Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Page 2 of 2 pages
became aware of Vaughn when I first started playing, in 1956, a board game called Cadaco All-Star Baseball, which has a round disc for each player, with numbered arcs on the discs for various events. 1 was a homer, 5 a triple, 9 a walk, 10 a strikeout - you get the idea. Well, the games had disc sets for "All-Time Greats", and I promptly found out that the very best shortstop disc was for somebody named Arky Vaughn. (The game did not adjust for time period, so the Honus Wagner disc was the unadjusted numbers from the dead ball era.) That made me look up Vaughn. The important thing that I remembered was that this guy was the best, except for the unadjusted Honus. And sure enough, when advanced analysis came into play, he WAS the best.
it looks like her fame is almost entirely based on mentions in print and electronic tabloids, exactly the same as the fame of the Kardashians.
So very wrong.
What is it based on, then? What are the points of contact that would have connected her music with an overwhelming number of Americans? Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like a Super Bowl halftime show might be the only thing that matches Sullivan.
There is no such thing as unimportant knowledge, if you look deep enough you can see the universe in Kardashian's butt.
The Beatles had two reputations. When they first became superstars, they were, essentially, a boy band like NSync. You can hear all those songs, all of which were #1 at some time, just by listening to the album "Meet the Beatles." After a while of this, and after making so much money that they weren't worried about selling records any more, they decided to try to become serious musical artists. The transition occurs just about at the Rubber Soul album. To the surprize of everyone who hated British Invasion boy bands (including me), they were able to pull this off, and ended up with a COMPLETELY different rep. The second rep is driven by the realization of critics that they actually performed two different kinds of song - let's call them the Paul songs and the John songs. And both of these were clearly not boy band pop, although Paul songs sometimes skirt really close (as happens with Wings).
Short version: You're a Lady GaGa groupie, & you've managed to rationalize it.
All I know about her is that she makes a big deal of dressing like a complete idiot. I tend not to like people who dress like complete idiots. If they're musicians, I prefer for their music to do the talking, not their hairstyles, makeup, costumes, etc. So ... I guess the "general artistic milieu" you're talking about is the one that starts with "complete" & ends with "idiocy"? God, I'm so fascinated I don't know what to do.
Even within genres you think you hate, you can find good stuff if you keep your ears open. I'm sure somewhere out there, there is a good prog rock or blues song waiting to be discovered. :)
They were just idiots you liked. But let's not kid ourselves, ok, please?
I'm sure I'm much more pop-friendly than the majority of people here, but I would say all four of the artists listed above have had at least a few good songs, all are good performers, and three of them are good singers. They definitely don't represent the worst of today's pop music.
Lady Gaga has a few things going for her. She's undeniably creative (though I agree with billyshears about "losing the thread on that joke" in terms of fashion and spectacle). She has legitimate musical ability -- she plays piano well and writes her own songs. And she has a pretty good voice. Sometimes that gets lost in all of her nonsense. But if you like pop music at all, it's hard to deny that "Poker Face," "Paparazzi" and "Bad Romance" are really good songs.
98. Srul Itza Posted: May 14, 2014 at 10:40 PM (#4707085)
but from what I've seen GaGa's crap is more like Bjorn dressing up as a ####### swan -- a pretty sad state of affairs
Assuming they are serious about it.
If it is all just a huge put on, as I suspect, then your reaction is exactly what they are trying to elicit. You are taking the joke seriously. I think it reflects worse on you than it does on them.
next, you'll be claiming ignorance of Blyth Power or Flux of Pink Indians, just because the mass media never got around to spoonfeeding them to you.
Anyone who doesn't know "Tube Disaster" or "Bloody Revolutions" has no business, IMHO, succumbing to an attack of the vapors because I wouldn't know "Poker Face" if I heard it.
The tragedy of modern music is that all of it is videoed in some form now,
Instead, we get these exhibitionist idiots painted in primary colors who who will say or do anything to get noticed.
I'm not sure why she's any more celebrated than, say, Alison Goldfrapp
People hated the Beatles because they were all style and no substance (cut your hair, hippie).
118. next, you'll be claiming ignorance of Blyth Power or Flux of Pink Indians, just because the mass media never got around to spoonfeeding them to you.
