[MERIT]

It is "fucking REMOTELY like that" because you are judging an entire group of people based on something that is only true for a small portion of them. A generalization is a generaliztaion, no matter how you try to paint it. Just because you may be too ignorant to understand song lyrics does not mean that others are. It apparently makes you feel like an elitist to think that you have some hidden knowledge about song lyrics that everyone else is too stupid too understand. Get over yourself kiddo.

So your argument is that people only learn things that they are taught? .... How profound. And who are you to say that things other people care about are pointless?

Anyone with a middle school education and 12 years of life experience is capable of writing songs like Aesop's. Not to knock the guy, I'm a fan, but you're holding him up on some pedestal like he's Jesus f*cking Christ of the rap world.

You're comparing Aesop Rock to William Shakespeare, and you say that I need to work on my analogies?

That's completely contradictory. If you know that there are kids who understand, yet you lump them into the generalization, you lose all credibility.

Really? The artists who conceived the work, wrote the lyrics, and made the song has no right to say how the lyrics that THEY wrote are meant to be interpreted? They are the only ones who have a leg to stand on in that department buddy.

Actuall, that's exactly what you've done thus far, almost exclusively.

His mainstream appeal is completely irrelevant here. He appeals more to fanboys who carry a backpack full of spray paint cans, wear beat up DC shoes, and think it's cool to listen conscience rap because it makes them "different" and "unique," like they "get" some concept that is hidden to the rest of the world.

If you know this, then why sit here and use the ignorance of that fact as an argument for your elitism?

Dirty

I agree with you Jester. From what I gather you are basically saying that Aesop is too complex lyrically for your average teenager, which I agree with. I don't think most teenagers are equipped with the general knowledge or vocabulary to really "get" Aesop. I don't know what he is saying half the time and usually don't care to sit around deciphering his lyrics and metaphors either.

Jester

What the hell, dude? I go to some failing LAUSD school. Did you never take an ENGLISH class? They didn't read ANYTHING?

I don't see how reading Romeo and Juliet or A Midsummer Night's Dream in high school would require the school being "fancy pants..."

Dude, teenagers to white people IS NOT a valid analogy, no matter how you look at it. In an analogy, teenagers cannot compare to white people. They're WAY TOO DIFFERENT. As a group, white people INCLUDE teenagers. This analogy is logically fallacious, I'm pretty sure. I can't remember the name, though! (This is clearly me trying to show off my VAST KNOWLEDGE because I'm such an elitist. )

Yes, it's a generalization, but I'm making that fact clear and it's making a generalization is fair, BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT A MAJORITY. If someone told me, like,

And Jesus Christ, I'm not saying a teenager can't appreciate Aesop Rock. But it's a fucking fact that a majority wouldn't, "no matter how you try to paint it." That other guy suggested that Aesop Rock's target fan base was teens.

My point: teenagers, in general, are not likely to be Aesop Rock's target audience, because if they were, he probably would not take such a complex approach, because your average teenager is likely to be turned off by the amount of things in the lyrics that they won't have come across yet.

The world is a big place, with lots of information--it takes time to absorb lots of it. Aesop Rock has a lot of stuff in his lyrics. For example, the dude's like a walking dictionary--you can't tell me his vocabulary is not above your average 15 year old's vocab. If you are telling me that, you can pretty much suck my dick.

Now, ALL THAT SAID. I perfectly understand the fact that people that aren't legally considered adults are capable of enjoying and making sense out of Aesop Rock. I don't care when you came out of your mom's pussy if you can make a good point.

Uhhhh... Yeah, people who only learn what is taught to them are lazy and don't seek knowledge. You're telling me there's no people who actively, like... read, and learn on their own, through their own interests?

Sorry if you think everything going on in the life of your average teenager is like, some serious shit. Teenage years are highly important because we're developing rapidly. Interests come and go, you're silly if you think everything every teenager takes is serious. It's all a learning process, and you're being goddamn sensitive because I'm only presenting the objective side of things. I'll get to this later.

