“Top” Doesn’t Have to Mean “Best”
As 2008 slowly comes to a close and albums take their places on the charts, an important question is raised: Does having the top selling album of a certain year necessarily mean that the album is the best? Also, who has the authority to make the judgment whether an album is worthy of such praise? If one reviewer writes a review in a positive light while another is negative, who is right? People enjoy all different genres of music and dislike others, but does that mean certain genres are worse than others? Obviously, a die hard Lil Wayne fan would protest that Tha Carter III deserves its spot at the top of the charts, but a Fall Out Boy fan would likely say otherwise. They could go back and forth and argue statistics and polls and whatnot, but they are not really getting anywhere. Neither is leaving the debate with a changed opinion and will continue to look at their side of the argument. Who has the right and ability to be unbiased, take a step back, and generate a solid and supported reason as to why a certain album does or does not deserve its high status?
The answer is: there is no answer. There is not a single person who is completely unbiased. Most people will say they enjoy almost or all types of music, which is not a lie. I am one of those people myself. I enjoy pretty much everything from The Used to James Blunt to Gym Class Heroes. But everyone has that one genre or band or artist that means more than the others, that genre that just clicks, and they can relate to it more than the others. Even if you took a person who has never heard music before and gave them ten albums, each of a different genre, they are going to formulate an opinion. When they come back to you and say one album outshines the others, that is just their opinion. As shown above in the charts, my list of top five albums of this year is much different than the top selling list. That does not mean my taste in music is worse than the rest of the world; it just means it is different, and as far as I know, different was never a bad thing. If there weren’t people who went out of the norm and created new things, there would never be any difference. Everything would be the same.
Who knows, maybe in a few years, a small indie band currently located in their parents’ garage will have a top selling album. People complain about one hit wonders, but if there were not any, then wouldn’t we get sick of the same artists after a certain amount of time? And it’s not like these artists disappear off the face of the earth after their one hit song has been put away. For example, Jason Mraz’s hit back in the early 2000s, “The Remedy (I Won’t Worry),” is still remembered today. Maybe the song isn’t clicking in your mind now, but if you heard it, I bet it would. When I discovered him and went out and bought his albums, I honestly thought it was a cover song because I remembered hearing it so many times before, but had never matched the song to the artist. Mraz is still making music and touring, just as much, if not more, than before. But not many people know that.
The whole point of the radio and the music industry is to get peoples’ voices out through their music, and yeah, maybe one of the first fans of that big time indie band that used to live in their parents’ garage isn’t too happy, but bands deserve some credit. No one can stay small forever. Fans should support them either way, even if they become the next big time band, or even if they never leave that garage. So what if they never make a top album, because top doesn’t have to mean best, and so what if maybe the guy from Rolling Stone magazine doesn’t appreciate their music as much as you do? Music has a different meaning to every person and nothing, not even record sales or popularity, should change that.
As 2008 slowly comes to a close and albums take their places on the charts, an important question is raised: Does having the top selling album of a certain year necessarily mean that the album is the best? Also, who has the authority to make the judgment whether an album is worthy of such praise? If one reviewer writes a review in a positive light while another is negative, who is right? People enjoy all different genres of music and dislike others, but does that mean certain genres are worse than others? Obviously, a die hard Lil Wayne fan would protest that Tha Carter III deserves its spot at the top of the charts, but a Fall Out Boy fan would likely say otherwise. They could go back and forth and argue statistics and polls and whatnot, but they are not really getting anywhere. Neither is leaving the debate with a changed opinion and will continue to look at their side of the argument. Who has the right and ability to be unbiased, take a step back, and generate a solid and supported reason as to why a certain album does or does not deserve its high status?
The answer is: there is no answer. There is not a single person who is completely unbiased. Most people will say they enjoy almost or all types of music, which is not a lie. I am one of those people myself. I enjoy pretty much everything from The Used to James Blunt to Gym Class Heroes. But everyone has that one genre or band or artist that means more than the others, that genre that just clicks, and they can relate to it more than the others. Even if you took a person who has never heard music before and gave them ten albums, each of a different genre, they are going to formulate an opinion. When they come back to you and say one album outshines the others, that is just their opinion. As shown above in the charts, my list of top five albums of this year is much different than the top selling list. That does not mean my taste in music is worse than the rest of the world; it just means it is different, and as far as I know, different was never a bad thing. If there weren’t people who went out of the norm and created new things, there would never be any difference. Everything would be the same.
Who knows, maybe in a few years, a small indie band currently located in their parents’ garage will have a top selling album. People complain about one hit wonders, but if there were not any, then wouldn’t we get sick of the same artists after a certain amount of time? And it’s not like these artists disappear off the face of the earth after their one hit song has been put away. For example, Jason Mraz’s hit back in the early 2000s, “The Remedy (I Won’t Worry),” is still remembered today. Maybe the song isn’t clicking in your mind now, but if you heard it, I bet it would. When I discovered him and went out and bought his albums, I honestly thought it was a cover song because I remembered hearing it so many times before, but had never matched the song to the artist. Mraz is still making music and touring, just as much, if not more, than before. But not many people know that.
The whole point of the radio and the music industry is to get peoples’ voices out through their music, and yeah, maybe one of the first fans of that big time indie band that used to live in their parents’ garage isn’t too happy, but bands deserve some credit. No one can stay small forever. Fans should support them either way, even if they become the next big time band, or even if they never leave that garage. So what if they never make a top album, because top doesn’t have to mean best, and so what if maybe the guy from Rolling Stone magazine doesn’t appreciate their music as much as you do? Music has a different meaning to every person and nothing, not even record sales or popularity, should change that.
Anyway. That's about it.
I'm missing him right now, and he's not even mine to miss.
I feel like
every
second
is
consumed
by
him.
Today he smiled, said hello, and waved. I bet he doesn't remember doing it.
Also, my friend plans to go out with this guy who likes her. I know it shouldn't matter to me, but it makes me feel more lonely.
Am I lonely?
No comments:
Post a Comment