In response to Botman
Botman wrote:
But you can't fairly say what Limb Bizkit is without first understanding them.

I don't see that that's true. One can adequately describe the type and quality of music, lyrics, and so on without necessarily knowing what the artist intended to convey. It is the mark of a good artist that they can convey it successfully.

What I mean by that, is, like you said, it's commonly though that Limb Bizkit is some angy, teenybopper band (I'm not ging to post the artical, it would be too much of a hassle to scan and upload, and you dont care what Durst has to say).

It's by no means a teenybopper band. Such would include M2M, A*Teens, and individual singers like Britney Spears and Leslie Carter. Bubble gum pop is a completely different genre.

Their music does have a deeper meaning to it, its just overlooked by many, mostly their critics. Heck, there's even some humour to some of their work (though it's not exactly 'refined' or anything).

It's often true that many critics fail to see meaning, but it's also often true that many artists fail to convey it. If the deep meaning of some lyrics happens to be buried under a thick crust of enraged shouting, self-edifying stanzas, and vulgar diatribes launched at critics, however, it's perfectly valid to question whether such a deep meaning exists at all. If Limp Bizkit wants to get a deeper meaning across, they're not doing it in a very unique fashion, and the meaning is largely inaudible.

Everyone is obviously allowed to think what they want, and it's fine by me if you don't like Limb Bizkit. I just think they are hard done by.

I dunno; my contention, and AbyssDragon's as well, was that Limp Bizkit sounds a lot like other angry, shouty groups out there. You've said nothing to disprove that contention, so they can't be as "hard done by" as you say. If critics judge them harshly based on their striking similarity to other groups and the way any messages get drowned under a sea of screaming, that's a perfectly fair assessment. There are no doubt differences between Limp Bizkit and other bands, but those differences would seem non-trivial only to fans of the sub-genre.

I'm curious why someone who's purportedly such a big fan of Limp Bizkit so repeatedly misspells their name. You are aware there's a P in "Limp", right?
And, just because it's been driving me nuts, the word "article" is not spelled "artical".

Lummox JR
In response to Lummox JR
I don't see that that's true. One can adequately describe the type and quality of music, lyrics, and so on without necessarily knowing what the artist intended to convey. It is the mark of a good artist that they can convey it successfully.

Maybe you don't see the messages becasue they arn't targeted toward you. I suppose the question to ask here, is how old are you? You seem increasingly like you belong to an older generation than myself and most Limb Bizkit fans. I interprit the messages in his music because the involve things that are familiar to me and others of my age, as we go about our lives day to day. Limp Bizkit is targeted at "gen X".

It's by no means a teenybopper band. Such would include M2M, A*Teens, and individual singers like Britney Spears and Leslie Carter.(who? =)) Bubble gum pop is a completely different genre.

Different meanings I guess. Bubble gum pop isn't a term we use here, though it's pretty obvious what it means. Here teenybopper pretty much means anything tryhardish or too american (as in, they go over the top to try to imitate American sterotypes).

It's often true that many critics fail to see meaning, but it's also often true that many artists fail to convey it. If the deep meaning of some lyrics happens to be buried under a thick crust of enraged shouting, self-edifying stanzas, and vulgar diatribes launched at critics, however, it's perfectly valid to question whether such a deep meaning exists at all. If Limp Bizkit wants to get a deeper meaning across, they're not doing it in a very unique fashion, and the meaning is largely inaudible.

As I said before, different things appeal and affect different generations differently. Mmm, difference... Yup, you used "vulgar". The only person I know to have ever used that world, other than you, is my grandparents. Limp Bizkit simply arn't targeted at you. =)

I dunno; my contention, and AbyssDragon's as well, was that Limp Bizkit sounds a lot like other angry, shouty groups out there. You've said nothing to disprove that contention, so they can't be as "hard done by" as you say. If critics judge them harshly based on their striking similarity to other groups and the way any messages get drowned under a sea of screaming, that's a perfectly fair assessment. There are no doubt differences between Limp Bizkit and other bands, but those differences would seem non-trivial only to fans of the sub-genre.

When I talk about hard done by, I was refurring to things like rape rock. Not a typo. This term came about after the second (and appaling) Woodstock, where Limb Bizkit was accused ignoring the fact that people were being raped while they played. This is a pathetic thing to say. They didn't know it was going on. Now, I've never stood infront of 300K people beofre, but I'm guessing it's pretty hard to monitor them all, and "shout" at the same time.

