dont follow versions lead
I've noticed some very sneaky behavior with users editing their posts after-the-fact, especially when they get challenged, to make it look like their challenger is being unreasonable, or uncharitable
I looked back and I see that's more what you were accusing me of i.e.dichotomizing
we were explaining this to craner the other day wrt whigfield saturday night but he didnt understand it was too complex for himyeah I think the question you bring up at the end of your post is a tough one
so much of our opinions are "reactionary" in the sense of being situated within some context of what we perceive as the larger opinion
so much of thinking someone is "bad" or "good" is, under the hood, about whether we think they're over- or underrated
Bourdieu talks about this with political positions a bit too, the way that a text "pushes" against current opinion, tries to "twist the stick in the other direction." the opinion doesn't exist in a vacuum but against the dominant ideology it's responding to
So his song is called Watermelon Sugar.... which I assume is named after In Watermelon Sugar, one of Brautigan's strangest books. Has this real nightmarish cuteness to it. Why is he naming his tune after that?on a lighter note what I think this thread needs is a good long analysis of Harry Styles' solo output vs. the greater output of One Direction
this is related to that thread on erisology isn't itthe opinion doesn't exist in a vacuum but against the dominant ideology it's responding to
good questionwho's done a good job in using their influences?
well, I guess anyone who did the opposite of bowie!good question
a lot of the post-punk people did a good job of it I think, from avant-funk to the disco not disco crowd to etc
on a somewhat related note, Arthur Russell. Levan, bringing dub respectfully into the Moulton/Gibbons model of dance music.
tho also you'd probably have to clarify what "a good job in using their influences" means
one illustration of this is how often i find myself embroiled in exactly the same argument at exactly the same time (sometimes one here and one on email, or both on email to different people or whatever) but im taking opposite sides depending on what i think that person needs to hear. it happens all the time its a really werid coincidence.we are always trying to make corrections to the current configuration that is why one dissensus maxim is that the question is not so much is its good as is it needed?