Re: [microsound] Adorno turns in his grave

[devslashnull <dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I would like to refute this point you made earlier in your thread:

"Those that suck will be mocked or ignored and sink.  Those that are 
good will rise and become virulent.  Let natural market forces decide."

How much culture that many percieve as being in the "suck" category is 
taken as a whole to be "pop culture"... percieved as having been good 
enough to rise to the "top" of something or other? Like winning 
American Idol? Which is of course, supposed to be predicated on some 
kind of cultural "free-market"... "the community" or "the public" 
chooses... and something "rises to the top".

those that are choosing are always already corrupted by "natural market 
forces" having been force-fed the market, naturally.

I don't understand who the subject is in your statement either... who 
is it that is determining what sucks or is good? as if there is some 
baseline for these qualities that can be standardized. I think the 
activity that occurs on MySpace with regards to the relative popularity 
of an artists work has more in common with "mobs" than with markets 
(especially in the sense of a free one). It becomes cultural mob-rule 
rather than cultural democracy. artistic merit determined by the whimsy 
of a fickle crowd.

would a composer such as Xenakis, or Stockhausen rise to the top on 
MySpace? And if not (for whatever reasons) does that mean they suck?




On Jul 12, 2006, at 3:14 PM, Jason Hollis wrote:

> Oh my goodness, do however think to either refute/discuss one of my 
> actual points



CommTom
Communications of Tomorrow
"it's only a day away"

unique electronic music for the adventurous ear.

http://www.commtom.com