Pitchfork MTAE score prediction thread

[Araneae]

Originally Posted by dustrock

Artists are self-absorbed, delusional and insufferable. Otherwise why would you think that someone would want to listen to you?

A lot of them are, yes. I don't really have an issue with that, I really only have an issue with people, especially media, trying to create an idealized and wholesome image of the artist. I guess that comes from people's need to create an image that's congruent with their own virtues. It's like some people can't admit that Lennon was an asshole and still like his music, they always try to reason all the awful things he did or said or erase them from history, and pretend it never happened in order to neatly fit their image of Lennon. People do the same with Billy (and he even perpetuates it).

[pavementtune]

Originally Posted by The exploding boy

i like to think if it was true we'd know by now.

well, with MJ we sort of do, don't we. pedophilia has been established, or not?
I was a huge MJ fan as a little kid, so as soon as all that hit the news, I went into the hanging-my-head-shredding-a-few-tears state, and kept hoping it just isn't true. and then over the years more and more came out, and I just stopped paying attention, I don't want to know everything, because I never will no matter how much I read about it.
I call pedophilia an illness, though. not saying it's an illness nobody can handle, and has to act it out, absolutely not.

Lostprophets/Ian Watkins, anyone?

Originally Posted by dustrock

Can you separate the artist from the art? Can I enjoy Enders Game even though Orson Scott Card is a huge dildo bag?
?

That's the thing though, with "separate the artist from the art." not everybody is able to do that, and not everybody wants to. do I want to sing along to Lostprophets now? no, because I'd associate it with what kind of human being contributed to that music, and I don't want to be the audience for someone like that.

Do I still listen to Noir Desir? yes, I know what he did, I can still enjoy the songs.

So separating the artist from the art works in some cases for me personally, in other cases it just doesn't.
Ask random people what they think about Polanski films - how often will you hear something about Polanski the rapist as answer, and no comment on the art/the film itself?

would you listen to SP songs in the same way, once it hits the news that Corgan actually enjoys drowning kittens in his basement, and raped little boys? could you separate the art from the artist?

[dustrock]

I could. But I've had a lot of wine tonight.

Incidentally if you're bored, listen the deposition MJ gives when somebody sues him for copyright infringement on the Dangerous album.

He is hilariously talented and you can tell the lawyer was asking him some questions just hoping he'd burst into song.

Obsessive.


You know what I miss about Billy? The guy who would listen to like 20 different seemingly - identical versions of Bullet to get the best version.

[pavementtune]

Originally Posted by dustrock

You know what I miss about Billy? The guy who would listen to like 20 different seemingly - identical versions of Bullet to get the best version.

me too.
but an altered version of that guy is still here. obsessing over theoretical marketing aspects, like what kind of release format/song length/repetition of words/poppy synth coldplay melody intro/insert new sex and drugs "celebrity" persona/attention span of kids these days/image altering etc. blabla. for 6? years, and counting.

[houseofglass11]

Originally Posted by Elphenor

The Who will always be a band that I simply don't understand the appeal of minus a couple singles.

The Doors are amazing

Not surprisingly I have the exact opposite opinion. The Doors were OK, first album was good, the rest was really patchy. They also never rocked hard enough. The Who on the other band was an amazing band. I don't know how anyone could deny the power of 'Live at Leeds' and 'Who's Next'.

[The exploding boy]

Originally Posted by pavementtune

well, with MJ we sort of do, don't we. pedophilia has been established, or not?
I was a huge MJ fan as a little kid, so as soon as all that hit the news, I went into the hanging-my-head-shredding-a-few-tears state, and kept hoping it just isn't true. and then over the years more and more came out, and I just stopped paying attention, I don't want to know everything, because I never will no matter how much I read about it.
I call pedophilia an illness, though. not saying it's an illness nobody can handle, and has to act it out, absolutely not.

Lostprophets/Ian Watkins, anyone?



That's the thing though, with "separate the artist from the art." not everybody is able to do that, and not everybody wants to. do I want to sing along to Lostprophets now? no, because I'd associate it with what kind of human being contributed to that music, and I don't want to be the audience for someone like that.

Do I still listen to Noir Desir? yes, I know what he did, I can still enjoy the songs.

