easycure

I totally agree ;-)

But, friend of Scaruffi, you describe the terms I used as if I were addressing people, not music. It's obvious that when I say "subtly hypocritical," my reference is to them as a group, as a collective of musicians, certainly not to them as individuals. I'm not judging ethically; I'm judging aesthetically, which is why I use such terms. If I were referring to people as such, it's clear that the example you provided would fit perfectly—Oasis would fall much more into that category. But I'm talking about the pure musical approach, whether that's more or less conscious, I don't know; certainly, for me, the result is this. Finally, if I use extreme terms or an extreme way of doing things, it is certainly, as you yourself said, to respond to the extremism of many fans. But I have no pretension of changing their opinions; frankly, I don't care. I only have the pretension of making another bell toll.

Ah ok, you wanted to know specifically in what sense I have "expanded"... I think this is well summarized in my post from yesterday where I respond to a friend of Scaruffi, it's more or less exactly what you're asking me ;-)

never thought of being a victim. however, there is a big difference between having a heated discussion on topics that could be considered extreme, and offending. it doesn't seem to me that the review used terms like "those idiot brainless fan assholes, die bastards cockheads.." etc. etc. so your argument would hold as long as the discussion was limited to people like you and Lux, who haven’t shied away from getting angry, but have always been respectful. Moreover, once again you only assess one point of view: you judge my style as being, let's say, "a bit" arrogant. yet 99% of the people who write here limit themselves, when they’re not offending, to mumbling nonsensical phrases about how I wouldn’t understand shit about music and that the DT are the best band in the world :-D they don’t explain, don’t offer their opinion, their vision, they limit themselves to a priori comments, expecting to take it for granted that their opinion is the right one. Such a style, clearly identifiable in 3000 comments full of phrases like the one I exemplified, is a far more arrogant aberration than mine because it is entirely a priori while I at least have the sense to articulate and clarify my opinion. Even arrogance has many faces. Aside from this, it is obvious that the review itself has a provocative aim, it was born in this sense and that provocation continues to amuse me a lot, however, in all honesty, there haven’t been many insights to change my opinion or my "style", at least for what my impression is.

You, Orion, are fixated on this blessed topic of how I've changed my mind. I’ve already answered you several times on this issue, and I’ll respond again: I can't expect, nor can you, to have changed my opinion over the past few months, and in any case, there are different kinds of change: I believe I’ve delved deeper into many of the topics I discuss, and just because these still align with my longstanding views doesn’t mean they haven’t evolved. It seems to me that you perceive "changing one's opinion" in only one direction, namely the one that would align most closely with YOUR opinion ;-) Aside from that, you entered the discussion only around May/June, so you have a limited perspective, as it could not be otherwise, on the discussion that has taken place here, which spans almost THREE years. This is what I was referring to when I responded to Scaruffi's Friend: compared to when I wrote the review, nearly THREE years ago, my point of view has certainly expanded. It’s obvious that this perception is difficult for you; you've missed about 1000-1500 comments, and aside from that, I repeat, there are VARIOUS and multiple ways to deepen one's opinion. I hope to have finally exhausted this topic with you :-)

Hello Scaruffi's friend! I admire your balance: however, you've misunderstood me a bit; the fact that they are particularly technical musicians is, for me, a starting point. Of course, you might say that the review focuses on that, and that's true; but it's two years old and while confirming everything, my perspective has, let’s say, expanded. Essentially, what interests me in considering them one of the worst bands to have graced 50 years of rock is the combination of immense erudition with an absolutely nonsensical harmonic approach, completely devoid of style, fundamentally banal. The fact that they copy is merely one aspect of their total lack of personal composition. This makes them ENORMOUSLY arrogant and also subtly hypocritical in assuming that great competence is enough to talk about style, in presuming that any form can intrinsically create content and fulfill the communicative need. Intrinsically post-modern and terribly conservative, they are one of the worst aberrations of rock. That Scaruffi does not consider them as such does not mean much to me, aside from the fact that not everything he says should be taken at face value; the impression in his case is that he has been drawn in by the lengthy, jammy intellectualism of the band in question, as often happens if you read his site, where he tends to drool every time a piece exceeds 10 minutes in length. :-)

wait wait, maybe I found it on soulseek.. :-) aaaahhh, soulseek

Dude, do you know I've been looking for this record for ages? Can you send it to me or get it to me somehow? ;-)

josi! hello handsome! :-D yes, fucking Catanesi, beaten at home what an embarrassment :-)

Thank you so much, North! Thank goodness there are groups like yo la tengo... ;-)