Conversation, Debates, Dishonest Tactics, Politics

Cryptic nonsense

Dear Diary,

I suppose I don’t know if this post really has a point, but let’s give it a shot anyways.

Cryptic nonsense. We all deal with. Some deal it like it’s a drug to the people around them, others are force-fed it and either smile and like it or spit it out with disgust and ask for something better.

So what am i saying? Cause it’s all rather cryptic at this point. So here, let’s spell it out.

I often find myself in a situation where I disagree with something. It’s either religious, political, social, scientific, some sort of issue I have to deal with where there is a clear disagreement that…. probably neither party will change their mind. That’s fine, I’m okay with disagreement. I don’t make the nonsense statement that it makes the world more interesting, but I certainly accept it and don’t resent the world for it. However a lot of the times I just desperately want to understand what the person is saying. What is the point of their statements? What is it that they’re trying to get at? Do they have a central point? Is this just emotions that don’t seem to have any connection to goals or needs or wants?

I’m often left in this state where I drop the fact that I disagree with them, apologize if they claim I’ve been mean or rude or whatever word they want to throw on me to try and put me on the defensive, and then ask them to elaborate.

What I get is cryptic nonsense. I ask someone what they mean by a “Slippery slope” and they say some story about some governor or something or other that doesn’t seem to really tie to what we’re talking about at all. They often change the topic completely as if they haven’t, pointing out some other hypocrisy that I might even agree with but don’t see the connection to our topic. It’s an endless chain is the worst part. Cause then I ask how that connects to the topic and they say something else that seems random and non-important.

As I go down this path, trying to take them seriously and hear them out and understand them, because I desperately want to not leave this conversation without at least understanding of their point… I come to the realization that I’ll never get the answers I’m looking for. This isn’t about disagreement, this isn’t about debating, simply understanding. I simple want to understand them so I can better access my feelings about hem. However this is simply a waste of my time, I will never get my answers.

So when I say cryptic nonsense, this is what I mean. Cryptic is an adjective meaning hidden. So I suppose I don’t mean “hidden nonsense” but rather “Nonsense that is purposefully hiding what I want to know.” This is an impossible game I’ll never win. They’ll either change the subject or say something so lacking of substance it’s hard to believe it ever got brought up in the first place. Their statements flow into a river and dissolve into it’s waters and I couldn’t begin to piece together what they’re throwing in their even if I had eternity.

This is simply frustrating. It leaves in me a state of distatste for them, which is a shame since I’d much rather like people then dislike them.

Sincerely

CrypticBulbosaur

Standard
Uncategorized

The presumptions attitude of how life “Should” be handled.

Dear Diary,

While people stick their finger up their own buttholes and tickle themselves, looking in the mirror and tell them how they’re so special unique, sometimes afterwards they then wave that finger under my nose and try and tell me that I’m not living life how I should be.

They’re not polite about it, they pretend they’re being polite when in reality they’re simply telling me I’m living my life wrong. This may be really vague, so let me be upfront about it.

Marriage and Children.

Often do I explain to people, calmly and with a nonjudgmental tone, that I have no interest in either. Accompanied with my calm explanation I often get the incredibly responses that I’m wrong about this. I’m told I will eventually change my fundamental position and philosophy once I meet the right person and swing into the romance that is marriage. After this I’m told I will eventually decide that I want to raise offspring of my own because it is the only thing that could ever bring me joy in this world. It’s explained to me that these things are inherent to people and that my position is that of either rebellious silliness or confusion. At least these are the implications of the “polite” conversation being had with me.

How fucking condescending are people that they do this? It’s one thing to have a hypothesis that these things are hardwired into our brain, I suppose I can respect this position, but to tell with utter confidence that I’m just wrong about about my own feelings and that once I realize this they’ll start going about life properly is quite another thing.

It’s utterly insane that people want to be unique but then turn around and try to enforce things about their life on everyone else. People who need this sort of comfort with their own decisions might ask themselves whether or not they’re really happy with the decisions they made. Do they really know why they want these things? Have they thought about it? Can they put into words why these things are so fundamentally important to them? If you’re a person that sticks your shitty finger into other peoples business I’m guessing that this type of inquiry is non-existent in your life.

If you have children and are happy, great. If you’re married and happy, great. I know a couple who love their children more than anything, except maybe each other. This is the fairy-tail that everyone loves, but it’s a reality for them. I respect them and have nothing but applause for their understanding of their own wants and needs and their realization of them. So, in short, I have no hate for people going about their lives this way. It’s not for me though.