So separating the artist from the art works in some cases for me personally, in other cases it just doesn't.
Ask random people what they think about Polanski films - how often will you hear something about Polanski the rapist as answer, and no comment on the art/the film itself?

would you listen to SP songs in the same way, once it hits the news that Corgan actually enjoys drowning kittens in his basement, and raped little boys? could you separate the art from the artist?

but would you go see Cantat live? I understand being a musician is what he does but i think it was fairly ill advised to go touring. But i don't know. On the other hand, Is he supposed to not have a living anymore now? and that's how the justice system works. You get a sentence you do your time, are you supposed to forever pay for it after? cant you ever be rehabilitated? can you ever make up for what you did? can you ever be forgiven? But that's another subject altogether.

But then like Polanski is one of my favorite filmmaker (Well the pre 80s stuff anyway. After that it's spotty) and honestly the rape case never comes to mind when i watch Rosemary's baby for the zillionth time. I have a chinatown poster in my living room and i see his name daily and never do i look at that poster and stop to think, oh yeah he sexually assaulted some girl too. So i dont know. I guess im saying im fairly good at separating the artist from the art.

[Araneae]

I think it's easier for people to ignore when the person isn't a constant visual reminder. It's easier to forget the person behind a film or a novel but much more difficult to do with a performer.

[Elphenor]

Originally Posted by houseofglass11

Not surprisingly I have the exact opposite opinion. The Doors were OK, first album was good, the rest was really patchy. They also never rocked hard enough. The Who on the other band was an amazing band. I don't know how anyone could deny the power of 'Live at Leeds' and 'Who's Next'.

Yeah the whole reason I like The Doors is that they didn't rock in the way you're describing

[Elphenor]

The fact that Lennon was a total asshole actually makes me like him more. The sugar coated myth is way more lame than the reality

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by dustrock

And being anti-war and materialist may not be ideal but doesn't discredit him.

i was talking about how he was the anti-materialist materialist.

Originally Posted by dustrock

Can you separate the artist from the art? Can I enjoy Enders Game even though Orson Scott Card is a huge dildo bag?

well in that case, no

in lennon's case plenty of his music isn't about lecturing humankind with an air of self indulgent sanctimony.

that's what's nice about musicians or artists. They could be horrible but the thing they made isn't because it's abstract or impressionist or what have you. Bill writes emotional music when was good because he is this overly emotional person. If he wrote songs about how it was unfair he wasn't famous or probably something about how we should all learn to forgive each other he should be booed.

With most writers their stories are from their point of view, and reinforce it.

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by The exploding boy

seriously?

I find that pretty lazy coming from you. What happened to MJ is rich super weird and incredibly miguisded guy + opportunistic parents and i'll stick with that unless you've got proof i haven't seen.

I mean i guess in the end it's a matter of opinion more than facts but... i like to think if it was true we'd know by now.

you could say that about bill cosby too

[fuzzyroes]

didn't only 2 people go after MJ? And they were both people who had a history of trying to extort others.

[fuzzyroes]

with MJ it was always all about the money too. All of these people with Cosby are coming out without money even being on the table.

[Trotskilicious]

yeah that child molestation money is fuckin crazy

[reprise85]

I really like MJ's music so I will admit that in his case I have more hope that he didn't do it than I would with most people that get accused. Personal bias.

It is established that he had children in his bed etc. IMO, that means one of two things:

1. He molested them
2. He is asexual

According to Lisa Marie Presley, they had sex, but he was very much phobic about her seeing his body.

Obviously he had a lot of issues. Did he molest children? ... I don't know. Probably? It is hard for me to type that because I don't want it to be true.

[reprise85]

With Cosby, you have 20 people and it is many years later. It is pretty unlikely that they are all lying, and even if you don't want to believe he held someone down and raped them, he did drug some of the women and offer them drugs in an effort to get them to sleep with him. That is rape.

[Trotskilicious]

well there's 2 sides 2 every story and they shouldn't have been there

[Cool As Ice Cream]

it takes two to rape.

[fuzzyroes]

Originally Posted by reprise85

I really like MJ's music so I will admit that in his case I have more hope that he didn't do it than I would with most people that get accused. Personal bias.

It is established that he had children in his bed etc. IMO, that means one of two things:

1. He molested them
2. He is asexual

According to Lisa Marie Presley, they had sex, but he was very much phobic about her seeing his body.

Obviously he had a lot of issues. Did he molest children? ... I don't know. Probably? It is hard for me to type that because I don't want it to be true.

I think with MJ, he just literally really liked hanging out with children. They were the only people who didn't "want" anything from him. And of course, MJ saw himself as just a big kid.

To him, sleeping in the same bed or room with children was like having a slumber party or something. Sure, it's fucked up... But I don't think he was a molester.

Theres also been handfuls of kids who have hung out with him back in the day, who had sleep overs with him that have went to bat for him and explained that nothing sexual happened at all.

