According to who? If you ask me all this genre shit is market speak from a bunch of music label eggheads blowing their collective wads over all the clever styles they can come up with.
Yep.
I hate movies and never watch them because of Jerry Bruckheimer.
My god, you’re delusional. Elvis didn’t invent shit. His greatest accomplishment was being white. Elvis didn’t lay any groundwork; he popularised a form of music that already existed. He was a charismatic performer, however.
Also, Icebrand, at least Green Day weren’t created to sell fashion.
Actually, I’ll expand on this. There seems to be a school of thought amongst fans of alternative genres that a band that is bad (or that they do not like) can not possibly be a part of that genre. This isn’t restricted to punk - emo fans often proclaim that Dashboard Confessional isn’t emo; hip hop fans will tell you that Nelly isn’t hip hop, he’s rap and I’m sure metal fans do the same thing (though I can’t be certain - I’m not that into metal).
It’s like they are saying “I like emo/punk/hip hop/etc. but I don’t like Dashboard/Green Day/Nelly. Therefore, they can’t be emo/punk/hip hop/etc.”
It seems unique to underground genres, however - rock or pop fans don’t say that Matchbox 20 isn’t rock just because they don’t like them.
As for the bands you mention, I think of genre as a cultural thing rather than a sound thing. Hence Avril Lavigne and good Charlotte can’t really be considered punk because they don’t spring from a punk environment. Green Day, however, may have an MTV friendly sound, but they are certainly punk - I mean, listen to them, in sound they’re similar to The Ramones with twenty years of recording technology added (Dookie certainly retains more snot-nosed nihilism than the Clash’s Rock The Casbah) - but more importantly they came from what could be considered a punk scene lest you be one of these purists that maintain the only real punk was from the late '70s (and was used to sell fashion).
gex gex - I think you’re onto something, but I don’t believe it’s “underground” genres that reject bands that they don’t like, it’s more subgenres. You can only go so far out denying what something is - you can dig around and redefine metal or punk or whatever and then pigeonhole all of the “bad” bands into “pop punk,” “nu-metal,” or what-have-you. But it’s pretty hard to maintain that an artist isn’t rock, blues, jazz, or whatever they are, simply because they’re very widely defined, whereas the subgenres are defined more by the people who identify with the subgenres.
Good point Gex.
The Sex Pistols have a lot more in common with the Spice girls then some people would like to admit.
You have pretty good taste for a country fan. 
Some people have intellectual orgasms (intellsexual gratification?) over listening to certain bands and putting down others that don’t share their sentiments. Other people have intellectual orgasms telling everyone they’re above the frothing masses of the first group and that it’s all about the music, man. But it takes a really special person to sport a mind-boner while arguing about it on the Internet with such intensity.
While still others get that special brain-fluid ejaculation from criticizing arguments.
I think we’re on to something here.
Do you get the feeling that, if it weren’t for labels, we’d all like a lot more stuff?
Is it me, or do people seem to go out of their way to claim great prowess in the understanding of the most UN-popular kinds of music? Isn’t that what the concept of ‘Underground’ is? That if you are interested in something ‘mainstream’ you must only be doing it because everybody else likes it; somehow liking the ‘underground’ music means you like it for what it is?
This seems pretty silly. I mean, imagine you have 50 brands of candy bars. There is one brand nobody eats because it tastes like garbage. So you happily wolf down these monstrosities, claiming you’re the only one who really tastes the yumminess of the candy bar, and every else are morons (Emperor’s new clothes, anyone?)
Sorry for calling you an idiot.
Anyway, I’m not dilusional and white has not too much to do with it. Elvis was great and was the greatest thing to happen to popular music.
And some people make asinine drive by comments when they should exercise their right to remain silent.
I’m so punk that this response isn’t going to have anything to do with this thread other than the fact that this thread mentions punk rock.
For those who may wonder how not being on topic makes me so punk: you don’t understand because you’re not a real punk like me, and I’m so punk that I’m not even gonna bother explaining it to you.
For that matter, people who criticize my spelling and grammar only do so because they don’t understand that my spelling and grammar is punk, and not being punks, those people just don’t get it.
Furthermore, those who disagree with me in other threads are simply seeing things from a non-punk viewpoint, and as such, they just don’t understand what it means to be a real punk and to see things the way a real punk does.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to some real punk music made by a real punk rocker, Allan Sherman.
Really, though, the guy was kind of quaintly ironic. “I’m much too good to lower myself to this sort of petty debate, I don’t see how you could possibly get intellectual gratification - wait, better make this a masturbation reference, to make it look more hip, intellectual, and irreverant. Anyway, I’m above your bickering, you pathetic children - you’ll never see me posting in a thread like this - oh shi”
The problem of hypocrisy runs deep into society.
I didn’t think you called me an idiot… but I’ll take your word for it.
And on to other things…
Seems I did alright on my little piece of musical philosophising. I’ll try something else.
I dunno if anyone else likes non-pop music for the scene points, but I like it because that’s what I like to listen to. Not everyone is the same. Something isn’t worthless just because its not popular…
…and some things aren’t worthless just because they are.
Just a little hijack for fans of music of any non-mainstream genres out there:
Some time ago I discovered that what I liked to listen to usually wasn’t what was played on the radio. That’s fine… it’s fun searching for bands rather than having them fed to me. I also developed the hatred of the mainstream commonly exhibited by fans of such music (often known as indie snobs).
But just lately… last few years or so, I’ve begun liking some pop music. Some Neptunes beats… some Destiny’s Child… Are there any indie fans out there who at some time rediscovered pop music? Or am I just weird in being able to listen to Kid606 followed by The Lucksmiths followed by R Kelly’s Ignition Remix followed by Cursive?
If I started a Cafe Society thread called Indie Fans of Pop Music, would I get any takers?
You search out bands and travel your own path, whilst us automatons consume whatever “the evil money grubbing labels” want us to hear that week?
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
I guess it’s better then being “fed” by some snobbish sense of superiority.
**
Well I wasn’t an indie fan (I can’t stand that shit :p), but I’ve found myself enjoying more popular music then before, so I agree with you here.
I didn’t think I deserved the roll eyes. I just said I listen to what pleases me, it’s a bit harder to find the music I like, but I don’t mind. I didn’t make any reference to any “evil money grubbing labels,” nor did I suggest that those who like mainstream music aren’t exercising choice or possess inferior taste as a result of what they listen to. I made no value judgements at all. Is your knee jerking a bit hard today?
I’m happy to agree with this.
Usually people who use about terms like “fed to me” possess the attitude I was speaking of in my reply.
Good to hear you’re not one of them.
Good to know that unlike us indie snobs, you don’t make assumptions about people on trivial things like what sort of music they like.