It’s one thing to think someone is being immoral and bring it to the table of discussion, even if not polite to do so directly, but it’s quite another to bring to the table the idea that you think the fact that they aren’t married or having children is losing potential. It’d be equally as inappropriate for me to bring to the table that I think you’re so stupid for suggesting that, that all the atoms in your dumb body are wasted potential for the universe.  I however actually keep that kind of thing to myself. Or post it on my blog. Whatever.

So in the end, Marriage and Children are not things I want in my life. Anyone trying to argue that my feelings and wants aren’t what they are can lick my taint. Seriously, scrape any grossness off your tongue so you can get a full blast of flavor because it’ll be just as good as your shitty nonsense that you might just die from pleasure.

Sincerely

PeachFlavoredTaint

Standard
Art, Fun, Larp, Magic, Presentation, Role-playing, Storytelling, Videogames

Magic, in books, role-play, video games, and other storytelling type things

Dear Diary,

I’ve had this weird relationship with a person who keeps following me. It’s magic. Magic seems to think it’s necessary for a lot of my daily life things, jumping in and trying to help out… but in the end it just makes things harder for me to do. Then I have to explain to everyone why there’s an idiot following me around and why what he did had nothing to do with me.

So in books, in movies, in role-play, I’m constantly plagued by magic. People forget why magic, when it is good, is good. They don’t seem to understand that the same reasons magic is good in certain stories are the same reasons other random story elements are good. It’s because they’re useful, well thought out, and have a string of logic that has no loop holes. However when people write magic into other things they tend to miss this idea completely. Magic is GOOD because it is GOOD. Because it’s grand and epic and decimates everything around it.

People put magic into things for many reasons, one of them is just to cover up giant plot holes in stories. Now if you held the magnifying class on stories with magic long enough you’ll find that well… magic does this every last time since magic isn’t REAL, but you could do this with other plot elements as well because…. the stories tend to be made up a lot of the time. However sometimes people think that you can just use magic to cover up the fact that something made no sense. However this is see through and bullshit. I often find myself talking to someone about a plot and say

“Yeah this didn’t make sense”

and they’ll say “Oh well SAYING BACK LINE FOR LINE WHAT THEY TOLD ME IN THE MOVIE”

So I hastily reply “I know that’s how they explained it, but use your brain for a second and think… this makes NO SENSE AT ALL”

But there’s no convincing them.

This often happens with things that aren’t magic as well, so I think part of it is people don’t want to think about their entertainment they just want to hop up and down and clap wildly, giggling and smiling. This may be seen as a good thing. However, as great as that is for the person,I simply can’t do this. When I see a problem in something I instantly want to fix it not pretend it doesn’t exist.

Another reason people ignore that magic into stories is it often makes whatever you’re doing feel extra special. This person has MAGIC. It’s spoon feeding this idea that something inside of you is this masterful wonderful thing that no one can touch with even logic because well, people want to feel special. When in reality lots of people fall short of other people and as hard of a truth as this is to swallow it just is true. I’ll never be able to beat the good players of magic the gathering or chess for instance because I can identify that there are ways my brain are just not as good at functioning… for instance I can’t really see multidimensional perspectives in a lot of games like that so as much as I can practice and get better I still won’t have that skill. It’s like saying someone with no hands could eventually become the tennis master of the world, it’s just not true.

As I said before though I think magic has it’s place, so let’s look at the easiest one magic can get away with things…

Video Games:

I feel this is where magic can get away with the most. If magic is treated like everything else in a video game… like guns, swords, or any other MECHANIC in the video game it’s hard to care whether or not it makes sense that I’ve injected myself with something that let’s me shoot swarms of bees at people. It’s just fun and silly and isn’t a story it’s a mechanic. However, if used IN the story it falls under the same criticism as books and movies.

Role-Playing:

So there’s two types of role-playing we need to cover. Let’s start with LARP. Live Action Role-Play is very similar to Video games. If it’s a mechanic and you don’t have to think about it too much it’s fine. However since it’s not straight up game-play it tends to be thought about a bit more so it needs to be a little less silly than most game plays. Shooting waves of bees with the DNA powers in you just is a bit too much to not notice the silliness.

