25 Aug
2010
25 Aug
'10
3:26 p.m.
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 1:16 PM, James Warden <warjamy(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I think what he's getting at is the intellectual, spiritual and
artistic worth of mainstream popular music today - which is as bad if
not worse than its ever been right now. Whilst I'm well aware there
has always been trite music flogged by pretty looks and imagery for as
long as we've had TV and a music charts it started to go really sour
in the 90's with Britney, N'Sync, Backstreet Boys etc. - a disgusting
proliferation of truly heartless, plastic, image-based substitute for
music which led to the likes of S Club Juniors, TaTu and now Hannah
Montana et al.
Call me a conspiracy theorist but I do firmly believe the dire state
of mainstream popular music is an intentional attack on consciousness
by Big Media. Thankfully though there are still plenty of great
musicians producing genuine, worthy music out there - you just have to
go look for it on through the alternative media outlets on the web
etc.
Can subconscious intelligence enhancing music
actually be
made or are we
limited to the primitive senses of sexual reproduction and
aggression for
mass market appeal?
Patrick, I do not understand this sentence of yours.
Sexual reproduction is not a primitive sense, neither is "aggression", and the
"goal" of sexual reprod. and aggressive behavior is not mass market appeal as
you seem to suggest here.
When all this is said, mass markets are a given of our industrial societies. So of
course, any marketable activity can lead to de facto industry standards or trends. Some
ppl are easily appealed by those, some are not. But I don't see why we should label
our basic biology or behaviors as primitive and link it to mass appeal. Could you
elaborate ?