what makes you so special?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

if you are the sort of person who thinks your criticism is right even in the face of dissenting opinions (and there are always dissenting opinions), then can you explain how it is that, against all odds, YOU are the person who is right and everyone else is wrong, except in the extent that they agree with you?

this question idealizes things somewhat, so either (a) use your imagination or (b) answer as far as it applies to your inflexibility/objectivity/solipsism as a critic.

this question is about JUDGMENTS, not TASTES. so, things like 'this record is bad', not 'I like this record'.

― Josh (Josh), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:31 (twenty-two years ago)

aside from being the Supreme Being Who Controls All Things? no, sorry, can't.

Hi, Josh. welcome back.

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Do you like DMB???

― Jon Williams (ex machina), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:35 (twenty-two years ago)

For I am a Lord, and the rest all are but Peasants.

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:36 (twenty-two years ago)

(xpost)

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Mommy says so

― mookieproof (mookieproof), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:38 (twenty-two years ago)

To answer in a not-quite-flattering way, I think I can rationalize just about any of my opinions pretty well; it's what makes me believe in them as opinions and in myself as a critic. I have pretty good ears, catch things others miss a lot of times, try to think carefully about why things mean what they do to me, attempt to consider what they might mean to other people (and how that might or does impact me as an observer, which in pop culture is nearly as important), and I can turn a phrase. (Not always, but still.) Is that closer to what you're looking for?

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:45 (twenty-two years ago)

But judgements=tastes ???

― mei (mei), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

there can be no judgements on aesthetics. it's always subjective no matter what. there is no difference between judgement and taste

― JasonD (JasonD), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:50 (twenty-two years ago)

sort of, matos, but given what you said let me ask it a different way: if being able to rationalize your opinions pretty well is what makes you believe in your opinions, then how do you deal (in terms of believing in your opinions) with the fact that there are apparently always other people out there who are just as good at rationalizing their opinions?

― Josh (Josh), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:51 (twenty-two years ago)

and, jason, that's kind of what the 'if' in my question was for. of course the people who think there can be no judgments (in the 'objective', impartial, right-or-wrong sense) won't really have an answer to my question, unless they care to do some amateur sociology/psychology on the people who do - but that's not what I'm interested in.

― Josh (Josh), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:53 (twenty-two years ago)

What Matos said, plus the added quandry of "there is no right, there is only opinion; my opinion happens to be presented in a style that implies objectivity when there can be no objectivity...". I doubt any (some / many?) critics are completely closed-minded once they have had their say on a record; ie; people are open to suggestion, hence most critics don't think their opinion is right, they just think it is their opinion. That's me anyway. Not that I'm any good or respected or anything.

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I accept plurality, believing all the time that I still have a more direct line to The Truth than they do

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:57 (twenty-two years ago)

also, it's not all that makes me believe in them; it's more what makes me feel comfortable going public with them as often as I do.

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 13 June 2003 19:58 (twenty-two years ago)

criticism is a totally personal and arbitrary thing: therefore it's impossible to remove taste from the equation. as a critic, i think the things that make me worthy of the title are pretty much the same as what matos said. it's not rocketscience and i don't think many of us think we are the sole founts of musical rectitude! it's just opinions expressed and reasoned out.
it's also worth considering that when viewing criticism as a consumer guide as well as (dare i say it?) an art, readers more often than not become familiar with writers who address their own musical tastes/lines of reasoning, thus growing to trust and understand the rationales behind any decisions/opinions in their work - kinda like building a "relationship" with them.
taste is very important in this as the reader is looking to be tipped off as to what they should spend their money on, not an empirical, objective deconstruction (as proposed above) of something they'll most likely have no interest in.
in any case, just to clarify things, i've never thought my taste any "better" than anyone else's, it's just that i know a little bit more about my chosen fields (and music in general) than your average joe and am reasonably good at explaining why i think what i do. if someone has a enough faith in me and my work, i can lead them to a few good records and make them hear things in them (and perhaps ones they already own) that they might not have done otherwise... simple, but still fun to do

― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Friday, 13 June 2003 20:13 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't explain that state Josh asks for because I don't believe in it.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 13 June 2003 20:20 (twenty-two years ago)

Did you say rectal 'tude?

