OK
So the Super Bowl was last night. Let's face it, football sucks. They stop the play too much for any momentum to be gathered and half the time the play is stopped for commercials. I didn't watch much of the game last night, mostly because I didn't watch much football all year and unlike countless others, I wasn't looking for an excuse to get drunk and act like "men". The real highlight of last night was the half-time show, featuring none other than Paul McCartney! (Coincidentally, today marks the 41st anniversary of The Beatlea' arrival in America...)
What's that? Not a highlight? Right, that seems to be the consensus in the American media today in articles such as this and this. I don't understand how a 62-year old musician who can arguably rock harder than anyone in the mainstream a third his age can be called boring or "innocuous". Paul went out there and sang four of his hundreds of classic songs and because there wasn't a coreographed dance or some MTV bullshit. It's a shame, too, that so many young people probably saw the performance last night as old-fashioned or what not. This leads me to my next point...
I can never understand why enjoying old music has consistently been deemed to be "uncool". Well, maybe that needs a bit of clarification. It's quite "cool" to name drop certain bands (The Beatles, Floyd, Bowie, Doors, etc.) that you like but it's rare that you find someone who actually listens to these bands when they say they do. To me, it seems they know the "classic" albums that their favourite emo and indie bands mention and that's it. Newsflash: most of those artists listen to the whole catalogue (though why they can't seem to parlay their influences into good music is beyond me...). Yes, Dark Side is amazing but so is Atom Heart Mother (1970) and The Final Cut (1983). Sgt. Pepper might be one of the best albums of the past four decades but Band On The Run (Wings, 1973) has amazing moments too. I think if you're going to listen to these bands, it's very much worth it to look into their whole catalogue since they're so important in the musical landscape. Just a thought...
I think my point here is that I'm sick of being ridiculed for certain things I listen to. I listen to what I like, whenever it was made. I don't care. If that's what your criteria for good music is, I feel sorry for you. It just seems for me that a larger chunk of the music I like was made 25-40 years ago. I love early Bee Gees records, I think they're lyrically incredible. Why is that "lame"? I hate screaming so I think a band like Refused suck. I don't care about their lyrical content, I think they suck. Just my opinion. So why should I be attacked everytime I say that? I don't like it and I won't appreciate it if I don't like it. Unless everyone starts acknowledging that "I Started A Joke" is one of the saddest songs ever written.
Won't happen. And I don't care. I'll listen to what I want. You shut up about it.
Peace, love and fluffy bunnies...
radical ryan fantastic