However in online role-play we’re starting to move to the less game-play mechanic oriented part of magic and the more thematic type. This is used to move along the “story” and set the characters and what not. However unlike LARP which has a specific stringent set of rules that if written well constrain the player, there are absolutely no constraints what-soever. So people who don’t understand what make magic good go for the epic plot fixing elements AAAAAAAAAAAAND the make me feel special reasons for putting magic into their characters and tend to break the entire system. This is where magic bothers me THE MOST. Partly because you have easy access to the worst of the worst, where as books and video games it tends to be easier to see what will be bad and to avoid it… but people not only make their characters completely illogical but they also make them stupidly over-powered and buff. Anyone who has a bit of humility can’t even interact with the other persons character. Magic in this format I think should be completely thrown out. It simple in my opinion, doesn’t work. People who role-play online have o sense of logic for magic and I’ve NEVER seen anyone who used magic in an appropriate way. If you online role-play, make your characters not magical. Fantastical? Sure. Magic? No.

Lastly we have Books and Movies:

This is the one where magic either works or it doesn’t, There’s less in-between and it more just depends on the writer. If you use magic make sure it’s logical. Since it’s used JUST as a plot tool just remember basically my first complaints: Remember it has to be logical. It should be in there for a reason. MAGIC for the sake of MAGIC doesn’t hold up. It doesn’t make the story more interesting in and of itself. Interesting story is built by knowing your audience and creating emotion based on that. Just like any art, art is about emotion. You gotta decide what kind of emotion you create. Also if you have ANY integrity what-so-ever you shouldn’t be hoping to use magic as a crutch for bad writing or as a way to get blind nostalgia.

I’ll explain why nostalgia is the worst thing to ever happen ever for creative endeavors another day, but take this consolation prize… If people only like your work for nostalgia’s sake then it’s probably not that great. I know I’m DEFINING it as only for nostalgia but, it’s often times close enough to only that we can just round down.

Sincerely

ButterBrowniesAndTurnips

Standard
Uncategorized

Role-playing, Live action, online, and meta gaming

Dear Diary,

There’s not a weirder relationship I have than with role-playing. It’s not something I hold with such high regard that I stick around smelling my own role-playing farts, but I certainly don’t dislike it. It’s a really fun way to pass the time, challenges your insecurities and makes you push for creativity. The great thing is there aren’t any serious consequences for failing at this either. With live action role-play if you fail at being creative you can throw away your character, start a new, and everyone has to pretend to be interested in you because there’s usually not enough going on in the beginning of the night to distract them from the fact that you did so badly before. In online role-play there’s the opposite problem, there’s so many friggen people doing it you can just throw out a person and it won’t matter… you just go grab a new one. So role-play is cool.

So what I wanted to talk about is…. meta gaming. What is meta gaming? Well the meta is you. You aren’t your character, you know more than your character. You have to try and role-play your character as if you only know what your character knows. If you game as if your character knows what you know, it’s called meta gaming. In LARP depending on how bad it is it can be called cheating. If your older character dies and you know who killed him… walking in with a new character screaming that the person killed him is gonna be cheating, you’ll be slapped on the wrist or flat out kicked out. In online role-play you’ll probably get thrown away.

However some meta gaming is actually not only okay it’s a GOOD thing to do. Let’s talk over a situation I’ve known about as a good example of meta gaming.

I don’t know all the details, but basically someone’s character was looking for someone and because of the situation his emotions would have lead him to keep searching for this other person before returning to the other vampires to go… ya know have fun and role-play and such. So when he searched for a while eventually the storyteller said “Hey this isn’t gonna get resolved this way, if you come and role-play I assure you this will be resolved.” but he sternly refused. No, his character WOULD NOT do that. Not ever. So guess what he had the pleasure of doing? Sitting around not role-playing for the majority of the night. I think maybe he gave in eventually, but he really wasted huge chunks of his time.

So, how does this apply to online role-play? Well I remember once I got in an awkward situation with a role-player where my character had conflict with them. My character’s conflict got resolved by a third party and even though I had already added the person who I had conflict with… she assured me in a player to player basis that her character was so offended that she WOULD NOT under ANY circumstances not try and physically harm my character. This is analogous to the sitting around searching for someone example. We both wanted to role-play with each other, we both liked the personalities we drew up for our characters, but she was sabotaging the role-play by making sure her character was PERFECTLY consistent. Maybe you can get away with these sorts of things in online role-play because ya know…. throw the person away and find new role-play… but I feel like there’s a lot of missed opportunities because of an unwillingness to let the meta guide your character just a little bit so you can ya know… have fun. These are extreme examples, but in many cases it’s more subtle. Your unwillingness to break character even a little bit can make certain situations being role-played monotonously. With just a slight tweak to their behavior you can move on to more fun role-play.