Oh, wow. LOL. Anyone out of middle school can write Aesop Rock's songs. Wow, I really don't even know what to say to that. You don't see the craftsmanship in Aesop Rock's work? Everything he's said amounts to middle school knowledge... That's an impossible conclusion to arrive at. Sorry, what the fuck?

Well, they're both writers with unique artistic styles. I've seen a lot of people write off Aesop Rock as nonsensical, and in school, an overwhelming majority of my peers wrote off Shakespeare as nonsensical, too; complaining that people probably "look too much into him," and that he didn't really have as many subtle messages as teachers claim he do.

What? Dude, to say in general does not mean to say EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM OUT THERE IS THIS WAY. It means most. A majority. That means there are others who do not fall under this category, but that the numbers under this category are larger. How many times do I have to say that I recognize that there are many exceptions to this? There are a lot of teenagers who like Aesop Rock, that's proof enough. But how can one say his target audience is teenagers when he clearly isn't taking an approach that would make him click with your average teenager.


Yes, the artist had the inspiration and made the piece. That doesn't mean other people's interpretations are wrong, because different words and sounds and ideas click to us differently. I'm saying that the artist doesn't get to decide who's right, the interpretation is pretty much up to the audience. Whatever they see is what they see. The artist just tries to guide them to interpret things a certain way; that doesn't make their interpretation wrong.


Dude, what the fuck are you talking about? I really haven't. There's a HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "IN GENERAL" and "ALL." Goddamn.


Hey, infidel, it's called conscious rap. And Aesop Rock wouldn't just fall under that category, lol.


BECAUSE MY POINT IS NOT THAT TEENAGERS CANNOT ENJOY OR APPRECIATE HIM. My point is that they are not likely to be his TARGET FANBASE.

Look, did you have a tough time growing up, or some shit? Because you're getting awfully sensitive about me not sympathizing with all the smart kids out there. I know they're out there. But that's not what I'm talking about right now. Do you feel like you're not recognized for your great ideas, man? Do you need some people to tell you that you're a smart guy?

Calm the fuck down and grow the fuck up. You're really arguing against something that's not my point, anyway. You think I'm prejudice by age, which is absolutely ridiculous. I've debated against that form of prejudice many, many times, because I was often arguing issues with people older than me, and when that happens, of course you're likely to come across those prejudiced-by-age people who will refuse to acknowledge your point because "you're too young to understand." Stand up against that because it's wrong--anyone can know about things, but it's a matter of drive. If you don't want to know about things, you're not going to try and go learn about them, so you won't know them and you won't be able to make sense out of A LOT of different things when they come up--not just Aesop Rock.

But don't come on goddamn forums complaining about how teenagers are so so smart.

Jester

Pretty much. Yeah, I don't know how I'm making unfair statements to say that Aesop Rock uses words that are uncommon, and dare I say that he employs vocabulary which is at a higher level than your average 16 year old kid.

And yeah, you don't have to do that to enjoy him, either. Which I also know. People can just like the sound. I mean, most people probably don't sit around deciphering lyrics and metaphors, even for artists that are their favorite. But I bet oojay's going to use that as proof of me being an elitist, somehow, lol.

Sparky

I don't necessarily know if making lyrics so incredibly complex that most people are turned off, and even those who aren't may never notice is really a positive characteristic.

It does make for an interesting dynamic, but i still don't have even a clue what aesop may be saying probably half the time, if he is trying to say anything. This isn't the case for other artists I like.

He really goes out of his way to make his stuff more up for interpretation

I like aesop when he is being direct, when its all just imagery and seemingly random stringing together of language it doesn't hold my interest as much. I still like it, and it's more stimulating then all these stupid puns that people spit, but it's not as rewarding for me.

Thom Yorke

I think for Aesop even people who don't fully get his lyrics can appreciate his flow and producing. While some of the stuff he says is easy to pick up on, alot of it is not so easy to get, and certainly not for most teens. I myself had to go through alot of his lyrics to pick up on stuff. Generally teens will not do that.

