• 1 Post
  • 545 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2024

help-circle
  • I might be wrong but I feel that today’s mainstream music is quite generic. Of cause there are bubbles for everything and more than before due to the internet.

    I don’t know where to draw the line tho. The top level comment says it’s the early 00’s (or rather quotes Mark Fisher who said that), maybe it’s later. Maybe kids these days don’t listen to what I think is mainstream. Maybe I’m just old and “this is generic and no art” is the new “this is noise and no music”, I donno.


  • In my defense, I was like 12 or something. I knew the song from my older brother and liked it. My English wasn’t good enough to understand it completely but it spoke to me on an emotional level.

    So the shock wasn’t that I was a huge Limp Biskit fan. I can’t name another song and had to look up the spelling writing the comment. The shock was how much older the song was than, well, than me. It spoke to how I felt towards my parent generation but it was basically written by my parent generation.



  • To play the devil’s advocate here: “music used to be subversive but now it’s all the same, nothing original” sounds just like a grumpy old man yelling at a cloud. Old people will find reasons to hate new stuff.

    This isn’t to disagree. I read Capitalist Realism and think the argument works. And personally, I remember how shocked I was to find out that Behind Blue Eyes wasn’t originally by Limp Bizkit but much older and that my mom listened to the punk rock band I liked as a teenager when she was young. My question might be if there ever was anything “new under the sun” but first and foremost, I like the idea as a devil’s advocate.






  • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.comtomemes@lemmy.worldbased vs cringe
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 days ago

    I would argue that it has an origin but lost its meaning since the people who use it don’t know the meaning. At this point, it’s more than anything a cultural signifier which isn’t a new thing either. People try to belong to an ingroup and adopt their insider even if only as marker of that group.








  • lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoScience Memes@mander.xyzLamarck moment
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    24 days ago

    Lamarck wasn’t the first to come up with a theory of evolution and Darwin wasn’t right about the mechanism.

    Charles Darwin’s grandfather already had a theory of evolution and arguably, even he wasn’t the first.

    Charles Darwin wasn’t aware of genes. His idea of inheritance was basically the same as Lamarck’s. Only when Darwin and Mendel were combined, the “modern” theory of evolution was born, the “new synthesis” or something it’s called.

    The reason we single out these two isn’t that one was first and one was right, neither was. It’s because of the Great Man of History idea. We could talk about Wallace, how he was on the same path as Darwin but Darwin published first to outcompete him. But we don’t because we like to believe in great thinkers who singlehandedly changed the world.