There was a quote that someone told me in terms of the LARP role-play and that is this. “When role-playing, there’s no reason you shouldn’t be role-playing the MOST exciting time of this characters life. You should absolutely let boundaries of normality be broken, emotional behavior to kick into your character, cause it just creates more fun role-play.” This is extremely paraphrased, but the point remains valid and it’s not a point I made myself. In fact the person I’m quoting is quoting someone else so…. yeah.

Remember role-play is for fun, getting stuck in consistency and sabotaging fun is just a waste of time.

~OneButteryDolphin

Standard
Conversation, Definition, Real Men, Thinking about what you say, Words

What do REAL MEN do?

Dear Diary,

Sometimes I feel alone on an island where I’m the only one thinking about the words I say. What do they mean? Do they mean what I really think they mean? Or are they some cheap way to get across a point with horrible side effects? We often judge things that get the job down but have horrible side effects… like laws with horrible side effects, medicine with horrible side effects, corporations with horrible side effects but people don’t take a second to see that our words have side effects we couldn’t even imagine? Words that are trying to get at the heart of being a “good” person, sentences put together to tell people to be faithful to their spouses, to not bully, to dress however you want, with the side effects of saying some truly destructive things and often times false.

So to give an example of the most prevalent and my most hated I’ll use the “Real Men” example. This takes roots somewhere in society or societies where it was decided that men don’t cry, they don’t wear pink? they don’t hug, they want to have sex with as many women as possible, they are strong or not a man at all, this sort of BS that’s commonly agreed upon as bad set’s of rules for men. However then to combat these problematic ideas they use the very thing that starts them, saying “Real Men do so and so.” Real men wear pink, real men stay faithful, real men don’t bully, real men cry, what in the world is all this BS? I’m not saying Men SHOULDN’T wear pink, stay faithful, not bully, and cry… I certainly wear pink, am monogamous, don’t bully people, and cry when I have the need to but…. why are we dictating this is what men do? Some men don’t cry, some men don’t like pink, why are we trying to shame them? Not to mention, being a man is simply defined by either gender or sex…. so meaning you either were born with the parts or you identify as someone who would have liked to be born with the parts. What in the world are we adding on all these FALSE clauses? It’s not helpful, it’s just setting more ridiculous rules that aren’t accurate.

This goes down to the “No True Scotsman Fallacy.” It goes something like this (I heard it from a youtuber TheraminTrees).

Marv is Scottish and so is Brad. Marv says, no Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge. Brad points out that Tim is born and raised in Scotland, Scottish by blood, but puts sugar on his porridge. Then Marv says “Ahh, but no TRUE Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge. This extra clause doesn’t actually fit…. no where in the definition of “Being Scottish” does it say, not putting sugar on your porridge. This simple is just untrue!

So the point is, being a “Man” has a simple definition. Let’s stop saying “Real” or “True” men do things… let’s just say “It’s a good idea to do X, Y, and Z and your gender or sex shouldn’t inhibit that.” I can see it’s well meaning, but it’s counter productive. Actions don’t make a man the sex or gender he is…. his biology and identification as being a man does.

So, what’s the big deal? Well when we try and attribute good moral ideas to “Being a man” it’s almost like we’re implying that being womanly is well… the less moral stand point. This being something you’re born into should show the huge misstep of it. I know people don’t mean it this way, but we can’t give these subtle messages to society, to our children, to our friends, that being a woman is somehow inferior to being a man… You might be able to argue the biology of strength and agility, or ability to get pregnant, but moral compass as far as I’m concerned isn’t determined by your gender or sex.

So yeah…. I guess the lesson, as always, is think about what you’re saying. Seriously look at the words you say. This is a really easy thing to avoid doing.