[MERIT]

NO SHIT. Of course the analogy is falacious, just as falacious as your original generalization was, THAT WAS THE WHOLE POINT.

It is in no way a fact. It is your opinion which you formed based on a generaliation that you made. It's not even arguing semantics at this point, you seem completely unaware of your own ignorance.

I disagree that teens are his target fanbase (as I've never claimed otherwise). But I would imagine that Aesop Rock appreciates all of his listeners equally, no matter who he was targeting his music at.

If you would have stated your opinion like this in the first place, you could have avoided 2 pages of bickering.

And who are you to attest that he doesn't spend hours on end utilizing thesauruses and dictionaries to write his lyrics. Using complex words doesn't equate to being "deep" or "meaningful." And you need to watch your smartass mouth. This may be an internet forum, but running your mouth is bad karma. You may end up getting stomped the fuck out and having your wifey getting stripped naked right in front of you (kharmically speaking of course).

I never made a differentiation between the two. You tried to demean people for learning by being taught by others. How does that differ from actively doing research on your own? You're still reading books that were written by other people, and not introducing anything new to the equation.

It's called arguing to the extreme. I'm trying to make you realize that you're erroneously holding him up on some pedestal like he is the greatest lyricist in the history of music.

Anyone who believes that Aesop Rock has contributed more unique and astounding work to society than William Shakespeare has absolutely ZERO understanding of art or literature. You need a CT scan homie.

Actually, if the artist exlplains what the lyrics mean, but the listener disagrees, the listener is absolutely wrong. If I draw you a picture of a racecar and tell you that it is a racecar, but you swear up and down that you think it looks more like a squirrel, YOU ARE WRONG.

Yes, back up your opinions by being a grammar and spelling Nazi, that will really help your credibility. "Conscious" rap is an umbrella term, which Aesop Rock most definitely falls under. And don't call me an "infidel," it makes you sound like an even bigger douche.

Yes, thank you for finally realizing what is really going on here! My mommy didn't hug me enough as a child, so I go on to internet forums to pick fights with people who are elitists in an attempt to appease the massive black hole this is my tortured soul. Seriously dude, get a life.

You're the one that pops up on here towing the line for an artist simply because others don't agree that he is Christ incarnate. Get off Aesop Rock's dick for two seconds and look around buddy, there's more important things in life than being an elitist douche.

Jester

But it really wasn't. LOL. That's what you're fucking missing. There's a difference between making a general statement and comparing two things THAT ARE NOT COMPARABLE. Teens and "white people" are not a comparable group at all, therefore, your analogy does not work. Get your shit together, son.

Yes, it is a fact. Like, if you think it's not, if you think Aesop Rock would appeal to a majority of teens, you're just an idiot, dude. There's no way around this. A majority of PEOPLE wouldn't even like Aesop Rock. If you want to prove this, conduct a little experiment yourself. Introduce Aesop Rock to 100 randomly selected people. I bet you the people who like it and become fans or even casual listeners is in the minority. I'll bet you a thousand fucking dollars.

Jesus, there's a lot of people who don't even like hip hop because they don't know good hip hop--they just take what's given to them over the radio, because people who "care" about finding and exploring music are in the minority. If you disagree with that, then you're being disagreeable to be disagreeable. You can't tell me the radio / TV / mainstream media is not a primary source of music / entertainment for a majority of people. My point with this being that when the majority of people out there listen to pop, their taste is not likely to fall in line with Aesop Rock.

Pop music is constructed a certain way--the formula is simpler because it's easier to appeal to more people that way. Aesop Rock's music (well, None Shall Pass, kinda) again, doesn't really fall in line with this notion.

THEN SHUT THE FUCK UP. That's my goddamn point, and you're trying to "disprove" what I'm saying, but you're not even attacking my point. You're just calling me ignorant for making a general statement, like it's against the ****ing law of logic to generalize on ANYTHING, like it's IMPOSSIBLE for a general statement to hold any sort of truth.