I dont think LB are hard done by when they are compared to other bands. Its when people bash them, becasue they dont understand them. And no matter what you say, you dont understand them, because of no fault of your own, because you simply arnt who they are targeted toward, or atleast, this is how it appears to me.

I'm curious why someone who's purportedly such a big fan of Limp Bizkit so repeatedly misspells their name. You are aware there's a P in "Limp", right?

I have a tendency to spell things phoneticly (foneticly =)). If you look through my writing, you'll see I oftern swap between using a "p" and a "b". It's because it's pronounced Limb, so thats how I write it. Things might be different here, but we don't pronounce the "p".

And, just because it's been driving me nuts, the word "article" is not spelled "artical".

Drives you nuts? How do you think I feel? When I write HTML I have to spell "colour", "color".
In response to Shadowdarke
Shadowdarke wrote:
Botman wrote:
Lummox JR wrote:

...it's commonly though that Limb Bizkit is some angy, teenybopper band... Their music does have a deeper meaning to it, its just overlooked by many, mostly their critics...

I can't think of any "angry" bands that don't claim their music has a deeper meaning to it, some people just don't appreciate the way they choose to express it. It's impossible to create real art unless it means something to the artist.

I dunno... even I can't see anything behind 'Slipnots' "music"... But who knows, maybe its just cause '"no one understands us".
In response to Botman
Botman wrote:
I don't see that that's true. One can adequately describe the type and quality of music, lyrics, and so on without necessarily knowing what the artist intended to convey. It is the mark of a good artist that they can convey it successfully.

Maybe you don't see the messages becasue they arn't targeted toward you. I suppose the question to ask here, is how old are you? You seem increasingly like you belong to an older generation than myself and most Limb Bizkit fans. I interprit the messages in his music because the involve things that are familiar to me and others of my age, as we go about our lives day to day. Limp Bizkit is targeted at "gen X".

The so-called "Generation X" is in its 30s now and actually is the older generation you refer to.

As I said before, different things appeal and affect different generations differently. Mmm, difference... Yup, you used "vulgar". The only person I know to have ever used that world, other than you, is my grandparents. Limp Bizkit simply arn't targeted at you. =)

The fact that one can recognize profanity for what it is doesn't make them out of touch or anything. It does beg the question, though, of why any generation would feel that deep meaning must be couched in a barrage of pointless cussing.

When I talk about hard done by, I was refurring to things like rape rock. Not a typo. This term came about after the second (and appaling) Woodstock, where Limb Bizkit was accused ignoring the fact that people were being raped while they played. This is a pathetic thing to say. They didn't know it was going on. Now, I've never stood infront of 300K people beofre, but I'm guessing it's pretty hard to monitor them all, and "shout" at the same time.

Indeed, that would be a ridiculous thing to say.

I dont think LB are hard done by when they are compared to other bands. Its when people bash them, becasue they dont understand them. And no matter what you say, you dont understand them, because of no fault of your own, because you simply arnt who they are targeted toward, or atleast, this is how it appears to me.

If you mean I don't understand the "messages" they're trying to get across, you're right. I dislike the tone of their music enough not to try to listen to the lyrics over and over to glean such a meaning. But not all "bashing" is done out of a lack of understanding, nor can it all be called bashing. By your logic, anyone who dislikes a group (or at least this one) simply fails to understand them and therefore can't really dislike them on intelligent grounds. That's just plain inane. "If you don't like it, you don't get it" is not an argument that washes; the bottom fell out of that one when disco died.

It is far more appropriate to say that a fan of a sub-genre is much more likely to notice subtle differences between groups, hear more of the lyrics and understand their full meaning better, and appreciate groups on another level because of that. People who aren't fans may simply dislike the style, which does indeed sound like lots of other groups, and they may in fact have special reasons to despise one group over another.

I hear similar arguments from anime fans, who insist that a general hatred of anime is irrational because there are some really good examples to the genre. However, these rabid fans too quickly dismiss that some people value well-drawn, well-proportioned faces, animation at more than 3 frames per second, and intelligent storylines with actual depth. While a fan my focus on the details that separate one work from another, a detractor is more likely to focus on the commonalities between these works and hate them all for much the same reason.