Sincerely

CarefulReadersSayLessStupidShit

Standard
Activism, Conversation, Debates, FaceBook, Morals, Politics, Values

Burning Bridges

Dear Diary,

Ya know I surround myself with people of many different beliefs. Although generally the sets of very core values tend to be similar, some of the beliefs and how these core values manifest tend to greatly differ. I have atheist and theist friends. I have feminist, liberal, socialist friends and I have conservative, constitutionalist, and libertarian friends. I have friends who have very particularly views on how definitions work and some who are more in agreement with me. People who think video games do or don’t have certain affects on people. People who have particular views on how belief affects the world… the list goes on and on

And a lot of the times… my “Radical” or “Extremist” views will clash with this huge diversity of people. I’m very big on correcting things when I think they’re wrong. I’m also very open-minded on hearing things explaining why I’m wrong, even if in the end I don’t buy it. But I’ll get into a discussions very easily and often find clashing views on things. Now certainly, depending on the situation, i’m likely to just… not get into a discussion. But sometimes, the discussion happens and…. the person burns the bridge with me, deciding that this difference in ideals is so great that they CANNOT be friend.

So it’d be easy to say this person is a horrible person or something around the lines of bad friend…. but let’s first look at the extremes:

Let’s look at the least extreme.Someone doesn’t like the same taste in something as you do. Same taste in music, same taste in food. There’s no philosophical difference that separates you two on a mental stand point, this simple is subjective and often times (hard to know with every case) is a biological or psychological difference that doesn’t really reflect you as a person in a fundamental value sort of way. Anyone throwing you out as a friend in this sense is easily a bad friend. Now certainly, there are contexts where other factors could be put in… like how they communicate it and stuff. Let’s say however, everything was communicated politely and non-aggressively. Yes, this person is a bad friend.

Now the other extreme, the most different someone could be. Let’s say someone’s values are so intrinsically different they think… that killing people is okay. I’m not talking about the abortion debate. Like let’s say someone is saying that it’s perfectly acceptable to kill someone if you want something from them. This might be a little far fetched so let’s say…. they think that beating your spouse is acceptable. This person thinks beating their spouse is acceptable and you disagrere with this. Would you be a bad friend for leaving the friendship? Yes. There is no context where this isn’t so fundamentally offensive that you could justify this. At least for me.

So, now we got our spectrum. On one end we’re extremely critical of the person ending the friendship. On the other we’re completely sympathetic. So, what about…. more realistic situations. Let’s say…. someone doesn’t like my political outlook. This isn’t such a fundamentally different value that you really should feel so offended. One person believes in free health care is the most compassionate and another person believes private charity is more compassionate. In the end though… both people are for helping people. This difference SHOULD NOT get in the way of friendship. If you let something like this break your friendship, then you’re basically showing that the manifestation of your values are more important than the friendship. You really need to ask yourself if you’re disagreeing at the core what’s important, regardless of the implementation and how the two people think the outcomes will come about. Not only does this help preserve perfectly good friendships, but if you’re thinking like this you’re much more likely to UNDERSTAND their argument and well… understand the issue as a whole better. It makes you better prepared to debate about it.

So, the reason i put this up was i recently had a friend take me off facebook. He’s part of a movement I used to be a part of, but have grown distant from I still have a lot of the core concepts in agreement with him, but for I’ve decided the outcome of the solutions to the problems are less than ideal. And when he posted stuff I very politely disagreed with him and explained why. Then I was unfriended. It’s hard to feel anything but a great deal of disappointment when people put the manifestation of their ideals before the ideals themselves.

I suggest to focus on what you have in common and focus on some common core set’s of values, because it can remind you that even though your solutions might be as different as it gets… that doesn’t mean the core values are.

Sincerely

Waytooseriousforthisblog

Standard
Art, Connotation, Conversation, Debates, Definition, Fun, Music, Thinking about what you say, Words

Using the Correct Word

Dear Diary,

I got into an interesting conversation the other day. So, let’s set the scene:

I’m a musician. Not an amazing one, but I think I’m better than someone who knows a couple chords on a guitar ya know? And in high-school I played music with my best friend at the time. We’ve grown apart, but we still sometimes collaborate ya know? So I sent him a text about my thing, feeling embarrassed about my bad vocals I sent him and said something like.

“But I think it’s fun.”

And he responded. “All Music is fun”

We quickly got into a debate about this as I challenged him. But, as a musician, shouldn’t I like music as a whole? Yes. So don’t I think all music is fun? No.

Here’s the problem, fun is a very vague word. It generally means like “Amusement” but it can also mean more vague things than that, like, “Entertaining” or “Enjoyable.” Enjoyable? That’s INCREDIBLY vague.

