Vengangelica
Let me try to point out the difference here, which both you and wisdom seem to be missing completely.
The rest of us are not saying that there is or has never been a long song with which we became bored. As I mentioned in my last post, it has happened to me, infrequently. Sorry for bolding the next part but it is important and neither of you seem to be understanding when I say it so:
The difference is that listening to a long song, which becomes boring or which I don't like, does not make me think, or put me in a frame of mind where I think that ALL long songs are therefore boring.
THIS is the point you're both missing. Of course things can become boring if overstretched. An overlong film can meander ("The matrix revolutions" sagged for me in the middle) as can a book that's too long or not enjoyable enough, and the other one you mentioned, well that's just silly. Eating twenty scoops of ice cream would make you feel sick, not bored. But yeah, the principle remains. I wouldn't have another 20 scoops of ice cream again after that, but only because I wouldn't want to be sick, not because I was bored.
Your point and examples there start to get a little muddy, but the important thing to understand is that we, the vast majority of us, don't make a draconian judgement based on a bad experience. So if we don't like a long song, okay we dont like it. No-one's saying that they like EVERY song they listen to. You only have to browse through my journal to see that there are some albums I've been disappointed with, or tracks on them I've disliked. In that case, yeah maybe I wouldn't listen to more music from that band --- or maybe I'd give them another chance (cough) Snow Patrol (cough) --- but the important point is there are few if any albums I've hated because of the length of the songs.
Maybe it's not true to say the length doesn't matter to me: personally, I prefer longer songs, though if the song is not good then a longer version of it will (probably) not make it better, though it has happened. Look at U2's "Bad", benefited from being extended. Just one example. Another is Thin LIzzy's "Still in love with you".
Anyway, the thing none of us here can understand is not that wisdom does not like long songs --- anyone is entitled to their opinion and preference --- but that the length of the song is a direct barometer for whether they listen to the song or not. None of us here would look at a song by an artiste we have never heard from, and check the length: it's just not important, unless maybe we're in a hurry, on the way to bed, tired or whatever.
So THAT's what we can't understand: that the length of a song stops wisdom from even trying it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VEGANGELICA
I am assuming that people get bored of almost *any* activity after a while and want a change, a break, a chance to focus on something else. Therefore, I am assuming that people when listening to music will eventually happen upon a song (or can imagine a song) that is so long that its length becomes one reason they don't like it.
I can understand how you like the music that you do regardless of its length. Can you imagine there being a song, though, that is so long that you'd get tired of listening to it, just like you might start to get bored and feel distaste reading a very long book, or watching a 6-hour movie, or eating an ice cream cone with 20 scoops of ice cream?
It seems in this thread that almost all posters can't imagine getting bored due to the length of a song. Some act as if wisdom's disliking most long songs (over six minutes) is baffling or small-minded. His preference seems to be a completely understandable human reaction to me, given that people often get bored doing one thing for too long and itch to move on to something else.
Mind you, in my view there is nothing wrong with tending to like either long songs or short songs. It is simply interesting to find out the reasons for people's preferences.
|
It is, yes, but the unfortunate thing is that wisdom has not engaged in debate. He (she?) has literally attacked people's music preferences, totally unnecessarily and inappropriately slagged off and underminded icons in genres he/she does not like, and has probably little experience of, and in general been very combative, stubborn, defensive and at times downright rude. This has, admittedly, led me to be more than a little offensive myself and for that I apologise to all here, but it's hard to listen to such unsubstianted and irrelevant pronouncements without losing your rag. Shouldn't have done, I know, but wisdom's refusal to listen learn or even understand, to see anyone's view other than his/her own has really annoyed me, and kept me posting even though I said I would step back.
Quote:
|
Actually, wisdom has replied to many posters in this thread. Ki made the same accusation as you, but it isn't correct.
|
No, when talking to Ki, me or anyone else who disagrees with their view he/she has just attacked his points and not dealt with or accepted them. He/she has already said he/she did not want a debate. It's pretty clear now why, as he/she seems unable to hold a cogent argument, but as I already said, why join a group like this if you're not prepared to debate? Baffles me, it really does. This has been an interesting thread certainly, but it could have been carried on in a much better spirit had wisdom been prepared to discuss instead of attack or ignore. Sad really.
In fairness, as I think I mentioned, you've been a far better debater than he/she; just a pity you're basically doing his/her talking, fighting his/her battle for him/her (will someone please let me know if wisdom is male or female so I can stop using these alternative pronouns?)
Just tell me, really, do you support the belief that if you hear a long song you don't like, or several, that you stop listening to all long songs purely on that basis?