Jump to content
 

New Single/Video for Generational Divide (Out Friday!)


Ghent

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Harvey Klinger's Heartache said:

What am I supposed to argue? Retards don't know they're retards ... I'd be trying to make my completely point and you'd be over there looking at clouds drowning in your own spit. I can't be responsible for that! Sure, you're soft-brain but a mother's love is mostly unconditional and I won't take the chance of breaking her heart.

I know that because I argue with Janet every day ... difference is Jan's mom doesn't love her so it's whatever. 

You really don’t seem to get that just because something is fast doesn’t mean it’s not boring. 

 

I’ll leave you there, trying to make your “completely point”. Whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean. Though, the irony of calling someone a retard and then typing that incoherent dribble is not lost on me. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bucko said:

It does itself a favor going live, in all aspects minus Mark's vocals I'd say.  They need to go back to Neighborhoods style production, could do wonders for their current sound which gets completely drowned in the thick, over produced studio version. 

Still pretty generic overall, wish they'd just write a song that means something, anything, instead of this mental illness kick they're on which is literally all they sing about now.

Probably not a good sign.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Russel Coight said:

The worst part of this new era of blink is all these fucking YouTube videos of Cunts trying to make the new songs sound like the old songs.

”what ‘new song’ would sound like if it was recorded in 99”

”’’new song’ : punk version”

Absolute cunts.

And absolutely none of them sounds like blink in 1999

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, daveyjones said:

most people who espouse such a view ("the beatles suck") are simply being wacky contrarians for the sake of it. i know, i used to be one of them.

the beatles are like the mona lisa. the mona lisa is, objectively, a really, really good portrait. but what it has become in the public eye—a sort of shorthand for ALL of western art—makes people who are serious and/or knowledgeable about art kind of throw up in their mouths. but that reflex doesn't make the mona lisa a bad painting. nor the beatles a bad band.

Agreed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, daveyjones said:

it's neither easy nor a dismissal. i'm both sympathizing with—and providing insight into—how many people view the beatles.

"I just think the Beatles have one great album (Meet the Beatles) and the rest is crap" is a contrarian view, in that it runs counter to the assessment of both the public at large and the entire canon of 20th century music criticism. that doesn't necessarily mean you feel that way disenguinely. notice i hedged with "most people who espouse such a view" ... leaving plenty of room for you to not be one of them.

The thing with The Beatles is that the argument turns on the difference between personal appreciation and cultural innovation/influence/impact, and they ruled on all 3 (and I think that's not subjective.) This still doesn't require people to enjoy them by law or listen to them, but they have been important and objectively good in the cultural and historical context.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...