[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Frank Sinatra dead at 82

At 11:58 AM 5/19/98 -0400, Stephen R. Low wrote:

>There was a time in this country's musical history when a significant number
>of people (listeners and music industry execs) were capable of judging song
>quality and performance talent. Over the years the number of people with
>this level of education and judgment has sadly declined. Instead, we are
>left largely with music of very low quality, delivered by dreadful
>writers/performers, largely to the ignoramuses who listen. No one would
>argue that the crap that's played is POPULAR, but this is not the same as
>being of high (or top) quality.
>Important warning to potential flamers: Your failure to agree wholeheartedly
>will identify you with the ignoramati (sp?) I referenced above. Flame me at
>your own risk!

OK, let's consider this a "commentary" as opposed to a "flame".  I don't
believe for one minute that the quality of music (or any other pop culture)
has changed significantly over the years.  A very high percentage of any
mass-produced entertainment is crap and is quickly forgotten.  One notices
the current crap because it's impossible to miss...but...in a couple of
years most of it will be forgotten...the stuff that is capable of standing
the test of time will.  I find it hard to believe that a larger percentage
of pre-rock era pop music was great or memorable...but it's had 40+ years
to let the true classics shine through. The clinkers have thankfully fallen
off the end of the earth never to be seen again.  Mitch Miller & The Gang
put out countless albums in the 50s...would you place him beside a Sinatra,
Crosby or Cole?

Or is this a case of "I don't like or understand.any of the new stuff, so
it's garbage"?  If that's your attitude, then count yourself among the