The way I see it, when someone (whether it be the artist, fans, and/or critics) calls something "art rock" it often comes across as a self-conscious and egotistical attempt to distance the music from mainstream "non-arty" music. I mean, there isn't a genre of art called "art painting". It's just art. Music is likewise just art -- even though a lot of people don't think of it that way -- and the kind of people who would use the term "art rock" are aware of this, so their using it just seems redundant and desperate.
That is not at all a criticism of the music itself of course, or even the tastes and opinions of people who call something "art rock", just my general impression of why they and the genre are seen as pretentious. It's not like I care about doing away with the term, and I use it myself, as it is a recognized genre name that describes certain bands who might otherwise be hard to categorize (not that "art rock" is a particularly useful description of a band's sound, but it's better than nothing).
__________________
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by J.R.R. Tolkien
There is only one bright spot and that is the growing habit of disgruntled men of dynamiting factories and power-stations; I hope that, encouraged now as ‘patriotism’, may remain a habit! But it won’t do any good, if it is not universal.
|
|