I had a co-worker who accidentally sent me a text talking about how he was playing a Pokemon game again (same first name as the person he was trying to text), and while Pokemon upon immediate examination seems like the dumbest thing in the entire world to me, when I teased him a little bit about it and chatted with him about why he, as a 25 year old man, still liked it, it was in fact pretty interesting. Didn't make me want to learn about it myself, but I was happy to learn about it from him.
Plus, how can you not love a water-shooting turtle who evolves into a monster with giant water cannons sticking out of his shell?
Exercise: match these seven planets to the seven days of the week.
But that way lies madness -- next, you'll be claiming ignorance of Blyth Power or Flux of Pink Indians, just because the mass media never got around to spoonfeeding them to you.
I associate Thursday with Thor; not sure what that has to do with any of the planets.
Here's a thought -- go #### yourself.
OK, the answer key, using Spanish as the alternate language (note: Portuguese would be useless):
So you do need (or at least prefer) spoonfeeding by mass media?
I was visiting my aunt a few weeks ago, and her less-than-intellectual (but not stupid) son-in-law Kirk, who lives next door, came over. We got to talking about gardening, because my uncle died last year and I was wondering if anyone was going to put his little greenhouse to use. I made some comment about planting dates or vegetable yields and Kirk said somewhat derisively "I suppose you read that somewhere", which I confirmed. Then he said "Debra (his wife and my cousin) told me you used to read all the time when you were a kid", so I said that I still do. Then he said "My Dad never read much at all, but he started reading books about 10 years ago and he said it was amazing how much he learned", basically looking for confirmation from me that it was true and he Dad wasn't just pulling his leg.
If something isn't your jam but isn't actively hurting the people who enjoy it why slag on it? To prove yourself a snobbish jerk?
But Arky Vaughan isn't the 1929 stock market crash. He's more the Panic of 1907, which was big and important but hasn't resonated down the years like the Great Depression. Vaughan for whatever reason didn't break through into longlasting celebrity. His Pirate teams were good but never won the league, and the 30s were a down time in national baseball interest for obvious economic and geopolitical reasons. Not knowing about Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, Walter Johnson would be pretty ridiculous from a baseball announcer, because everyone around baseball knows those names. Not knowing about Vaughan puts you with a lot of people who don't know about a great player who sort of vanished from the popular mind.
A baseball announcer is in theory an expert. I'm pretty sure that most if not all economics professors know about the 1907 panic.
The main difference, I think -- & I'm not awake enough yet to research the thread, but I'm pretty sure someone has already at least alluded to it -- is today's sorry, pathetic 24/7 media coverage making capital-C celebrities of the Lady Gagas & Katy Perrys of the world. Had websites, entertainment cable networks & such been around back in, I dunno, the late '70s, my flesh might well have crawled at the very idea of delving into the likes of (picking bands out of the air) the Adverts & Stiff Little Fingers. I obviously have a strong iconoclastic streak (for all the hundreds of records, CDs, etc. that I own by Top 40-type artists over the years), & the sad fact is that by definition, I guess, I harbor an instinctive aversion to embracing icons.
You have a pathological need to define yourself in opposition to things that are popular and have decided that this must be pushed onto the entire rest of the world.
The idea that you would stop wanting to listen to Suspect Device or White Noise because a bunch of other people also liked those songs is...well, pathological.
Listening to Tube Disaster right now. It's good. Glad to have found out about it.
Yes, but if you're not listening to the original Epileptics demo version, you're missing out.
There's a qualitative difference between these two that's kind of hard to put into words, but off the top of my head I'd say it has something to do with the fact that, especially around here, we see and discuss baseball as an extension of our intellectual curiosity, bringing analytical skills to bear, etc. etc. Whereas by and large, being into TMZ and the Kardashians and US Weekly and whatnot tends to reflect a lack of curiosity and disposition towards valuing the mindless, the shallow and the superficial.
'm not a musical person at all, so most of my exposure comes from listening to the radio when I'm in the car.
The competition for Lady Gaga is not your list of all-time favorite mp3s that you have lovingly curated on your home computer.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
Login to Join (9 members)
Page rendered in 0.8277 seconds, 41 querie(s) executed