― Andy K (Andy K), Friday, 13 June 2003 20:21 (twenty-two years ago)

no, but i've just started using "rectal" as an insult recently... as in "that common record is totally rectal"... it's a pretty good word!

― Dave Stelfox (Dave Stelfox), Friday, 13 June 2003 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

I tend to believe in my judgements on music in the face of the reasoning of others because I honestly feel like I'm smarter than 95% of the people I meet.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 13 June 2003 20:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I've always considered my self a 5%er. Asalaam Aleykum.

― oops (Oops), Friday, 13 June 2003 20:48 (twenty-two years ago)

The thing about opinions, in criticism as in anything else based on them, is not whether they're "right", but whether they're interesting and/or transferrable. My opinions may be entertaining to the reader in their own right (or provocative, or whatever), or I may find (or happen across) a way of expressing them that the reader can understand and do something with.

This is exactly why putting grades on record reviews is dopey; a "B-" is neither interesting nor expressive. An effective review (of the consumer's guide sort, I mean) need not necessarily even convey whether the reviewer liked the record, if instead it can help the reader guess whether they should investigate.

So I write reviews because I know this, and am willing to try to explain what there is to like about a record, and offer you various potential points of entry, in case any of them sound promising to you. Or I write because I've had a notable experience and I think I can give you some sense of it.

But I think that means I'm disqualified from answering the original question. Crap.

― ara, Friday, 13 June 2003 20:50 (twenty-two years ago)

It's hard for me to understand what's fun about being "right." Doesn't the pleasure in writing about music come from either articulating something difficult to express or enriching the listening experience? So anyway, no way in hell I consider my opinion about music more valid than anyone else's.

― Mark (MarkR), Friday, 13 June 2003 21:33 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm with Ara.

(x-post) ...and Mark.

― jaymc (jaymc), Friday, 13 June 2003 21:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't consider my opinion to be more valid than anyone else's, it's merely 100% right for my own tastes. If I like something, I'm right all the time, for myself. I consider myself to be in complete debt to any musician who releases something I enjoy, for it's a talent I sadly do not possess.

I can't castigate anyone for liking music I don't, or disliking music that I do. I guess that's all I gotta say.

― ham on rye (ham on rye), Friday, 13 June 2003 21:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm justified in my opinions because I am actually from the future, where mankind interacts with a number of extrasolar species on a regular basis and we have colonies throughout the galaxy, with big fuckoff robots and warp speed and shit. My 'criticism' of music is therefore based on factual information regarding what people are listening to in the 26th century, which explains why I bought all the Yellow Magic Orchestra mini-gatefold reissues at once. The rest of you are simply postulating on the quality and importance of different musics - I can tell you for a fact that nobody remembers the Rolling Stones or the Beach Boys in 2533 (Billy Idol and Duran Duran, on the other hand...).

I must say that this archaic practice of purchasing the physical media is kind of fun. I like the little boxes.

― Millar (Millar), Friday, 13 June 2003 21:50 (twenty-two years ago)

God help me I'm turning into Custos

― Millar (Millar), Friday, 13 June 2003 21:51 (twenty-two years ago)

opinion is opinion dude, its just one persons word against another. nothing is canon, people are only gonna die anyway, and their opinions will die with them.

personally im not interested in reading negative reviews, i mean i can tell from the first few lines if someone dont like the record, and theres no need to read it from then on, im not saying negative reviews shouldn't exist, i just can't be bothered to read them all the way thru. i like to read reviews about records the writer really loves, and if im feeling the love, i may just go out and buy the record.

im never gonna type drunk again, i promise

― Bob Shaw (Bob Shaw), Friday, 13 June 2003 22:49 (twenty-two years ago)

okay this thread is begging for answers which fall over themselves trying not to come off as TOO self-satisfied. nonetheless.

i generally think "best" and "worst" are dum unless the judgemental criteria are tightly specified and damn near quantifiable. so in my crit the things i hold to be right and try to make right and THINK i
CAN get right aren't calls like "best" and "worst" but more like THIS is what a song does in a particular spot and THIS is the effect that generally has or perhaps which it seems obvious it was intended to have. as has been said by a few foax this almost amounts to amateur sociology or something.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 13 June 2003 23:31 (twenty-two years ago)

okay this thread is begging for answers which fall over themselves trying not to come off as TOO self-satisfied.