So it's pretty weak to compare Jackson to the recent shit that's came out about Cosby.

[fuzzyroes]

I'm a big MJ fan and have read several books about him and there was serious integrity issues with both of the people that were trying to sue him.

[The exploding boy]

Yes that's the thing. If you read enough about it it to me becomes pretty clear what happened. And honestly i'm not a MJ fan, i mean i think Thriller's great but overall, i don't really give a shit. It just seems to me that all it was is opportunistic parents.

An yes there's money to be made of course, settling out of court.

I mean he put himself in this situation but i'm pretty damn convinced he didn't molest anyone. And i get annoyed when people throw that accusation offhanded like it's a given. It just isn't. But with child molestation, public opinion is it must be true if nothing else because they'd rather not risk being wrong and defend or at least condone a pedophile.

I mean yeah down the line we don't know fo sure but i'd say to me the odds are more leaning towards him being innocent.

[Order 66]

i dont know about the accusation in the early 90s but the arvizo case was bull.. they were obvs charlatans

[T&T]

couldn't we just ask macaulay culkin? he looks like a reliable guy.

[T&T]

I think MJ was pretty messed up/

2. He is asexual

I'd think so.

the guy didn't want to be black, or white. his final form was almost an anime character.
http://i.imgur.com/E9kA8Eb.jpg?2

[pavementtune]

Originally Posted by The exploding boy

but would you go see Cantat live?

I did, and will since the Détroit album is really good.
but I don't expect people to go to concerts with me, for example.

Just recently I forgot the whole "beware! Cantat" thing, and babbled how much I like the Horizons album - to a French colleague. In return I got an enraged speech why Cantat has "lost his right to perform and be respected as an artist." killing the daughter of a beloved French icon, then his wife hang herself after he got out of jail and did who knows what to her, his lawyer offed himself... the Cantat story is long.

As for Polanski - I don't care myself, his films are entities on their own for me, and worth to be seen. but for many he is a persona non grata, his work has to be shunned for all eternity. Klaus Kinski, Woody Allen.

I used to think I am albe to separate art and artist to a certain degree, and could aprreciate xy artform without attached moral judgement of the artist behind it. and then the Ian Watkins case showed me that I am unwilling to even try that with Lostprophets' music, so I'm the wrong person to argue to give Cantat (or any "asshole" artist) a break and listen to their music.

[Mals Marola]

Originally Posted by T&T

I think MJ was pretty messed up/

I'd think so.

the guy didn't want to be black, or white. his final form was almost an anime character.

didn't he have some sort of chromosomal disorder that led to the whole lighter skin thing?

[lionheart0]

Where the hell am I?

[T&T]

Originally Posted by Mals Marola

didn't he have some sort of chromosomal disorder that led to the whole lighter skin thing?

of course he had a medical condition
but he clearly also had a mental condition.

It was well documented that he was regularly on painkillers for one condition or another. I was on the same painkillers that Jackson was being prescribed (I remember looking up the name and getting tons of MJ hits on google). I can attest that those pills killed my boners & sex drive, which was my motivation to eventually get off them. It was a logical decision to stop taking them because the imbalance they caused was so obvious. They were fantastic for the pain and I really enjoyed the consistent euphoric buzz but I hit a huge depression while in withdrawal. In hindsight it was weird having zero libido. pills like that fuck you up.

[Mals Marola]

Originally Posted by T&T

of course he had a medical condition

yeah

yer "couldn't decide if he was black or white" made me think you were part of the "he was making himself white!" camp that exists in the belief that when he was getting his skin bleached, along with all the other plastic surgery or whatev

obv that's bullshit but i've heard it talked about

didn't really fixate too much on what race he actually saw himself as, if that's what you're getting at, the conflict seemed more like an exclusive desire to either figure out how to deal with being an adult or just remain a child forever

which is what more or less seemed to get him in all the trouble he was in for about the last 20 years of his life

[T&T]

Originally Posted by Mals Marola

yeah

yer "couldn't decide if he was black or white" made me think you were part of the "he was making himself white!" camp that exists in the belief that when he was getting his skin bleached, along with all the other plastic surgery or whatev

obv that's bullshit but i've heard it talked about

didn't really fixate too much on what race he actually saw himself as, if that's what you're getting at, the conflict seemed more like an exclusive desire to either figure out how to deal with being an adult or just remain a child forever

my point is that the racial "black or white" dialog was all projection by others. I think he just wanted to be a cartoon character. that's how fucked up he really was. (fucked up is a strong term, because I have no objections to actually being a cartoon character, but he was outside the norm obviously.)