lux

My daughter, I have listened to artists and bands far more intricate and peculiar than Evanescence. I tell you that the melodies are ABSOLUTELY Pop of Evanescence; it’s not a matter of prejudice, we all have ears to listen. There isn't even a true mixture of genres in their sound; there’s just a Nu Metal structure with vague Gothic hints. Musical sensitivity is something that develops after many, many different listens of many different genres. You won’t understand me until you intellectualize your approach to music. Even I, a long time ago, thought that Linkin Park was the pinnacle of rock. I was ignorant. I still am, but to a decidedly lesser extent, and above all, “I know that I do not know,” meaning I know there’s always something I haven’t listened to and need to hear in the future. It’s not a matter of subjective emotions of music and the usual nonsense and clichés, but rather a matter of culture and historical relevance. Subjective emotions are the last thing a critic should focus on when speaking about music. Music is culture. Culture can (albeit somewhat narrowly) be confined into explanatory and transmissible frameworks from one individual to another, therefore it possesses a component of objectivity and historical relevance.

beyond all measure

A Liz, what patience it takes with you. What do you want me to explain, sorry? If you had a reasonably global view of rock from the 60s to today, you would understand that Evanescence are an artistically useless group; they certainly didn't invent Gothic (do you happen to know Paradise Lost)? They drew on some vaguely Gothic atmosphere and embedded it in a Nu Metal context, hitting the jackpot with the vocalist's voice (which is pretty). But a voice alone doesn’t make music great. They’re catchy to an excessive degree, bland. They bet everything on success. There are tons of better bands than them, but if you shut yourself off from MTV, you’ll never know them.

The Evanescence invented a genre??????ahahahhahahahhahahahahah ahahahaha, come on Liz, I beg you, let’s end it here. SUCCESS is NEVER (except in very rare cases) directly proportional to its artistic value; indeed, it’s OFTEN INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL. So their success means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Britney Spears also had success, but you won’t tell me she makes great music.

"but don't say silly things!!!!!! they are immense!!!!!!!" ...what elevated musical criticism, Valentina, you are truly unreachable dialectically.

Without a reason? But I must have listened to them to say they suck, right? Anyway, I would really like to know the musical culture of those who listen to and appreciate Evanescence. Holy God, I can somewhat understand why you like them (more or less); tastes are subjective... but objectively, their music is poor, there's no arguing about it.

nooooo but what have I done, I was supposed to give him 1

yes yes, they are really great. The Grateful Dead, on the other hand, are a bunch of donkeys.

And those who don't listen to Evanescence don't understand a damn thing about music, I think that's fair... But why are you talking, why? Why do you care so much about pigeonholing such ridiculous figures?

Well, isn't sugar better at this point? We don't understand a damn thing? Just go to school, will you?