I have a tendency to spell things phoneticly (foneticly =)). If you look through my writing, you'll see I oftern swap between using a "p" and a "b". It's because it's pronounced Limb, so thats how I write it. Things might be different here, but we don't pronounce the "p".

Yep, that must be the Kiwi accent, because the P is supposed to be pronounced. Of course it's kinda hard to pronounce a B right after a P, but somehow we manage.

And, just because it's been driving me nuts, the word "article" is not spelled "artical".

Drives you nuts? How do you think I feel? When I write HTML I have to spell "colour", "color".

And St. Webster said: "When thy word ends in an -or sound, thou shalt not spell it -our, for the U is extraneous and silly." And lo, the colonists did rejoice, for it gave them another reason to mock their northern neighbors.

Lummox JR
In response to Lummox JR
The so-called "Generation X" is in its 30s now and actually is the older generation you refer to.

I think your wrong here, but if you insist, Limp Bizkit is infact targeted at Gneration Next.

The fact that one can recognize profanity for what it is doesn't make them out of touch or anything. It does beg the question, though, of why any generation would feel that deep meaning must be couched in a barrage of pointless cussing.

Because "my" generation has different values and ideals to "yours". And profanity is an accepted part of everyday speech, and to "us" doesnt carry the weigth it does for "you".

If you mean I don't understand the "messages" they're trying to get across, you're right. I dislike the tone of their music enough not to try to listen to the lyrics over and over to glean such a meaning. But not all "bashing" is done out of a lack of understanding, nor can it all be called bashing. By your logic, anyone who dislikes a group (or at least this one) simply fails to understand them and therefore can't really dislike them on intelligent grounds. That's just plain inane. "If you don't like it, you don't get it" is not an argument that washes; the bottom fell out of that one when disco died.

Thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying you dont like Limp Bizkit because your told, by the media, by your peers and your parents etc that your not supposed to like it. The media seems to like to deface bands such as Limp Bizkit and Marilyn Manson (though admittedly he's pretty screwed).

It just really hacks me off when I see music and videogames (even D&D) etc being blamed whever a kid does something stupid. The parents are more to blame than anyone (cept the kid who actually did it).

If you simply dont like Limp Bizkit becauase it doesnt appeal to you, thats fine. But it's because your accusing it of being things that it isn't that leads me to believe you dont understand them.

Just ignore me if IM completely wrong with that.

I hear similar arguments from anime fans, who insist that a general hatred of anime is irrational because there are some really good examples to the genre. However, these rabid fans too quickly dismiss that some people value well-drawn, well-proportioned faces, animation at more than 3 frames per second, and intelligent storylines with actual depth. While a fan my focus on the details that separate one work from another, a detractor is more likely to focus on the commonalities between these works and hate them all for much the same reason.

I think you just replied to your own paragraph, though I could be wrong... Yup, that doesnt deal with anything I wrote, unless my memory really is that bad.

Yep, that must be the Kiwi accent, because the P is supposed to be pronounced. Of course it's kinda hard to pronounce a B right after a P, but somehow we manage.

Hehe, thats kinda cool. I think its out of laziness "we" dropped the p. Either that or because limp bizkit sounds far too similar too a very infamous game known as "Sticky Bicky" (i think its only known about in NZ and Aussie, cause a NZ reporter asked Durst if his band was named after the "game" and the reporter ended up having to explain the "game" to Durst cause he had never heard of it. This was on national news, and sticky bicky is a very crude game) Dont even ask what its about.

And St. Webster said: "When thy word ends in an -or sound, thou shalt not spell it -our, for the U is extraneous and silly." And lo, the colonists did rejoice, for it gave them another reason to mock their northern neighbors.


If you wanna get really picky, you can spell "fish" as "ghoti". the "gh" from "cough" makes an "f". THats all I can remember lol.
In response to Botman
Botman wrote:
The so-called "Generation X" is in its 30s now and actually is the older generation you refer to.

I think your wrong here, but if you insist, Limp Bizkit is infact targeted at Gneration Next.

The term "Generation X" was spawned to refer to what was essentially the post-baby-boomer generation. Most of Gen X were born in the late 60s, very early 70s; basically the people who graduated high school in the 80s. I'm from a group just following that.
You, however, have used the term "Gen X" probably because you've heard it used ad nauseum, as many have, but didn't know what it really meant.

