Originally Posted by whogivesaflux

art pop is a term I confabulated out of my proverbial cobwebs on the spot. It's a term that for me describes more so an effect the artist/band has socially that constitutes a resulting clique mentality. It's a phenomenon that attaches and best lends itself to a commercial popularity drawn form a pseudo intellectual underground which is in reality neither.

I believe in identifying responsibility rather than the premise. The measure of anything is best taken from result rather than appearance.

art pop to me is not all bad either. For instance, Beck is Art Pop to me and I REALLY enjoy Beck. I just find Radiohead exceptionally boring, "safe", pedestrian, "correct". That sort of thing.

Bottom Line: ANY music that has a reputation that is popular enough to proceed it demands the sincerest of scrutiny from me as a listener and long time musical appreciator. Radiohead did not live up to that reputation for me. I just don't get it. It doesn't challenge me whatsoever. Just like certain people don't "get" Bob Dylan, I don't "get" Radiohead.

Radiohead is NOTHING like The Velvet Underground, I'll give you that. But the Velvets were most definitely the closest thing I can imagine to a pseudo intellectual garage/psych experimental pop group. The very essence actually.

Have you heard the Lou Reed E.A.P. thingamabob? I saw that the other day when I was picking up some new and used CDs. I was tempted to grab it but having been so disappointed with Lou's latter day solo cannon, I opted out.