Consensus is the new postmodernism
Jan. 21st, 2010 11:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
koganbotLotsa convos on Tumblr today somewhat inspired by Xhuxk's P&J essay, e.g., this one and this one and this one and this one. The problem that I'm having with them, and that Tom recognizes better than the other posters, is that the words "consensus" and "populist" and "contrarian" don't take care of themselves without elaboration. [EDIT: Chuck didn't write the headline that used that word, by the way.] One gripe I have in particular is the degradation of the word "consensus," which didn't used to mean "taste cluster" or "gets a plurality of votes" but rather "general agreement" or, more strongly (as in "the decision was reached by consensus"), "virtually everybody in the room signs off on it." So, there was no consensus in 2002 2000 that George W. Bush was the best man to be president or even that he won the election, but there was consensus that we should abide by the Supreme Court's decision as to who was to be president.
One reason I dislike the word's degradation is that if you're standing against a "consensus" that a whole bunch of other people don't actually consent to either, you're not being particularly contrarian. So if you communicate with a lot of rock critics you're not going to find consensus either that Animal Collective and ilk are good or that Taylor Swift et al. deserve to be dismissed out of hand, so in opposing those positions you're not really contrarian. In certain offline situations your ideas might put you genuinely alone among your friends, but still, you carry the rockcrit world in your mind so you're not alone in that world.
As for "populist," what's populist? Are you populist if you're for the cheer captain, who is popular, after all? Or do you have to be for the girl on the bleachers, or for the kid who snuck across the street to cop a cigarette?
But what interests me most is that people, despite trying to simultaneously stand with The People and stand against the crowd (good trick if you can pull it off; I'll give some examples in the comments), don't love and vote for particular songs for such reasons but rather vote for what they consider good music. "Sounds good" or "I like the way the music makes me feel" or "I like the mood" or "it's got a killer beat and I like dancing to it" or "I'm taken intellectually and emotionally by what's going on in the lyrics" or "I'm impressed by the philosophical and political questions the lyrics raise" or "I'm fascinated by the music's form" and so forth will trump "liking this makes me a populist" or "liking this makes me a contrarian" every time. So the fact that people's tastes do tend to cluster by social group and social class has to be explained, as does the fact that through their taste people get to differentiate themselves personally and socially from their fellows. I raised this issue in my very first Rules Of The Game column in mid 2007 and kept working at it in all the columns and followups through Rules Of The Game #9 (see links for all of them here) and then returned to the question throughout the series especially at nos. 12, 13, and 18. My point there was that social solidarity and social differentiation and personal differentiation all have an effect, but the effect is neither direct nor some mystical social pull but rather comes out of one's daily music listening and one's interaction with friends and acquaintances and with the broader culture that one gets through the media and participates in online. The words "consensus" and "populist" and "contrarian" wave vaguely at the world of such interaction without bringing us to it.
One reason I dislike the word's degradation is that if you're standing against a "consensus" that a whole bunch of other people don't actually consent to either, you're not being particularly contrarian. So if you communicate with a lot of rock critics you're not going to find consensus either that Animal Collective and ilk are good or that Taylor Swift et al. deserve to be dismissed out of hand, so in opposing those positions you're not really contrarian. In certain offline situations your ideas might put you genuinely alone among your friends, but still, you carry the rockcrit world in your mind so you're not alone in that world.
As for "populist," what's populist? Are you populist if you're for the cheer captain, who is popular, after all? Or do you have to be for the girl on the bleachers, or for the kid who snuck across the street to cop a cigarette?
