The whole cocky, angry, entitlement thing
So you don't like rock and roll? Jerry Lee Lewis? John Lennon? Zeppelin? David Bowie? Weird.
Anyway, I've never heard nothing but "meh" about that Storytellers thing, and I dig Kanye a lot.
Cocky and angry are prerequisites for rock and roll and those guys felt entitled to have all the broads they wanted. Kanye and a lot of other acts today feel they are entitled to be cocky and get angry when everyone doesnt sing their praises. Those you mentioned earned the right and I dont believe acts today believe they have to.
Here is the difference to me. I read the names you posted and with each one, the visual I get in my head is of them performing their music. When I hear or see Kanye's name, the vision I get is him bitching about something. Probably the fault of the industry in general but still.
I dont like him. I wont judge anyone who does, but I dont.
Was that so hard? See what trying to justify your taste gets you?
Go forth and sin no more. Though you should note that College Dropout is a great fucking record.
Taste police, is that a new forum feature? Not justifying, just making a simple, general statement that I wasnt aware was going to be analyzed in such detail. I need to go check the sign on the door to see what forum I am in.
I cannot deal with his massive overuse of autotune. Drives me nuts.
So you don't like rock and roll? Jerry Lee Lewis? John Lennon? Zeppelin? David Bowie? Weird.
Anyway, I've never heard nothing but "meh" about that Storytellers thing, and I dig Kanye a lot.
It probably has more to do with overexposure. Maybe if all those acts had had twitter accounts and had acted like cranky little children on national television semi-regularly (only to be replayed for weeks by 24 hour news), it would be a better comparison. People were left wanting to know more and more about those acts, but it seems like Kanye is everywhere I turn. I can see how it would be easy to get turned off by that.
I'm pretty sure that John Lennon was as overexposed as anyone in rock and roll could possibly be in his day. And Bowie was omni-present for a time in the UK press.
True. It's an interesting topic for sure. I think Kanye revels in the 24-hour new machine, though. It appears that he says and does a lot of that stuff just to get people talking about him.Still, I find it interesting that people blame the over-exposed in situations like this rather than examining mechanism of 24-hour-hypermedia or one's own complicitness in choosing to suckle at the media teat. I find myself carping about "overexposed" stuff at times, and I've taken pains to check myself and examine how I came upon the idea that some person/thing or another is overexposed. I admit, I'm really interested in the group and personal dynamics of tastemaking and mediated culture.
Yeah. John Lennon definitely got a lot of press. But wasn't that after he had several hits? And their initial coverage was mostly about their haircuts and outfits, right? Not so much about their politics and how they thought they were the voices of a generation. All that ridiculous stuff came years later, didn't it?
I'm sorry that I assumed you might have an interesting, discussable reason for the strongly worded dismissal of Kanye West which *you* issued. Are you feeling taste bullied?
Lennon got himself into the "bigger than Jesus" flap in '66 -- they'd been on the US scene for about three years. Kanye's first record (which was quite popular, but not Beatles popular) came out 6 years ago. Plus, he had already made a name for himself as Jay-Z's pet producer after gaining a ton of critical acclaim for The Blueprint a couple years earlier. Dude's an established artist in hip-hop circles.