skycrwlr wrote:
TapirMache wrote:
Of course my dislike of the track stems from a place of objectivity
I don't know where you get the idea that I don't like the song,
We are being troll'd do not engage
I'm not trolling at all, do you really think I can't like something and simultaneously have criticisms? I remember saying multiple times that I liked and enjoyed the track, however I don't think it's very good.
kafkaesque wrote:
uhhh... a place of subjectivity? jesus christ. has it taken you this long to realize that art and the appreciation thereof is subjective?
there is absolutely nothing wrong with not digging this song as much as their old material. furthermore, there is absolutely nothing wrong with voicing why you (relatively) dislike it. but there is so, so much wrong with claiming that everyone who really enjoys this song is deceiving him/herself out of blind fandom. it's the difference between saying "ah, i don't think this stands up to their best material" and saying "you are deluding yourself if you think this song is really good." the former is perfectly respectful disagreement. the latter is presumptuous, rude, and almost definitely not true.
have you read these forums much? people voice dislike of animal collective material all the time. the easiest example is centipede hz, which plenty of people on this board thought was a bit of a disappointment.
I completely disagree with you, the appreciation of art can be just as objective as it can be subjective. You actually think I would go to the trouble of creating some subjective reason to not like it? The only reasons I like it are subjective (ex: it's fun). Looking at it objectively, as I would their masterpieces (HCTI, Sung Tongs, Feels, Strawberry Jam, and MPP) which fascinate me from a compositional perspective, Floridada is very boring, there's no mystery to how they wrote it. I don't only enjoy listening to Animal Collective, they touch my soul and open new doorways of creative expression, but the latter hasn't happened with any studio album since Tomboy. When I saw them on their first tour playing CHz material, I thought it was going to be their best album yet, and I remember crying when Honeycomb came out because I was so disappointed. I've read these forums plenty, I actually transcribed most of the chords for CHz with a friend of mine under a different screen name, and I don't remember saying "you are deluding yourself if you think this song is really good". If anyone is being rude, it's you.
Proboo East wrote:
tapir, i got news for ya, bud: youre hilarious, your self-important attitude is genuinely one of the funniest things ive seen this year. thanks for the laughs, bro.
thanks dude, I'm just trying to help you guys out who blindly adhere to the belief that AnCo can do no wrong. It's no so much "self-important" as it is experienced because I used to be obsessed with figuring out their musical secrets, which is what led me to the forums years ago. I know how to play nearly all of their songs and they've all been incredibly influential to my songwriting, but since the Centipedia came out, their newest material appears to me as a predictable combination of their many influences, whereas most of their discography pre-CHz still blows my mind.
Texas Trill wrote:
TapirMache, take note on how rocks is clearly being subjective in his argument. He is also being open minded in hoping there will be better things for him to come. If you don't want to feel like you're being attacked, go about arguing like this
What is wrong with being objective? do you really think it's impossible to judge music objectively? Animal Collective are not my favorite band of all time for subjective reasons. Looking at them objectively, they've made more musical innovations than any single band since The Beatles. Objectivity is not about removing emotion from judgement, it's about judging one's ability to express emotion. Subjectivity to me means basing your judgement off of your own emotional reaction to the music, rather than appreciating music as a language. I understand it might be very different for some of you, but I've gone to every length imaginable to ensure my objective opinion is free of bias or any personal attachments I have to the music so that I'm able to look at it more clearly in the light of historical context, solely judging its intrinsic value.
I only brought up having met Mark Richardson to express his credibility as a critic.