But what interests me most is that people, despite trying to simultaneously stand with The People and stand against the crowd (good trick if you can pull it off; I'll give some examples in the comments), don't love and vote for particular songs for such reasons but rather vote for what they consider good music. "Sounds good" or "I like the way the music makes me feel" or "I like the mood" or "it's got a killer beat and I like dancing to it" or "I'm taken intellectually and emotionally by what's going on in the lyrics" or "I'm impressed by the philosophical and political questions the lyrics raise" or "I'm fascinated by the music's form" and so forth will trump "liking this makes me a populist" or "liking this makes me a contrarian" every time. So the fact that people's tastes do tend to cluster by social group and social class has to be explained, as does the fact that through their taste people get to differentiate themselves personally and socially from their fellows. I raised this issue in my very first Rules Of The Game column in mid 2007 and kept working at it in all the columns and followups through Rules Of The Game #9 (see links for all of them here) and then returned to the question throughout the series especially at nos. 12, 13, and 18. My point there was that social solidarity and social differentiation and personal differentiation all have an effect, but the effect is neither direct nor some mystical social pull but rather comes out of one's daily music listening and one's interaction with friends and acquaintances and with the broader culture that one gets through the media and participates in online. The words "consensus" and "populist" and "contrarian" wave vaguely at the world of such interaction without bringing us to it.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 07:32 pm (UTC)Anyway, here's the Blue Lines link (though I know you already have it linked on your page):
http://tomewing.tumblr.com/
Looks like Nabisco has been discussing the essay on his blog as well, though I haven't read much of this yet. (This is a link to his entire blog, since he seems to be spreading his discussion over a few posts, not just one):
http://agrammar.tumblr.com/
And inevitably, there's a long thread on ILM, which I inevitably haven't had the willpower to stay away from:
http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/ThreadSelectedControllerServlet?boardid=41&threadid=76656#unread
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 08:59 pm (UTC)Desnoise, by the way, is Marc Hogan, who seems like a very nice guy but the relationship between what you said and what he initially thinks you said is often fairly distant.
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 09:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 08:10 pm (UTC)That means that it's actually much easier for an album to claim the top spot -- it doesn't need to attract nearly as many voters from the pool (again talking about percentage, not numbers -- the voting pool in the 90's was 300 and rose to 600 by the end of the decade; this year there were 800 voters). Even the 2nd place albums (and often 3rd and sometimes 4th place) in the 90's tended to have more total voters voting for them than the 1st place ones have had in the past five years.
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 09:57 pm (UTC)Bob Dylan "Memphis Blues Again":
Now the T-preacher* looked so baffled
When I asked him why he dressed
With twenty pounds of headlines
Stapled to his chest
But he cursed me when I proved to him
Then I whispered, said, "Not even you can hide
You see, you're just like me
I hope you're satisfied"
Iggy Stooge:
Well it's 1969 OK, all across the USA
Well, it's another year for me and you
Another year with nothin' to do
I'm a streetwalkin' cheetah with a heart full o' napalm
I'm a runaway son of the nuclear A-bomb
I am the world's forgotten boy
The one who searches and destroys
Eminem:
In every single person there's a Slim Shady lurkin'
He could be workin' at Burger King, spitting on your onion rings
Or in the parking lot, circlin', screamin' I don't give a fuck
With his windows down and his system up
So will the real Shady please stand up
And put one of those fingers on each hand up
And be proud to be out of your mind and out of control
And one more time loud as you can how does it go?
'Cause I'm Slim Shady, yes I'm the real Shady
All you other Slim Shadies are just imitating
So won't the real Slim Shady please stand up, please stand up, please stand up...[repeat another 3x]
Ha ha, guess there's a Slim Shady in all of us. Fuck it, let's all stand up.
*He's saying "T-preacher" or "T-creature" or something like that. The lyric sites say "preacher," but he's clearly putting a tea in front of it. Tea-preacher?
no subject
Date: 2010-01-24 09:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-24 09:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-25 03:49 pm (UTC)Or.........
2] Other suggested transcripts for this line are:
Now, the tea preacher looked so baffled
Now, the T-preacher looked so baffled
Now, the teen preacher looked so baffled
Now, the team preacher looked so baffled
Now, the TV preacher looked so baffled
Well, the teen preacher looked so baffled
From this page:
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:Ek4tW6yzBccJ:www.xs4all.nl/~lvdm/lyr/album1.htm+%22teen+preacher+looked%22&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Tea pitcher?
Date: 2010-01-25 04:43 pm (UTC)Now the tea pitcher looked so baffled
Makes less sense than "teen preacher," and I'm sure he's not saying "pitcher." But I don't hear an "n" after the "tee," either.
Another possibility. He meant to just say "preacher" but for a split second forgot the lyric, or there'd formerly been some other lyric he hadn't totally forgotten, so he started a word that begins with "t," then cut it off and went to the right word, "preacher." (Or "creature," but I guess it is a p more than a c.) He'd stumbled earlier, "When I s--, he built a fire on Main Street and shot it full of holes." But that sounds like a stumble, as if he'd started to say something like "I saw" or "I said" and then switched to "he." But the "t" (or "tea" or "tee" or "teen") in "T preacher" is sung unhesitatingly.
A preacher in a t-shirt?