and utterly conventional argument that's been made a million times before then fine but at least acknowledge reality in the process.

quite pleased that the most vigorous ilm discussion in weeks has served to hide all my various 'hurr x is shit' broadsides in the jump

btw i love pop now, hail pop, hail rock, hail dilettantism

Classic examples of Anglo-American pop culture’s smugly self-perpetuating hegemony ITT. All I’ll say is: there are other worlds, you don’t need to settle for a mere handful of sounds and structures.

go and start I Love Gamelan then

;)

Implying it’s not music. Tsk, tsk.

it's like a whole culture, man. like a sort of theatre that we don't have an equivalent word for. don't they have such crazy drums? like whoa

Yes a message board with a 1000-post afrobeats thread is totally closed off to outside sounds.

being serious for a moment, the pop hegemony doesn't mind appropriating from the other traditions now and then - and this isn't necessarily a bad thing, when done respectfully - but it does have a tendency to water a few aspects down, does it not

Afrobeats is a special case of outernational investment because it's a) self-identifyingly Pop and b) gained significant traction in the US and UK *as* Pop - it is a realised synthesis of pop tropes and indigenous art, so of course it's both catchy and interesting. imo that Serge Beynaud song that made the traxpoll is more or less the best thing that's happened in the history of the traxpoll, kiu ye fond dilettantes

Trying to skim through some of those Tom Ewing pieces, and despite all the people who might say "you don't understand", I get the sense that he was addressing himself to music critics primarily, thinking very hard at how their attitudes might change / were changing, how possibly a defunct way of thinking about pop-the-great-Nemesis might resolve itself. It's like he has to explain it, be the "bad conscience" of his era. It's admirable and he gets to analyze a lot of things. But that certainly separates the poptimist from the pop listener.
I was young when rockism was still in full action online, and then when others "fought" it, and now we're "beyond" and all this influenced me, so I probably have my own understanding of how all of that articulates, and it might not exactly align with Ewing or the "correct" way of thinking about poptimism (still a niche term tbh), plus the fact I'm from continental Europe so possibly "outside" the debate... anyway.

I've never argued that ILM as a whole is closed to outside sounds. I wouldn't be here if that were the case. What I do notice, however, is that the most vocal poptimists are almost systematically uninterested in anything that falls outside of their purview (short, accessible, earwormy songs, preferably conducive to a political analysis), barring a woke signifier or two. There's nothing wrong with that per se – but to argue that poptimism hasn't become a hegemonic (albeit less harmful) discourse like rockism (which was popist to begin with, just with more guitars) over the past decade or so is galling from the perspective of marginalized genres.

Like Nabozo said, I too was quite young when rockism was the norm online, so there may be a generational component to this misunderstanding. I get the sense that older ILMers focus more on its causes whereas younger ones are more interested in its effects.

tbh maybe they just like pop. the battle might not be pop vs art music (so many grey areas anyway) so much as a neurological one - omnivorous self-romanticising autistic monsters (hai) vs...well...normies people with more refined and well-adjusted tastes

"that's some incel bullshit!" yeah probably is I'm sorry

I tend to think that too (not quite in those terms, though), but it just seems so self-defeating. It cements the status quo (which takes us back to the politics of it).

the neurologics of music listening are fascinating to me and I think we shouldn't be afraid to discuss them

that said it's amazing what can be done for someone's hitherto-conservative music taste with a bit of exposure. "oh wow how had I not heard this before?!" it's because you weren't looking hard enough

enter ilx, I guess

"oh wow how had I not heard this before?!" it's because you weren't looking hard enough

Words to blather about music by.

ilx of course should aspire to more than simply regurgitating what *insert popular e-zine here* thinks is the hot and happening thing in popular music nowadays, and to ilx's credit it usually achieves this, if you know what threads to click

"oh wow how had I not heard this before?!" it's because you weren't looking hard enough

― imago

i guess i'm not looking hard enough because i say this to myself at least once a month

i can't even remotely relate to the "rockism vs. poptimism" debate. i'm old and out of touch with what people like. nobody i know is even aware of anything i like except for beyonce. i mean like seriously i think if i were to bring up janelle monae to most of the people i know i'd get blank looks.

in the battle between rockism and poptimism, back baby shark.

Treeship if you're seriously trying to claim that the current state of music journalism is the result of critical positions thrashed out 10-20 years ago, and not a result of the complete destruction of the economic models of both journalism *and* the music industry over that period, then you fundamentally don't understand anything you're handwringing over.

I did not claim this. I made the milder claim that overall in the critical discourse we’ve moved away from the prejudices that characterized rockism (privileging the individual artist over collective efforts/ authenticity over artifice/ albums over singles / guitars over synthesizers / “timelessness” over ephemerality). Whatever the reasons poptimism is dominant

I mean, you're exemplary when it comes to trawling for lesser known (euphemism) music, rush, so it makes sense that you shouldn't relate to this binary bullshit at all. Btw, I'm all for that baby shark line, whether it's a Kafka riff or not.

Agreed, Treeship (unsurprisingly).

Thanking Tim F for a morning of reading Ewing--I do miss his voice. This one's great: https://pitchfork.com/features/poptimist/6772-poptimist-11/. (Has mark s ever read Harold Innis??)

There's probably some ironic point to be made about that column's Dave Marsh quote about Morrissey and the specific way his rep has changed over time. But I agree that the overly or simplistically politicized mode of pop criticism* that pomenitul and treeship are talking about shouldn't really be called poptimism. I'll allow this could be an age gap thing: I subscribed to Rolling Stone and then Spin as a kid--maybe you were reading Popular at that age. Still, you guys are smart readers and beating on this distorted image of poptimism, especially on ILM, makes it hard to engage.

* I guess? There's no evidence in those posts, and without any links or names I don't know what dire shit you guys are referring to--or even if you're talking about ILM? Who even are "the most vocal poptimists" on this board in 2018?? As Matt DC basically said, I wonder to what extent you're attacking engagement-driven clickbait rather than a serious critical position. Maybe we should call it poptimization?

ok ignore that post and just watch/listen to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPanudF7X6I

I don’t think I’m attacking anyone, I’m just wondering whether “poptimism” is still relevant as a critical lens. These things are often circumstantial—no one says they’re a “New Critic” anymore even if they still draw on some of the ideas from that school.

i'll read some of those tom ewing columns.

maybe go do that? you really aren't making much sense, Matt DC otm