|
Some have contended that I’m generalizing about pop music. I know I am generalizing to some extent and that there are always exceptions to the rule, but there’s nothing wrong with generalizing if the vast majority of the cases supports your generalization. And the vast majority of all pop music I’ve heard (once again, I’m talking about pop music in the broadest sense of the term, covering all its subgenres, from mainstream pop/rock to hiphop to rap to heavy metal to punk to techno to reggae, and so on) sucks when compared to the richness and profoundness of classical music (also in the broadest sense of the term, from Machaut to Palestrina to Monteverdi to Bach to Mozart to Beethoven to Wagner to Mahler to Debussy to Stravinsky to contemporary classical).
Some have also asserted that good pop music does exist. The notion that pop music is musically inferior to classical music in many respects, doesn't exclude the fact that there are a few pop artists and bands out there showing genuine musical creativity in their songs. I personally, however, find this supposed creativity in pop music still a farce when compared to the creativity shown by the great classical composers. Radiohead was mentioned as an example of good pop music (true, I liked their albums Ok Computer and Kid A when I was younger). Indeed, they are an original and creative band according to the standards of pop music, but when compared to the standards of classical music their music suddenly isn't that special anymore... I mean, compare the creativity it takes to make an album like Ok Computer to the creativity it takes to compose a St. Matthew's Passion or a Mahler symphony - it's a no-brainer that the former is not a patch on the latter.
(Continued in my next post...)
|