Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 5, 2021 I somehow missed this thread when the other one went off the rails. If we can keep it civil and focused on music, it will stay. If it devolves into intolerant rants, then it will get nuked. I’ve had a PM conversation with another member for the last several days about echo chambers, intolerance, and the general realities of the world / internet. It’s disheartening to read people unwilling to accept opinions of others. With that said, here’s my opinion on this topic. I think cultural appropriation is BS, and this includes music (to keep it on topic). There was always someone doing it before whoever you’re talking about. Everyone is influenced by those who came before them. It’s how the world works and fortunately how education works. We learn from those who’ve gone before us, so we can increase our knowledge. When I see many cultural appropriation arguments involving music, the discussion usually stops a generation or two back. Why is that? Perhaps written records aren’t good? Perhaps it doesn’t fit one’s outlook on the situation. Perhaps we just don’t know? A discussion of cultural appropriation in music, which I personally think is BS, mustn’t stop with the artists we know. It should go back a couple hundred thousand years at least. What’s the logical conclusion of this BS topic? The first person to play music is the originator and all other music has been appropriated. Yes, that’s absurd. I know. My point remains, humans are influenced by other humans. There have always been cover bands, thieves, and those who make something their own, in addition to those who seemingly create something from from nothing. I respect all the opinions disagreeing with mine and all those who disagree. Different points of view are like options, they are healthy and I like them. AnotherSpin, NOMBEDES, John Dyson and 2 others 2 1 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 5, 2021 1 hour ago, Iving said: I missed whatever went down yesterday evening that resulted in "nuking" of the "Thesis: Appropriation" thread - and I don't refer to whatever that was. As I read it, there are two main problems with a blanket statement holding that, in relation to music, Cultural Appropriation is BS. Especially if the owner of an Audiophile/Music site asserts the same as a post-nuke verdict on "intolerant rants". I emphasise I wasn't party, or even witness, to those rants. 1. I can see that "Cultural Appropriation is BS": e.g. #1 white dopeheads wear fake dreadlocks - who cares e.g. #2 social manoeuvring - "I side with minorities" without accompanying substantial argument e.g. #3 pernicious - stoking the fires of victimhood for primary purpose of social/political unrest e.g. #4 pernicious - promoting instead of dissolving human "difference" However We all agree, surely, that music evolves. But this, of itself, does not mean that Appropriation is non-existent or irrelevant. Just as in the progress of Science and the Arts - nothing appears out of nowhere. There is always an unravelling towards the present - no matter how "creative" some new form of something. Few would argue that Rock 'n' Roll (pre-Beatles) is an American phenomenon. Blues > R&B > Rock 'n' Roll. It was pretty much Black to its climax c. 1947. I make the case myself - and there are plenty of informed/detailed arguments presented elsewhere. Early 1950s saw Elvis, Haley etc., many of whose hits are presumed to be their own inventions - "Shake, Rattle And Roll", "Good Rockin' Tonight". But these are Black compositions a decade or so earlier. Who gets credit for what is part of an Appropriation argument. If you Google "Shake, Rattle and Roll", you get result "Song by Bill Haley & The Comets". So anyone casually researching that tune (think younger generations) draws conclusions implicitly. These lack primary context. This is arguably "Appropriation". You may not consider it an important issue - you may say or think who cares who first wrote or performed something - but it *is* an Appropriation issue by any sensible understanding of what Appropriation means. And some people do care about plagiarism. It matters even when it is accidental/implicit. By far the greatest Appropriation argument relates to the economic power that drove the explosion of Rock 'n' Roll into the commercial mainstream - and thus the American/Worldwide 20th Century zeitgeist. On air play - promotion - pocket money spending on vinyl records. Need I expand on economic skew. And how that skew created implicit distortions in the lore of popular music. Again - "Appropriation" by any sensible interpretation. 2. A hobby site that is inclusive - or wishes to be inclusive - would naturally have a proportionate membership. Honestly I just don't know whether the membership of AS is "proportionate" culturally speaking. I know it's mainly a male pursuit - and thus we expect mainly males on any audio forum. There are few women - I am aware of only one on AS. And women audiophiles might not want to join in male banter. Still - if 10% of all audiophiles are women, we might aspire to 10% female membership. The same principle applies to socio-cultural background. Any which way - I do imagine that the culture of the site as promulgated by its owner is relevant to inclusivity - and that our owner values inclusivity. "I think cultural appropriation is BS, and this includes music" / "A discussion of cultural appropriation in music, which I personally think is BS" looks too strident to my eyes. btw - fwiw - Eric Clapton is usually more than eager to acknowledge influences. He wants to be known as someone who revived what was begun by others. That is his reputation. Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I certainly don't agree with it, but I like reading it. As a business owner, it makes sense for me to want everyone here no matter who they are. As a person, I also want everyone here, no matter who they are. I noticed you stoped backing up in time at Blues when you wrote "Blues > R&B > Rock 'n' Roll" Why did you not go back before Blues to see who influenced the great blues players? Do you think the great Blues players appropriated anything? Serious questions. I really have a hard time understanding sentences like, "Few would argue that Rock 'n' Roll (pre-Beatles) is an American phenomenon." Isn't that like saying few would argue the Earth is flat? Priaptor and GregWormald 1 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 8 minutes ago, Iving said: In the nuked thread - before it got crazy enough to nuke - I was very clear about the importance of folk music. How folk precedes everything. I have been very clear: We all agree, surely, that music evolves. But this, of itself, does not mean that Appropriation is non-existent or irrelevant. And then I explained. Most of my posts here are about evolution of music. From who and what did the folk artists appropriate? Surely we can keep going back in time a few hundred thousand years right? I prefer to look at this as an evolution of music rather than cultural appropriation. In addition, it isn't enough to suggest cultural appropriation where there is influence. We should also make sure to complete the loop by showing "the unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, etc. of one people or society by members of another and typically more dominant people or society." Perhaps that's my hang up. Are there specific musical instances you think are unacknowledged (certainly there are some) and what is "inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas?" Keeping this in the musical realm will help us not devolve into a shit show of course :~) Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 2 minutes ago, Iving said: You are doing what you often do. You extract tangents, demonstrating that you haven't read/understood the post to which you're responding. I do what I usually do. Answer in good faith anyway. Even though I have to repeat what I've already said. My Appropriation case was about 20th Century evolution of Rock 'n' Roll - not folk. I already explained I understand about the importance of folk. Most of my posts here are about the "natural" evolution of music. Well - humans as a species 200,000 yrs (and still). Out of Africa 70,000. Probably not much commercial or political exploitation of music during that time. I agree with you - most eveolution of music is "natural". Humans influencing each other is "natural". Everything is an eruption of history. I am always saying that. I know what you prefer! I am suggesting something to you for your consideration! I explained my case fully. Credit/plagiarism. Even more important - economic power and implicit distortions in lore. I know you won't accept what I say so I gave an academic reference too. You're challenging my on your own definitions - not what I said. I already explained about "Shake, Rattle & Roll" etc. No need for a shit show when I'm in town. A definition is a must. That's why I posted a simple one. If we don't agree on what we're talking about, then we'll never get anywhere. It seems that we need one or two elements, 1. Unacknowledged or 2. Inappropriate I raise my issues of going back further because it's a big evolution and not cultural appropriation. Sure, there have been some reprehensible people in the music business over the years, but based on my limited music knowledge it seems like most artists enjoy giving credit to those who came before them. That's kind of the opposite of cultural appropriation. I also think if people are to claim cultural appropriation they need to show what's "inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas." Musically, I don't see how it's inappropriate to adopt the customs, practices, or ideas of anyone? Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Last, you seem to not understand my tone. Suggesting you "Answer in good faith anyway" is strange to me. I always answer in good faith. Why wouldn't you? The use of the term "anyway" makes it seem like I am not, but you are. That makes it tough to have a conversation with you when you believe I'm not answering in good faith. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 20 minutes ago, Iving said: Well - humans as a species 200,000 yrs (and still). Out of Africa 70,000. Do we really need to argue over little things attempting to be correct and score points? I'd say no. I used this as my reference. "Music first arose in the Paleolithic period,[51] though it remains unclear as to whether this was the Middle (300,000 to 50,000 BP) or Upper Paleolithic(50,000 to 12,000 BP).[52]" Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 Just now, Iving said: Well - obviously that is a personal remark. An unpleasant and unnecessary culmination of your complete misunderstanding of my position and how it chimes with yours. If nobody understands your positions, perhaps you could offer different explanations that more people can understand? Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 12 minutes ago, Iving said: No it is not. You are resorting to external authority. You can develop an argument from first principles. Anyway - you used your own definition as a pivot for my remarks. As already explained. I gave an argument about: 1. credit / plagiarism 2. economic power and distortions in lore What more do you want? You are picking on me about no difference. Because you haven't digested my post. You are looking for conflict when there is none. My argument was about 20th Century Rock 'n' Roll - a counterpoint to "Appropriation is BS". My argument is clear enough. Otherwise I agree about imitation is flattery etc. I have explained. You challenge me on a tangent demonstrating that you haven't understood my post. I answer anyway repeating myself. Without a definition nobody has any idea what you're talking about. Your favorite color is red but you want to suggest that we needn't select which of these colors is red in order to discuss the beauties of the color red. I'm out. I really wanted to understand where you are coming from and have a good discussion, but you constantly want to point fingers at everyone else for not understanding and not talking in good faith. Perhaps it's time to look in the mirror. Iving 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 Just now, Iving said: Nobody? That's quite a generalisation. Is "everybody" sending you PMs as we speak? I don't need to offer different explanations if my first post is self-contained. You have demonstrated in Spades that you haven't understood it. Cogley even worse. Yes - I could dumb down. I don't choose to patronise. If anybody wants to read my post properly I would encourage that. How's the view from that high horse? Give me a break. Priaptor 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 3 minutes ago, christopher3393 said: So... even though when I've read histories of the blues there are many examples of what I would call blantant "racism"as well as many significant ethical concerns that raise questions about issues of fairness and "race", I wonder if we have to go back to the drawing board for other language and concepts to talk about those things? "Cultural Appropriation" just may be b.s. (bird s**t) imo. + 100 The music business is gross. There have been some terrible injustices, but I just can’t agree with calling it cultural appropriation. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 5, 2021 Share Posted October 5, 2021 13 minutes ago, christopher3393 said: I'd like to recommend a couple of articles that address this topic well without getting too heady. I think one was mentioned in a very helpful post in the nuked thread: Why Is Everyone Always Stealing Black Music? White people, blues music and the problem of cultural appropriation Before you wince, know that both articles say that the concept of cultural appropriation doesn't get at the complexity of the reality. There are lots of contradictions and gray areas. I enjoyed reading both and learned from them. This final reference is written in academic-ese. It is abstract, dense, and jargon-laden. But it also argues for the inadequacy of the concept and I tend to agree with it. Part 4 is the key piece and the critique of the notion of "cultural essentialism", which the author claims is presupposed by the concept of cultural appropriation frequently: The Ethics of Cultural Heritage: 4. Cultural Appropriation So... even though when I've read histories of the blues there are many examples of what I would call blantant "racism"as well as many significant ethical concerns that raise questions about issues of fairness and "race", I wonder if we have to go back to the drawing board for other language and concepts to talk about those things? "Cultural Appropriation" just may be b.s. (bird s**t) imo. Interesting. I just read your second link. At first I almost puked because I disagreed with the guy so much. But, I like how the article came around. I can’t say if his facts are right, but if they are, it’s a compelling case that cultural appropriation of music is a terrible way to describe it. A song written by a couple white Jewish guys, sung by a black lady, and made huge by a white guy who sounded black. It would be a utopia if we could all just say a song written for someone who had modest success, that was later sung by another person who made it huge. I get there are long painful histories, but at least I can dream of a world where the descriptions of people such as black/white, Jewish/Christian/Muslim, Man/Woman don’t need to be the crux of the story. Certainly owning one’s attributes, heritage, religion is great, but it doesn’t define us as people. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 13 minutes ago, PeterG said: Excellent questions. I buy the majority of CDs from Amazon, and direct from artists when I can. In both of these cases, artists are getting paid royalties (or more). I don't understand why you think they are not getting royalties from these. Even if the formula is as you say, the royalty amount is going up because of higher prints or lower returns. Like you, I buy out of print stuff from Discogs, and the artists do not get paid (oh well, it's only 10-20% of what I buy). I think there are many unknowns when it comes to artist remuneration. Plus, not all contracts are equal. I talked to an author recently who told me he didn’t care if I purchased his book from Amazon, a local bookstore, or via download, even though the prices were drastically different. He’d already been paid and received nothing from further sales. Yes, that’s an author but it’s an example of a consumer (me) not really knowing the details of how people get paid. We often assume purchasing a CD means more artist money all the time. I’m not so sure that’s the case. lucretius 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 6, 2021 Share Posted October 6, 2021 5 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said: There will always be a segment of the population that puts forth self serving rhetoric that essentially embraces the status quo. Statements like: "everyone stole from everyone, so there is no such thing as "appropriation"" "whatever happened wasn't my fault, so I just don't care if the music I like has a checkered past" "political correctness has just gone too far and must be stopped" "my favorite band(s) acknowledged/apologized for appropriation, so nothing to see there" There will always be that element that pushes back when the truth of how our society got to this point is revealed. Some will just reject it as lies. Others will respond with apathy. Still others, perhaps feeling a twinge of guilt themselves, will attempt to soften the vocabulary of oppression and theft in a naked attempt to salvage self esteem. And then there's the record companies and all the shady business practices that come with them. But is content really more important than how that content got made? Is the content more important than its provenance? Interesting take STC. Thanks for the honest comments. I agree with some and not others, but it’s hard to argue with sentences that say “there will always be a segment of the population.” In a way those are weasel words. No offense meant. Do you see anyone in this thread who you think is in that segment? Not in a confrontational way, just curious if you see others here in your identified segment that you disagree with. Priaptor 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 7, 2021 Share Posted October 7, 2021 Back on the topic of music, and do it cordially, or the thread gets nuked. NOMBEDES 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 7, 2021 Share Posted October 7, 2021 1 minute ago, AudioDoctor said: EC and his music, is BS I think you've previously said this as well :~) lucretius 1 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 8, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 8, 2021 17 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said: I think it's fairly obvious that the affluent, middle-aged white men demographic is over-represented on this forum, and the overall reaction to my post demonstrates that. Wow. You’re prejudging knows no bounds. Of course, only people in your approved demographic can have a valid thought about cultural appropriation. You’re on the slippery slope to separate but equal. Priaptor, Jeff_N and AnotherSpin 3 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Popular Post The Computer Audiophile Posted October 8, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 8, 2021 I’ll close out the thread with this video. Those on the ends of the continuum are closer to each other than they might think. lucretius and fas42 2 Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
Recommended Posts