See also: Cartesian concern with the disparity between language and meaning. It might seem conservative to necessitate a link between words and material cultural meaning but, well, the opposite is a complete breakdown in meaning. Which isn't bad (add italics to that "bad"), per se, but it isn't really possible when you apply it to people and cultural products. People will always attach meaning and connotation to language; always. That's why people just enjoying "the music" isn't possible. If you want to connect this back to Odd Future and feminism, look at the way that you defined feminism. That single word means two completely different things to you and me. Can it exist just as a word, without meaning? No. Nobody can say, "Well feminism is fucking stupid" and not have it mean something. Just like Odd Future can't say "All you fuckin' bloggin' faggots" and have it mean nothing. You're looking to remove meaning from the language because it's just "the music". The problem with that is, well, is that really possible? And if it is, is that really what anybody wants; especially the artists?
Asked by
redneckzilla
Duality aside1 I’m just a little disappointed in some of the writing (my writing, included) that focuses more on the zeitgeisty connotative aspect of music rather than on the music itself. I understand this is a problematic concept for you. There are ways to go about writing about texts that talks about the texts. It can thoughtfully explore an array of meanings inspired by the text. You can write about the marxist implications of ideology in Bleak House without writing about German idealism and Feuerbach because last time I checked, even though everyone in that book has a ridiculous name, none of them are Feuerbach.
There’s a big difference between writing about a song and writing about these ten other blog posts about the group that made the song. For real.
Plus, see https://skitch.com/b.michael.payne/r5bc1/twitter-frisco-tsc-i-just-like-to-let-my-work-
So I guess sometimes people really do just want to be judged by their work and not the falling tide of sentiment on Twitter that one day.
-
Of course, there’s a lot of post-Cartesian thinking that doesn’t see the frankly ridiculous need to set things in terms of objects and minds, especially when we are actually engaged in the world and a shared form of life with others, which living and life tends to create lived-in meanings that are fluid and resist gross categorization. ↩