Right. I've said it before already, and my first argument was on that basis. Sorry if you're too goddamn stupid and missed it.

See, when did I ever say "big words = INTELLIGENCE"? Stop putting words in my mouth by making hasty assumptions. I said that a lot of words he will use are above the level of an average 15 year old. Argue with that statement. Whether or not he uses a thesaurus or dictionary is irrelevant (you realize a LOT of rappers use dictionaries/thesauruses as tools to build their vocabulary? And what the hell, if someone TRIES to build their vocabulary, TRIES TO EXPAND THEIR KNOWLEDGE, that somehow belittles their credibility? They're actively seeking new ways to express themselves... Expanding the brain is good.)

And lol @ trying to like, rile up fear in me. What the fuck? LOL.

Dude, once again, NO I DIDN'T. I'm demeaning people who aren't trying to learn, and only learn what's put in their heads, rather than trying to fill their heads. If the ONLY way you learn anything is because it's forced into you, and you don't have any sort of curiosity to learn on your own, then that's a lazy person, man. People should actively seek information, not be passive and just take in what comes around.

Uh, how is a nonsensical hyperbole going to prove anything?

Right, I never said that, I don't even know how you arrived at that assumption. I don't believe that. Did you even read what I said? You completely avoided the similarities that I noted. That means there's some sort of point in common that can be compared between them; it doesn't mean "AESOP ROCK IS JUST AS GOOD AS SHAKESPEARE!"

Well, there's definitely a difference between the use of words for making pictures and the use of visual art to make pictures. There's a difference between the interpretation of ideas through words and the interpretation of something that you can physically see. You can show me the race car--ideas are a lot more complex than that, and they're infinitely varied by subjectivity.

But, still, you can show me a song that has a CLEAR, CLEAR message in it and tell me it's impossible to argue against the artist's point, and that is what I was really expecting you to do, because we're talking about music, not visual art. (I'd say visual art's not as open-ended as things like creative writing.) But anyway, bring me a song like that to make your point, and I'll probably just be like, "okay, sure, there's a clear definition for that song." And for the record, it's probably bad/cheap/cheesy art because art's not at its best in didactic form (oh boy, here's the part where you call me an elitist again, because everyone's art is equal and I'm being insensitive!).

Are you kidding me? That was the entire joke. You've been calling me an elitist for whatever reason, and I saw an opportunity to correct you, so I did it with an elitist demeanor to fulfill your predisposition towards me. I didn't realize it would go so far over your head, (infidel).

Common is conscious rap. Mos Def is conscious rap. "The Message" is conscious rap (I hope you know that song, because if you don't, well, you're not as good as me and my incredibly vast knowledge of hip hop!)

Yeah, Aesop Rock is kinda conscious rap, but it's not like, what he'd primarily fall under. He'd probably be called backpacker rap or abstract rap or "indie" or "alternative" rap. (I hate the terms "alternative" and "indie" though.) Don't get me wrong, though, Aesop Rock has a lot of conscious rap undertones, but t's like... If people were fans of Talib Kweli, Blu & Exile, Common (all of these are very much conscious rap), and asking for recommendations, you're not gonna be like, "OH YEAH MAN, AESOP ROCK IS YOUR DUDE." He just doesn't really fit as well under that umbrella.

Any time, man. If you ever need to talk, you can always shoot me a private message. I'm all eyes!

Right. I'm arguing in favor of an artist that I really like, on a forum which is meant for expressing different opinions on music, and the point that I originally was making (before you attacked me with silly "elitist" comments and completely irrelevant arguments) was that Aesop Rock's primary target fan base is not likely to be teenagers because of his complex approach. It's easier to reach people, ESPECIALLY YOUNGER PEOPLE, through simpler methods. But then you got all butthurt acting like I'm simply writing off anyone who doesn't love Aesop Rock to be idiot fucks. I'm not doing that at all, lol.

