I keep seeing these lists and think to myself: "How do you guys have the time to listen to so much new music every year and then even figure out which ones are cream of the crop. You've had these albums for what? Twelve months at maximum". I can name two or three albums from the last year that I find very potential but that's it, they haven't even been tried yet. Time is the best test indeed and I don't have lots of it for some new album that appeard out of nowhere some three months ago. I'm too busy listening this Iron Maiden record and that Morbid Angel one.. Let's see how many times I've listened to For Millarca or Belus after few years.
Exactly. Also a few of the top10 entries by people that have been striken by this industry-wide ailment have been out for scant months or weeks before they find their place in year end lists.
Or, maybe more pressing, why is it the majority of these lists are identical? Is it simply that the same 10 records all appealed favorably to critics (all hopefully with very different aesthetic predispositions)? Or is it that most critics want to appeal favorably to each other?
I suspect there's a need for some cultural consensus that drives Kvelertak on most year end lists. The record may or may not be of some quality but foremost it's a curious record. It's been marketed hard and most people took note. That people are putting it on their lists, I think, is more about saying "something interesting happened this year in metal, see, it's an alive sort of music".
That's the big purpose of end of the year lists for music journalists that write them. To show that they're engaged in something vital and alive. The commercial usage of these lists is different (christmas sales, whee!), but it feeds off of this perceived vitality.
Instead, I suggest that Heavy Metal is dead, done, buried. Let us then see who still worships death, ten years from now.
It's not dead, but there are things to find out about oneself if it's supposed dead for a time. The consumerist relationship with the metal day-to-day needs distance to be seen for what it is.
I keep seeing these lists and think to myself: "How do you guys have the time to listen to so much new music every year and then even figure out which ones are cream of the crop. You've had these albums for what? Twelve months at maximum". I can name two or three albums from the last year that I find very potential but that's it, they haven't even been tried yet. Time is the best test indeed and I don't have lots of it for some new album that appeard out of nowhere some three months ago. I'm too busy listening this Iron Maiden record and that Morbid Angel one.. Let's see how many times I've listened to For Millarca or Belus after few years.
ReplyDeleteExactly. Also a few of the top10 entries by people that have been striken by this industry-wide ailment have been out for scant months or weeks before they find their place in year end lists.
ReplyDeleteThe real question is will half these people even be listening to Metal at all in 10 years, much less the second- and third-rate Black Metal of late...
ReplyDeleteOr, maybe more pressing, why is it the majority of these lists are identical? Is it simply that the same 10 records all appealed favorably to critics (all hopefully with very different aesthetic predispositions)? Or is it that most critics want to appeal favorably to each other?
ReplyDeleteI suspect there's a need for some cultural consensus that drives Kvelertak on most year end lists. The record may or may not be of some quality but foremost it's a curious record. It's been marketed hard and most people took note. That people are putting it on their lists, I think, is more about saying "something interesting happened this year in metal, see, it's an alive sort of music".
ReplyDeleteThat's the big purpose of end of the year lists for music journalists that write them. To show that they're engaged in something vital and alive. The commercial usage of these lists is different (christmas sales, whee!), but it feeds off of this perceived vitality.
Instead, I suggest that Heavy Metal is dead, done, buried. Let us then see who still worships death, ten years from now.
Naw, man, don't think it's dead. Seems like it's just cannibalizing itself. And that's the good stuff. The bad stuff, well, it's parasitic.
ReplyDeleteIt's not dead, but there are things to find out about oneself if it's supposed dead for a time. The consumerist relationship with the metal day-to-day needs distance to be seen for what it is.
ReplyDelete"Seems like it's just cannibalizing itself. And that's the good stuff. The bad stuff, well, it's parasitic."
ReplyDeleteNeat rhetoric here.
So, why not make a list of your favorite albums from the year 2000?
ReplyDeleteI could, but it'd be a short list. I'll be writing about the records in the top100 that reach to 2000 after all.
ReplyDelete