The fact that one can recognize profanity for what it is doesn't make them out of touch or anything. It does beg the question, though, of why any generation would feel that deep meaning must be couched in a barrage of pointless cussing.

Because "my" generation has different values and ideals to "yours". And profanity is an accepted part of everyday speech, and to "us" doesnt carry the weigth it does for "you".

I strongly disagree.
No, scratch that. You're just plain wrong. Lots of people in every generation use profanity in everyday speech, and lots don't; to recognize it for what it is does not constitute a generation gap, nor an us-vs.-them situation.

It's pure dishonesty not to call the language what it is, whether one considers it acceptable for everyday use or not. Strictly speaking, it is vulgar. From an intellectual standpoint, vulgarity is almost always the worst way to express ideas, because it sharply limits the vocabulary. When used to excess, these words are stripped of all importance whatsoever, and become just so much white noise in a sentence. This constriction of word choice makes it more difficult to get across the deep meanings you claim to hear.

For an example of what I mean, consider poetry. A good poem chooses its words quite carefully; sometimes they're constrained by rhyme and meter, but often a good poet will find a way to work within the rhyme they've chosen. Words are picked for the most precise meaning possible, with a shape of connotation, form, and the full richness of their meaning chosen to fit just there. A well-written poem is like a tiny mosaic, where each word is a hand-picked tile chosen to fit just so, and the overall impact of that word and others like it allows the poem to express its point with both clarity and brevity.
Now replace every adjective with cuss words of your choice. There are really only so many to choose from. The result is a mess. Where such words are at their most effective is when they stand out among more meaningful words, or when the tone of a poem or song lends them a certain rhythm or feeling they would otherwise never be able to convey. A good poem can even imply a tone of voice, and uses that tone and its rhythm to infuse words with power at just the right moments.

The point is, it's not just a new generation that uses the F word every other word. Some people have been doing that for ages. History, however, has forgotten them, because eloquence and poor expression don't mix.

Thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying you dont like Limp Bizkit because your told, by the media, by your peers and your parents etc that your not supposed to like it. The media seems to like to deface bands such as Limp Bizkit and Marilyn Manson (though admittedly he's pretty screwed).

Not at all, and it's actually appalling how completely wrong you are. You seem to be flailing about for a reason to insist that disliking the group--or even saying that they sound a lot like other groups--is wrong. I dislike Limp Bizkit because the lyrics are throaty, shouty, and nasty. It's just too nerve-jangling for my taste. Even some of the "funnier" stuff I've heard from them tends to be too much to take in a sitting. The music in general doesn't appeal to me. Some parts of the music can be well-done, like the guitar work in the MI2 theme, but as soon as Durst opens his mouth the annoyance factor shoots through the roof.

It just really hacks me off when I see music and videogames (even D&D) etc being blamed whever a kid does something stupid. The parents are more to blame than anyone (cept the kid who actually did it).

Agreed fully, but that's completely beside the point.

If you simply dont like Limp Bizkit becauase it doesnt appeal to you, thats fine. But it's because your accusing it of being things that it isn't that leads me to believe you dont understand them.

Just ignore me if IM completely wrong with that.

The things I've said about Limp Bizkit are true, and have been said by many besides me; you have yet to refute them. They do sound a lot like other groups, they do use the same anger gestalt. The only really palpable differences are visible only to people who are fans of the genre, who are very familiar with other bands and can compare them point for point. (Which is not to say a non-fan couldn't hear a song and correctly place it as being by one group or another, but rather that despite each group having a signature sound to it, a lot of them look like they took the same handwriting class.)

I hear similar arguments from anime fans, who insist that a general hatred of anime is irrational because there are some really good examples to the genre. However, these rabid fans too quickly dismiss that some people value well-drawn, well-proportioned faces, animation at more than 3 frames per second, and intelligent storylines with actual depth. While a fan my focus on the details that separate one work from another, a detractor is more likely to focus on the commonalities between these works and hate them all for much the same reason.

I think you just replied to your own paragraph, though I could be wrong... Yup, that doesnt deal with anything I wrote, unless my memory really is that bad.

