RYM BTFO

>It would be fair enough, if easy, to disregard such carping as base hypocrisy, since I have skin in the game, and at some level want you to buy my record rather than someone else's (even worse hypocrisy: I grade student essays for a living!). But it's also that, as an artist, I truly don't find the question, "What's a better record, X or Y?" to be a meaningful question. So, in conclusion, let me repeat Reason Eight once more, with feeling: Each artwork proposes its own terms of judgment, sets its own goals, defines its own world, proposes anew its own set of relationships to what precedes it, implies a distinct way of being in the world. Yes, I'm saying that every record really is its own special fucking snowflake. Even the "worst" (by whatever rubric) record in the world proposes its goals, its relationships, its way of being. Believing that, I can't endorse comparative assessment as a quantifiable activity. Art objects can be described, endlessly, in their complex specificity, and described, endlessly, in the wide historical and cultural range of their effects as they move in time and across territory. But they can't be mapped onto curves or arcs of achievement relative to each other, or tracked and assessed in terms of their aesthetic success or failure, without begging certain basic questions about the grounding of such aesthetic judgments in the first place. Those questions might yield to sustained critical argument, but they can't be resolved by making, sharing or reading lists. And they aren't demonstrated by tagging numbers onto artistic achievement either.

>>73396361
>Which is why we should give up the practice of presenting lists and numbered rankings as if they offered shortcuts to understanding entire selves or entire genres, and stop writing soft-serve quickie primers that can stand in for personal engagement and research and first hand experience. Which is why we as artists should stop writing lists for websites when we are asked to do so, and instead do something else, or, failing that, encourage listeners to embark on their own journeys into the archive, and report back about one-on-one encounters with the treasures that they find. We should stop these phoney "Desert Island Disc" scenarios of imaginary scarcity. We should stop waging these "battles for the top of the heap" between art objects. We should stop thinking that one thing being good in its particular way means that another thing cannot also be good in its own, different, just-as-particular way. Stop playing favourites. Stop writing listicles.

>>73396348
There's no reason for me to care about anything a person who looks like that has to do or say. What an absolute cornball.

I give this article a 6/10. Some strong elements, but ultimately not worth returning to.

too much (bad) music in the world g

It's fun to make lists, and having favourites is a way to brand yourself, same as fashion or whatever

>>73396348

I said yes

shitty article. I'll rate music as much as I please.

>>73396348
what a pretentious cunt

>you're not allowed to say shitty art is bad because it'll hurt the artist's fee fees
Wew lad

>making lists and namedropping is narcissistic and a form of self-promotion
>continues to namedrop while showing pics of his record collection

Lmao Drew teaches at my school. Hilarious and clever dude

Sorry I don't take nu male opinions seriously