Here's a picture of my beagle Stuart - he's a new addition to the household, having adopted him less than two months ago. He's more fun to look at than to read this dumb story. A variation of which I've told a dozen times.
You see, I don't believe you can make a "best of" list. You can make a list of what you think is best for you, but insisting your opinion is somehow authoritative enough to qualify as "the best" is not only incredibly presumptuous but lacks any qualifiers - how are you the one who gets to decide what's "best"? Who does? With what criteria?
Recently - a couple months ago - I had an interaction with a stranger on Facebook. A friend posted a meme about Yoko Ono. It was hateful. It went something like, "Getting an extra day in 2025 is like getting bonus tracks on a Yoko Ono reissue."
Here is my response:
The Yoko Ono hate is so strangely strong to this day.
I personally was very happy to get the Secretly Canadian reissue of Yoko Ono Plastic Ono Band from 2016 which had three bonus tracks plus a snippet of studio dialogue. Folks like to shit on her but her releases are far more adventurous (in my opinion) than most of the solo Beatles output of the 1970s (& certainly beyond) & this remains (I think) the only Beatle-adjacent release that includes Charlie Haden & Ornette frickin' Coleman.
I just kinda wish people would stop using her as punching bag for their idea of "bad music" when they have so so many more options out there, especially if they're never actually taken the time to listen to her music.
One of this person's friends responded:
In other words, her music is better than it sounds?
I responded:
Taste in music is subjective, & I happen to like quite a lot of Yoko Ono's music. Your mileage, as they say, may vary. If you have no background in avant-garde music, you probably won't enjoy Yoko Ono's music, but that doesn't make her music "good" or "bad" because that's entirely up to you, & your opinion is your own & has no effect on mine or anyone else's, unless they value your opinion in some way. I understand that you meant your comment as a joke, as was the meme posted, but it's in my nature to point out that sometimes things we think are funny are a little tired & hacky, & that sometimes the things we think are universal - "Yoko Ono's music sucks!" - aren't quite that. Her musical output has been greatly admired by more people than you think, & that's the reason her records get reissued - with bonus tracks. That some of us are very happy to buy.
This person continued:
No Gary, there are objective standards for what constitutes good music....talent being a prime requirement. I would have less of a problem if whatever Yoko did was classified as "performance art," but to describe it as music is an offense to actual musicians, singers and songwriters. Lennon's promotion of Yoko was his joke demonstrating the level of abysmal crap the public, and particularly music critics, were willing to accept as "art." Some people still haven't gotten the joke.
My response:
My response:
I don't believe there are "objective standards" for music. Love of music is entirely subjective. This is a much longer discussion than can fit in a Facebook comment, but I can assure you that just because you feel your opinion of Yoko Ono is "true," it doesn't make it true for me & for the many other people who have enjoyed Yoko Ono's music for decades. If you'd like to think I have been duped or haven't gotten the joke, that's fine. It just tells me that I probably wouldn't value your opinion of the music I like. It's not important to me that people share my opinion - I love what I love & I can talk at length about why I love what I love. I understand that's true for many other people too & never feel the need to dismiss or diminish their opinions for that very reason. In the case of this post, I just wanted to point out that the joke didn't work on me because - as I've said - I've bought reissues of Yoko Ono albums because of bonus tracks.
This person's final comment included the statement "I can assure you there are objective standards" - like I would take a stranger's word for it! - he tried to bait me by saying my thoughts were akin to Rush Limbaugh's! - & he ended with this delightful suggestion: "If you'd like to send me a link to what you regard as Yoko's best work we can discuss in detail."
After I had said that if he thought there were objective standards for music, he kindly offered to "listen" to what I liked & then tell me whether it was good or not. Isn't it astonishing that I didn't take him up on that offer?
Which is a very long way of me saying the same thing I always say around this time of year: this is no way anyone can say that their selection of music is a "best of." The most they can say is that it's their favorites. "Best" is not a term one can use to describe musical choice unless you define the parameters of how you make that determination. & even then someone will disagree with your parameters & therefore your choices cannot be "the best."
Sorry for the long post. Luckily very few people will read this!
No comments:
Post a Comment