It doesn't deal with anything you wrote except to address the logic. You were, in effect, saying that those who say Limp Bizkit is a lot like other bands or that they don't like Limp Bizkit simply don't "get it". I've heard the same kinds of arguments from others on other subjects, and they don't really wash. The culprit is faulty reasoning, not flawed criticism.

Lummox JR
In response to Botman
Botman wrote:

Thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying you dont like Limp Bizkit because your told, by the media, by your peers and your parents etc that your not supposed to like it.

That's pretty presumptuous of you. I can't speak for Lummox, but I know I personally dislike LB simply because I don't find them intellectually challenging, musically appealing, artistically original, socially redeeming, impressive from a musical performance standpoint, or even fun to listen to.

My favorite music all hits on at least three of those six categories, while LB falls flat on all of them. I don't need media, peers or parents to tell me what I like.

In response to Botman
Quick math lesson- the phrase "Generation X" has been bandied about all over the place for the last 15 years... and that's only how long it's been really popular. Now, how can a 15+ year old word originally applied to a generation of teenagers and twentysomethings possibly be used to refer to the teenagers and twenty somethings of today?

Labeling of generations like this is bull, anyways. I'm just barely 21. Limp Bizkit sucks ass, and not in a good way. Who told me to say that?
In response to LexyBitch
Limp Bizkit sucks ass, and not in a good way.

I'm going to have to listen to one of their songs to find out what all the fuss is about... nah, who'm I kidding?

Personally, I love ABBA.
Uhh, I usually listen to something fast. But, whenever I'm in a depressed mood, I listen to something slast. Slast would be a mix of fast and slow, where it switches every so often.

Anyway,

blink 182
Metallica
MxPx
Weezer
NoFx
Offspring
SR71
whatever is on at the time
In response to Lummox JR
The term "Generation X" was spawned to refer to what was essentially the post-baby-boomer generation. Most of Gen X were born in the late 60s, very early 70s; basically the people who graduated high school in the 80s. I'm from a group just following that.
You, however, have used the term "Gen X" probably because you've heard it used ad nauseum, as many have, but didn't know what it really meant.

Actually, you'll find that words change with time. Reguardless of what your older generation may think, "this" generation has adpoted the term Gen X, while the older generations have labled it Gen Next. Face it, your behind the times.

I strongly disagree.
No, scratch that. You're just plain wrong. Lots of people in every generation use profanity in everyday speech, and lots don't; to recognize it for what it is does not constitute a generation gap, nor an us-vs.-them situation.

Sorry, out of touch again I see. Easy example. The word 'nigger'. To older generations this is an incredibly offensive word, kids of my generation have embrased it, and is oftern not ment as an insult at all, but even something to be proud of. Words like 'fuck' simply arnt offensive to "us" (generallising here).

Whats more, you cant fairly say what "our" views on profanity are if you dont hang round with us as one of us. Another example, In common eveyday speech, if I'm talking to an adult, I won't swear except for rare cirsumstances. Why, because they mght find it offensive. When talking to my peers, I swear constantly. Why? Because, lacking a better word, its 'cool'. The thing is, I dont even make an effort to swear, it's just natural because thats how we talk. Whats more, even those of our generation who arnt keen on casual swearing, and dont, for the most part still accept it and arnt offended by it. I could go say "fuck" infront of anyone my age, and very few people would be offended or even take notice. Say it to adults and the reaction will be completely different.

It's pure dishonesty not to call the language what it is, whether one considers it acceptable for everyday use or not. Strictly speaking, it is vulgar. From an intellectual standpoint, vulgarity is almost always the worst way to express ideas, because it sharply limits the vocabulary. When used to excess, these words are stripped of all importance whatsoever, and become just so much white noise in a sentence. This constriction of word choice makes it more difficult to get across the deep meanings you claim to hear.

Exactly. As I said in the paragraph above this, swearing is barely even considered a profanity, but rather just every day language.

For an example of what I mean, consider poetry. A good poem chooses its words quite carefully; sometimes they're constrained by rhyme and meter, but often a good poet will find a way to work within the rhyme they've chosen. Words are picked for the most precise meaning possible, with a shape of connotation, form, and the full richness of their meaning chosen to fit just there. A well-written poem is like a tiny mosaic, where each word is a hand-picked tile chosen to fit just so, and the overall impact of that word and others like it allows the poem to express its point with both clarity and brevity.
Now replace every adjective with cuss words of your choice. There are really only so many to choose from. The result is a mess. Where such words are at their most effective is when they stand out among more meaningful words, or when the tone of a poem or song lends them a certain rhythm or feeling they would otherwise never be able to convey. A good poem can even imply a tone of voice, and uses that tone and its rhythm to infuse words with power at just the right moments.

