I can respect that, but that isn't how the article is positioned. It makes objective statements without reservation in-text of them being opinions and summarizes them as fact.Originally Posted by Snow
Someone can have an extensive background and still be wrong, there're plenty of these in every field. Also, "Stravinsky’s dull modernist twaddle" is a pretty high-horsey and bizarre statement. Again, this article goes forward to the end of explaining why jazz is lesser as music, not as opinion. I can't speak for the history of KPop and jazz because that's not anything I've ever been curious about, and I trust the writer's understanding of that insofar as I lack knowledge to critically contradict it.He's a dude with extensive musical background, both academic and performing, so his vocabulary in expressing WHY he doesn't like the things he dislikes is much broader, but that doesn't change the fact that it's his opinion and if anyone is high-horsey about it it's definitely not him, that's why I like reading his stuff.
I don't take things deadly seriously, but I do enjoy reading things critically inside and out of my actual job. More importantly, regardless of enjoyment or non-seriousness or fun or anything, this article is misinformed and makes unsupported statements of fact. People download their opinions a lot on the internet, you can't get away with that. With this sort of thing it's easy for people to read an article like this and decide to share the view expressed in whatever they're reading/watching even if it's not substantively supported and is just a pseudo-factual opinion. That leads to people spreading ideas and opinions uncritically as though they're absolutely correct, without regard for further evidence. This is a problem in published writing too, for sure, but the internet exacerbates these things.Idk why you expected an academic article on a dude's kpop blog where he writes about things he hates and enjoys freely but kpop in general is the sort of scene where you either learn to not take everything so butt seriously or you drown in standom with little chance of recovery so his audience is on the same wavelength as him.
"By the 1960s, rock and pop music was moving into all sorts of new directions that actually made some degree of musical sense (plus a few that didn’t), meanwhile jazz was well and truly masturbating itself to death as it had mutated into “free jazz” where they didn’t even have proper chords and structure anymore" is a chiefly relevant example: contrasting rock/pop as evolving, becoming new things, with jazz which - allegedly, here - was not. This is another thing that can be noted as being factually incorrect by bringing into the argument Latin jazz and bossa nova.And where did he say it's a monolithic genre he mentions like at least five different subgenres??
I'm not writing this because I'm Serious and Upset on the internet, I'd probably be playing video games or something kinda dumb and inconsequential if I wasn't typing this. I don't get upset at things so much as I get sad at misinformation. Regardless of the title of the blog or article, in its language and structure this article positions itself as being factually authoritative. I've pointed out how it isn't, because being open-minded and critical of things you read is more valuable than just accepting them. If it's an opinion it's an opinion, there's nothing wrong with that. If you say, "I really think jazz got pretty stagnant and didn't go anywhere as a genre" then that's okay because you establish the perspective (yourself) and the proceeding relativism of the given statement.
I'm writing this because I'm a fucking academia nut nerd and also I like helping people better understand things and avoid misinformation.
Reply With Quote