[MERIT]

It makes absolutely no difference what subjects or groups analogies are based upon if the end result is exactly the same. You're completely failing to realize that making generalities is wrong and ignorant, especially when dealing with music.

You are apparently unaware of the definition of, and differences between an opinion and a fact. I really don't know how to put all of this into terms that would be easier for you to understand. If you believe that all of your generalized opinions are facts then this conversation really has no place else to go, as I'm obviously arguing with a self-absorbed moron.

Again, neither you nor I said that he WOULD appeal to most teens. But appeal is completely relative to the listener, and each person's musical tastes are unique, and should not be lumped into an ignorant generalization made by some idiot on an internet forum.

Again, neither you nor I said that he would. But how did you come to this conclusion? What is it based upon? NOTHING. It is your opinion, which has been baseless thus far.

So I'm assuming that you have done so yourself? No, didn't think so. You fail to realize that the person making the generalized claims is the one who has the burden of proof to back them up, not the other way around.

Jesus Christ, what is with you and the "majority" and "minority" generalizations? People are going to listen to whatever appeals to them, regardless of how they became aware of the artists.

When did I say this? Oh, that's right, NEVER. I don't why you think that making up lame strawman arguments will further your point (or lack there of to be more precise).

Seriously, let's see you make one even remotely valid or pertinent statement without resorting to relegating people into some "majority" or "minority" that you made up in your head.

There you go, discuss things like a disgruntled 12 year old with Tourette Syndrome. Well played. Maybe you can call me a "poop head" and throw rocks at me next.

There's no need to disprove something that you haven't proved in the first place. You have no point to attack. What you may think is your "point" is just a generalized opinion. I'm trying to get you to judge each persons' tastes and each artist's work on an individual and unique basis. What rings true for one person does not automatically ring true for another simply because you THINK that it does. That is not the way the world works, not has it ever , nor will it ever. Get used to it.

See above.

Actually, that was the first time that you differentiated between "not likely" and "all teenegers are too f*cking stupid to understand what I like because MY taste is sooooooo beyond their intelectual capabilities."

It's called an inference, and it's based on YOUR statements. Excuse the rest of us lowly peasants for assuming that you mean what you say.

I completely disagree. Again, not all 15 year olds are the same. I'm quite sure that most 15 year olds on here have an extended vocabulary and could easily comprehend Aesop Rock's lyrics. It can only be inferred that these opinions of yours are based upon your own experiences of being unable to comprehend things at an average 15 year old's intellectual level. My apologies if you're not on par with the rest of us.

That is all well and good, but you are idolizing someone for their ability to reference a dictionary and a thesaurus. You can bookmark Wikipedia and reference it at every turn, but that doesn't make you an expert on every subject.

I honestly couldn't care less if you're afraid or riled up, but I do believe in karma. And per karma, you must have lived a pretty sh*tty, no good, f*cked up existance thus far in order for you to have evolved into the elitist, attention whore douche that you come across as in every post.

But why demean anyone for no reason? Are you that starved for attention that you feel the need to make up hypothetical groups in your head and then meaninglessly demean those groups in order to appease your own low sense of self?

The complexity of the work is not what is in question, rather the MEANING and MESSAGE of the work. Regardless of whether it is a visual or textual representation, it CAN have a finite and exact meaning behind it, which was determined by the artist. Of course viewers and listeners have the right to interpret it however they choose, but that does not necessarily make their interpretation correct (when it does not correspond with that of the artist).

Tell that to Van Gogh, Picasso, Dali, Da Vinci (need I continue?).

It obviously didn't go over my head, as I clearly referenced it and evoked a mundane response from you. But seeing as how you have disregarded your own ignorance in basically every aspect of the discussion thus far, I felt the need to bring it to your attention.

So much for continuity and credibility in your arguments.










So, would you like to go another 10 pages of clammering to back up your baseless opinions and attempting to pass them off as facts, while simultaneoiusly backtracking and trying to remove your foot from your mouth, or can you leave it be and save me some time and yourself some dignity?

Sparky

you guys are both arguing about the stupidest **** at this point