Yes, and conincidently, poetry's popularity must be at an all time low, heck, I can't think of anyone who actually enjoyed poetry at school. Whats more, most poetry kids now write has a much darker message and language than poetry of your generation.

The point is, it's not just a new generation that uses the F word every other word. Some people have been doing that for ages. History, however, has forgotten them, because eloquence and poor expression don't mix.

It's because its common. And the common doesnt stand out. When "my" generation is the older generation, things like this will likely change.

Not at all, and it's actually appalling how completely wrong you are. You seem to be flailing about for a reason to insist that disliking the group--or even saying that they sound a lot like other groups--is wrong. I dislike Limp Bizkit because the lyrics are throaty, shouty, and nasty. It's just too nerve-jangling for my taste. Even some of the "funnier" stuff I've heard from them tends to be too much to take in a sitting. The music in general doesn't appeal to me. Some parts of the music can be well-done, like the guitar work in the MI2 theme, but as soon as Durst opens his mouth the annoyance factor shoots through the roof.

Then thats fine. As I said before, if you dont like the music because it's not in your taste, thats fine. But, for the second time I'm saying this, you dont talk like someone who simply doesnt like thier music. Your talking about them lacking deeper meaning, you talk about them being 'bubble gum pop', not understanding them, these dont mean just "I dont like their style". You clearly have a deeper and misinformed dislike toward them.

The things I've said about Limp Bizkit are true, and have been said by many besides me; you have yet to refute them. They do sound a lot like other groups, they do use the same anger gestalt.

Yeah, because other bands will imitate whats popular. Thats why LB isn't cookie cutter, because its the first (or atleast, first rememorable) band of its style. LB might be influenced by Hip Hop, but they are not a hip hop band.

The only really palpable differences are visible only to people who are fans of the genre, who are very familiar with other bands and can compare them point for point. (Which is not to say a non-fan couldn't hear a song and correctly place it as being by one group or another, but rather that despite each group having a signature sound to it, a lot of them look like they took the same handwriting class.)

I cant think of another band like LImp Bizkit, trivial differences or not, or I'd listen too them. If you can think of one, name it, I'm always looking for new music.

It doesn't deal with anything you wrote except to address the logic. You were, in effect, saying that those who say Limp Bizkit is a lot like other bands or that they don't like Limp Bizkit simply don't "get it". I've heard the same kinds of arguments from others on other subjects, and they don't really wash. The culprit is faulty reasoning, not flawed criticism.

Not everyone, just those that cite examples like "they have no meaning" etc. as I've said further up on this reply.
In response to Skysaw
That's pretty presumptuous of you. I can't speak for Lummox, but I know I personally dislike LB simply because I don't find them intellectually challenging, musically appealing, artistically original, socially redeeming, impressive from a musical performance standpoint, or even fun to listen to.

See, the idea of that statement was to get a strong response, to prove the effectivness of music like LB. It was a "controversial" statement, and one you either didnt like or dont agree with. I dont care weither you think more or less of me because of it, because it gets me more attention and infamy, and what adults dont like generally appeals more to yonger people. By being so controversial LB get more fame and money. And that what todays music industry is about.

The staement I made was really quite stupid, though it did have some truth to it, it was simply to register a responce.
In response to LexyBitch
LexyBitch wrote:
Quick math lesson- the phrase "Generation X" has been bandied about all over the place for the last 15 years... and that's only how long it's been really popular. Now, how can a 15+ year old word originally applied to a generation of teenagers and twentysomethings possibly be used to refer to the teenagers and twenty somethings of today?

Because its emaning can change. The meaning of the word 'nigger' has changed similarily. Its gone from being an incredibly offensive word to one which, when used by certain people, can even be somehting to be proud of.

Labeling of generations like this is bull, anyways. I'm just barely 21. Limp Bizkit sucks ass, and not in a good way. Who told me to say that?

