Quote:
|
Originally Posted by val-holla-ing
noise is fun and natural. i think that it's music living up to it's full capabilities by being a little harder to digest.
some people overanalyze it and some people undermine it. it is what it is. and it's completely subjective.
(i think it's crunk)
|
...I contend that it isn't completely subjective. If it were completely subjective, then why does Merzbow sell far more records, like nearly 10 times as much, as anyone else in noise? Does that not suggest that there is such a thing as a criteria for 'good' and 'bad' within noise? I realise that you probably don't want to follow this thought, but it is exactly why I am interested in noise - there HAS to be some reason why some people are perceived of as better, otherwise the success or otherwise of some artists would be entirely down to the advertising and commerce behind it. That Merzbow is more successful than anyone else, that Merzbow is generally thought of as 'better' MUST (to my mind) invoke the notion of quality, and in turn, this notion of quality must have criteria.
I'm not going to spit invective just yet, but this is the simplest thing in the world for me, and I can rarely see why people constantly appeal to this notion of absolute subjectivity, which is counter-productive and counter-intuitive.
So apologies if this seems pretentious, but this genuinely is a very, very simple thing for me, and I get frustrated that other people don't see it that way.
[note to self - really, you don't care... repeat and relax]