Unless, like me, you aren't a professional critic and therefore have no real stake in not coming across as hella arrogant.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Saturday, 14 June 2003 12:20 (twenty-two years ago)

ask whoever the fuck named my webpage.

― Anthony Miccio (Anthony Miccio), Saturday, 14 June 2003 12:30 (twenty-two years ago)

well, the world revolves around me. makes sense.

― faggotry, Saturday, 14 June 2003 12:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Because I am not American nor English - an outstander. Hence my judgement is not impaired by this so-called baggage called rock history. Personally I am fed up with *subjectiveness*. Fuck that. I am right. You're wrong.

― nathalie (nathalie), Saturday, 14 June 2003 13:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm justified in my opinions because I am actually from the future, [...Yadda Yadda Yadda...] I can tell you for a fact that nobody remembers the Rolling Stones or the Beach Boys in 2533 (Billy Idol and Duran Duran, on the other hand...).
God help me I'm turning into Custos
-- Millar, June 13th, 2003 12:51 PM. (later)

Well, Millar, it's noble to *aim* towards perfection....
But anyhow...your version of the 2533 is quaint, but Here's how it Reaaaallly came out

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Saturday, 14 June 2003 17:02 (twenty-two years ago)

making judgements is a basic ''survival skill''. and it applies to records too bcz if you like everything you'll end up broke.

― Julio Desouza (jdesouza), Saturday, 14 June 2003 17:09 (twenty-two years ago)

dan, arrogance IS usually thought of as a character flaw.

― Josh (Josh), Saturday, 14 June 2003 19:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Because I'm older and have listened to more stuff. A LOT MORE.

― Jazzbo (jmcgaw), Sunday, 15 June 2003 22:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I suppose it must be my big cack.

― Francis Watlington, Monday, 16 June 2003 01:50 (twenty-two years ago)

dan, arrogance IS usually thought of as a character flaw.

Depending on your environment, it can also be a survival trait.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 16 June 2003 02:32 (twenty-two years ago)

e.g. the competitive and dangerous world of critical discourse?

― Josh (Josh), Monday, 16 June 2003 04:27 (twenty-two years ago)

EXACTLY.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 16 June 2003 12:24 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think I'm "right" as far as the rest of the world is concerned.. I'm "right" with respect to people who have the same experiences & outlook as I do (which is nobody except myself.)

But I present my opinion as fact because .. fuck you, that's why.

;-)

― dave225 (Dave225), Monday, 16 June 2003 12:40 (twenty-two years ago)

More reviewers should remember that.

Sometimes I think it works if the reviewer writes as if an opinion is just for themselves, but drops enough obvious clues as to whether the reader might also like the record for those reasons.

― mei (mei), Monday, 16 June 2003 13:22 (twenty-two years ago)

An effective review (of the consumer's guide sort, I mean) need not necessarily even convey whether the reviewer liked the record, if instead it can help the reader guess whether they should investigate.
It's almost a good point. If a reviewer were to say "I was having trouble enjoying this record, but I suspect that someone who really enjoys (insert name of similar act) would find this to be interesting and innovative." I'd be okay with that.
Unfortunately, I see way way waaay too much of reviewers saying something along the lines of: "I was having trouble enjoying this record, but it is historically important to the development of (insert name of recent act) so pay attention to how (the original band did it better|the new band perfects the technique) "
Down with Historical Importance!

― Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Monday, 16 June 2003 13:41 (twenty-two years ago)

I take Josh to be asking "What about when you think your opinion is better than other people's (forget about the other times)?" The standard response here has either been to go jokey ("I am God") or to claim that you never think your opinion is better than others'. The latter claim is untrue. You often do think your opinion is better than others'. ("Opinion is just one person's word against another's" is itself an opinion, as is "no one's opinion is better than any others'." So they're self-contradictory statements. Got it?)

Except for Sterling's, Michaelangelo's, Julio's and a few other brief comments, everyone is dodging Josh's question.

As will I, at least for now.

― Frank Kogan (Frank Kogan), Thursday, 26 June 2003 14:11 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.