Youu. THats your opinion, thats fine. But theres a diffrence between you not liking their music, and Lummox not likeing it because it lacks talent. Just because you might be blind to the talent doesnt mean it's not there.


hmm I listen to stuff like
Blues Travelers
Newsboys
Jars of Clay
all the good ol bands like them...
once in awhile though I pop in 3rd Eye Blind, or umm, whoever sings "It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine..."
oh and don't forget
"You and me baby ain't nothin but mammals, so lets do it like they do it on the discovery channel..."
or
"I'm a barbie girl, in a barbie world... come on barbie lets go party, oo ooo oo yaa...."
In response to Botman
Because its emaning can change. The meaning of the word 'nigger' has changed similarily. Its gone from being an incredibly offensive word to one which, when used by certain people, can even be somehting to be proud of.

I can't speak for things where you are, but in America, it hasn't gone from one to the other. It's both, depending on the context, and has been for some time. Should you misjudge the environment in which you speak, you might be in for an unpleasant surprise.
In response to Botman
Botman wrote:
LexyBitch wrote:
Quick math lesson- the phrase "Generation X" has been bandied about all over the place for the last 15 years... and that's only how long it's been really popular. Now, how can a 15+ year old word originally applied to a generation of teenagers and twentysomethings possibly be used to refer to the teenagers and twenty somethings of today?

Because its emaning can change. The meaning of the word 'nigger' has changed similarily. Its gone from being an incredibly offensive word to one which, when used by certain people, can even be somehting to be proud of.

What Gughunter said. Additionally, "Generation X" is a label applied to a generation. If we apply it to each successive generation in turn, it loses all meaning. I'm sure the generation of teenagers that'll be growing up 15 years from now will still think of themselves as Generation X.

Then again, X is the archetypical algebraic variable... so I am going to have to partially cede this point. If you're using Generation X not to refer to a specific generation, but rather the current generation, whatever that might be, that occupies the space of supposed disdain and cynicism, that's fine.
In response to Botman
Botman wrote:
That's pretty presumptuous of you. I can't speak for Lummox, but I know I personally dislike LB simply because I don't find them intellectually challenging, musically appealing, artistically original, socially redeeming, impressive from a musical performance standpoint, or even fun to listen to.

See, the idea of that statement was to get a strong response, to prove the effectivness of music like LB. It was a "controversial" statement, and one you either didnt like or dont agree with. I dont care weither you think more or less of me because of it, because it gets me more attention and infamy, and what adults dont like generally appeals more to yonger people. By being so controversial LB get more fame and money. And that what todays music industry is about.

That's what the music INDUSTRY is about, yes. That's got nothing to do with music. As an industrial entity, Limp Bizkit kicks ass. Musically, they suck it.
In response to LexyBitch
Then again, X is the archetypical algebraic variable... so I am going to have to partially cede this point. If you're using Generation X not to refer to a specific generation, but rather the current generation, whatever that might be, that occupies the space of supposed disdain and cynicism, that's fine.

This is one thing that disturbs me. There is no such thing as a current generation, since every year the same amount of people are born, mostly.
In response to Botman

It's because its common. And the common doesnt stand out. When "my" generation is the older generation, things like this will likely change.

Yes, things will change. Among those changes: you'll find that you're doing, saying, and thinking the same things you reviled and despised as a child.
In response to Spuzzum
Spuzzum wrote:
Then again, X is the archetypical algebraic variable... so I am going to have to partially cede this point. If you're using Generation X not to refer to a specific generation, but rather the current generation, whatever that might be, that occupies the space of supposed disdain and cynicism, that's fine.

This is one thing that disturbs me. There is no such thing as a current generation, since every year the same amount of people are born, mostly.

I agree. Labeling generations is stupid. Botman is certainly within 5 years of me, probably more like 3, and yet we like different musics, have different outlooks on life, and I only swear for calculated effect. You're probably closer to his age and have an even more markedly different mode of expression.

What Botman means when he says "my generation" is "the people like me, who happen to be the same age as me." He fails to take into account the 20 and 30 year olds (and 40 and 50 year olds) from past "generations" who never outgrew the rebellious phase, and so are exactly like him with the swearing and the lack of musical taste and so on, and the 15 and 18 year olds who already follow politics, enjoy poetry, and invest their savings conservatively.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5