Why are the left such chumps when it comes to the charts?
I'm urging dubdobdee to pitch and write a piece that he's long been contemplating: "why are the left such chumps when it comes to the charts?" So to urge him further I'm pasting in a slightly re-worded version of what I wrote on his thread, and I encourage you to contribute your own thoughts here. (I'm not saying anything that I haven't said better and at greater length before, but I think this summary might be useful.)
My thumbnail explanation of why the left are such chumps about the charts is that being "left" has evolved into a cultural identity rather than just a way of analyzing and attempting to change society -- not that being a cultural identity precludes doing analysis and changing society, or that there's anything wrong with having a cultural identity (inevitably when people come together for a common purpose they'll already have a lot in common outside that purpose and will get more in common), but the unstated movement in the left has been towards embracing music, ideas, and actions because they are ours* rather than because the music, ideas, and actions are good -- though of course the music is called good, it's experienced as good, and sometimes reasons are even given, and the reasons are usually terrible: the reasons tend to validate or criticize the music on the basis of whether we* approve of who makes it, how it was (supposedly) made, and whom it was made for rather than on the basis of what the music actually is and does.
Of course, the whole culture, not just the left, tends to do just the same, and the nonleftist analyses often lean left anyway (interestingly enough), though with the "politics" subdued. And my critique of the "left" is pretty much in line with the critique of academia and journalism that I made in my book (this critique could be directed at several hundred other professions as well):
"(i) presentation of self -- creating, maintaining, or modifying one's hairstyle, as it were -- is a way of thinking, but (ii) given a choice between maintaining one's hairstyle and thinking about it, my profession as a whole will choose hairstyle over thought"
*"our" and "us" not necessarily meaning you and me and our buddies anymore, since in this corner of the livejournal we don't particuarly extol liberal-left approved music, but really, there but for the grace of god go you, me, and my buddies, ya know? And the postgrad liberal-left is our political leaning and our cultural neighborhood, even if it's not quite our particular musical street. Also, "our" and "us" don't totally explain why "we on the left" embrace hip-hop and blues and world music -- which is not made by "us" but is the sort of music "we" like, made by the sort of non-"us" that we project our romanticism onto. And there is a tendency for some lefties to validate pop by finding within it "modes of resistance" or by plumping for a "democratic catholocism of taste" or something -- again, not by the actual people in this corner of the livejournal, but by chumps on the left. And of course this sort of lefty can't comprehend that we like Britney because we think she's good rather than because we think our liking makes us anti-elitist.
My thumbnail explanation of why the left are such chumps about the charts is that being "left" has evolved into a cultural identity rather than just a way of analyzing and attempting to change society -- not that being a cultural identity precludes doing analysis and changing society, or that there's anything wrong with having a cultural identity (inevitably when people come together for a common purpose they'll already have a lot in common outside that purpose and will get more in common), but the unstated movement in the left has been towards embracing music, ideas, and actions because they are ours* rather than because the music, ideas, and actions are good -- though of course the music is called good, it's experienced as good, and sometimes reasons are even given, and the reasons are usually terrible: the reasons tend to validate or criticize the music on the basis of whether we* approve of who makes it, how it was (supposedly) made, and whom it was made for rather than on the basis of what the music actually is and does.
Of course, the whole culture, not just the left, tends to do just the same, and the nonleftist analyses often lean left anyway (interestingly enough), though with the "politics" subdued. And my critique of the "left" is pretty much in line with the critique of academia and journalism that I made in my book (this critique could be directed at several hundred other professions as well):
"(i) presentation of self -- creating, maintaining, or modifying one's hairstyle, as it were -- is a way of thinking, but (ii) given a choice between maintaining one's hairstyle and thinking about it, my profession as a whole will choose hairstyle over thought"
*"our" and "us" not necessarily meaning you and me and our buddies anymore, since in this corner of the livejournal we don't particuarly extol liberal-left approved music, but really, there but for the grace of god go you, me, and my buddies, ya know? And the postgrad liberal-left is our political leaning and our cultural neighborhood, even if it's not quite our particular musical street. Also, "our" and "us" don't totally explain why "we on the left" embrace hip-hop and blues and world music -- which is not made by "us" but is the sort of music "we" like, made by the sort of non-"us" that we project our romanticism onto. And there is a tendency for some lefties to validate pop by finding within it "modes of resistance" or by plumping for a "democratic catholocism of taste" or something -- again, not by the actual people in this corner of the livejournal, but by chumps on the left. And of course this sort of lefty can't comprehend that we like Britney because we think she's good rather than because we think our liking makes us anti-elitist.