So, do I think all music is “Enjoyable?” This is harder to access. I don’t think atonal music is general enjoyable in a direct sense. Like, I’m enjoying hearing the music for musical pleasure. However as musician I think it could be enjoyable to think about and take in for intellectual stimulation. So, I think enjoyable can apply…. but I think this is painting the wrong picture. So, that’s my general complaint.

Is all music, fun? Does all music bring amusement?

No, I don’t think so. I think A LOT of the time it does. Music is an easy way to bring fun to the world, it just is. So, most music is done for that. But here’s the thing, there are other better words to describe lots of music.

For instance, music can be cathartic, meaning like psychological relief through the expression of strong emotion. This usually means anger or sadness. So here’s some cathartic songs that I don’t bounce around having “fun” too, but have or still do bring me a level of catharsis that I often needed.

“Dreaming with a Broken Heart” by John Mayer.

He describes something that I genuinely felt all the time at one point in my life. At one point in my life everything seemed to take a turn for the worse. It was really easy to pin this on a break up that just recently happened, but that wasn’t the center of the problems. Either way, I’d fall asleep and be back together with my ex partner at the time. I’d be SOOO happy, then I’d wake up and instantly feel this wave of agony and sadness. John Mayer perfectly (or at least rounded up to) got this idea down in his song.

“Pictures of You” by The Cure

This actually stems from the same time in my life for similar reasons. Even if the lyrics weren’t as perfectly captured as John Mayer’s dreaming with a broken heart, the tone and subject matter really felt so similar to the feelings I had. When I was going through this, I’d be sobbing alone in my basement listening to this song on repeat. Either way, fun was not the experience I was having then.

“Friend” by Coal Chamber

This actually, in my opinion, was a pretty weak song. However, at the time I had someone who was a friend who betrayed me and I’d listen to this song and deal with my anger I felt from the betrayal. Either way, it certainly was CATHARTIC, but not fun.

However, some songs can be cathartic and fun all together. For instance, “Move Along” by the All American Rejects can be very cathartic if you listen to the lyrics. However, the tone of the song doesn’t have a incredibly sad one. It’s actually a little upbeat even. I could see myself jumping around having fun to this song, but also feeling cathartic and maybe a little sad to it.

Now, this isn’t to say that there isn’t subjectivity that plays into this. Some people have darker senses of humor so songs can feel fun that most people might scrunch up their face to in thought to calling it fun, but on the whole this subjectivity plays less into than you’d think.

Another aspect to this is that a song is really multi-dimensional. Saying a song is “Fun” reduces it to a level of simplicity it just doesn’t have. If you pulled apart each track, each verse, each instrument, you’d find parts that are darker, parts that are lighter, parts that are more fun, and parts that are more cathartic. Trying to pin down an entire song with one verb is just an inappropriate goal. However though, songs put together will have a certain tone to them and because of this you might be able to say the general tone of a song is “fun” or “cathartic” or some other verb.

So, now for the thesis I’m trying to make here with this post, using the right word. Even if we can stretch out a word’s vague definition to apply it to every song, track, or piece of recorded sound to be included into the word “fun” it still wouldn’t be painting the right picture. I was having a conversation earlier about people calling their pets their “Children.” Without proper context, if someone just started talking about their “Children” people are instantly going to imagine someone having either adopted or had a kid. This isn’t an inapplicable word, but it is misleading! Just like calling an atonal, experimental, or extremely avantegarde song fun sort of paints the wrong picture here. Other words better describe the music and if you say “This piece of atonal music is fun” someone might get a bit confused about what you’re trying to imply because the connotation of the word fun just doesn’t paint an accurate picture.

So, in retrospect I think people take this tactic to deal with criticisms of the genres. There is nothing wrong with atonal, experimental, or avantegarde music. Sometimes they might even be rightly labeled fun. However if someone is trying to say they’re “not music” or they’re “bad music” use the right ways to argue their points down. Music is the purposeful arrangement of sound and silence, it’s obviously music. Good and bad music may be discussed in terms of quality, but ultimately this tends to be a subjective matter and it’s hard to quantify what “good” music would be or what “bad” music would be because again…. it’s multi-dimensional. Labeling it fun to try and chase off critics of the genres is just a DISHONEST way to try and fight back against this unfair criticisms, so don’t fall into this trap. You only make it easier for them to say it’s bad music because there is a grain of truth to them saying “No it’s not fun” since it’s just not the optimal adjective to describe it.

Sincerely

YourFriendHenryTheEnemy

Standard