Grimes > Bjork
Grimes > Joanna Newsom
Grimes > Kate Bush
Grimes > Julia Holter
Grimes > St. Vincent
Grimes > Grouper
Grimes > Delia Derbyshire
Grimes > Ella Fitzgerald
Grimes > Billie Holiday
Grimes > Joni Mitchell
Thoughts?
Any thread>thread about grimes that has been posted before
>>66476768
but is she better than Aqua tho??
Lisa Germano > Grimes
Tori Amos > Grimes
Cat Power > Grimes
>>66476768
this is objectively false.
>Grimes > Bjork
Opinion instantly disqualified
What about Marissa Nadler desu?
>>66476768
>Grimes < Bjork
>Grimes < Joanna Newsom
>Grimes < Kate Bush
>Grimes < Julia Holter
>Grimes > St. Vincent
>Grimes < Grouper
>Grimes < Delia Derbyshire
>Grimes < Ella Fitzgerald
>Grimes < Billie Holiday
>Grimes < Joni Mitchell
Ftfy
OP, why haven't you killed yourself yet?
>>66476865
Well...
I think they are all good musicians that shouldn't be held up to each other
>>66477002
Who's that? Francoise Hardy?
>>66476953
False. Wasted effort.
>>66476899
Not good enough.
why does /mu/ feel the need to categorize women into a fake genre of their own? it's not like any of those artists have anything in common. why compare them just because they're women?
btw grimes sucks
>>66476768
>Grimes > Joni Mitchell
grime's whole quarky persona and music is BORING. UNINTERESTING. TRITE.
The only reason /mu/ likes her is because she's good for a fap or two.
Actually her whole image makes me dry heave, and enforces theories I have that women are incapable of being original or even getting close to something with a semblance and simply emulate men.
>>66478733
because we are autistic and like categorizing things
thinking outside of in-groups is hard bro
>>66476992
>I don't know what session musicians are
Also, elementary school mentality.
>>66476768
Am I the only person on here who legitimately likes Grimes? Every other pro-Grimes post I see on here just screams irony to me.
>>66478880
I can't in good faith say I legitimately like her. To me she's the face of the commodification of counter culture. Grimes has somehow managed to say nothing, do nothing, and yet be popular. Hipsterdom is a snake eating it's own tail. Grimes is the kind of music people who have the image of counter culture alone. It is what pretentious people wanting to add some spice to their tastes as a way of scoring social points would pickup.
And she's also Canadian
>>66479013
>she's the face of the commodification of counter culture
goddamn this. it's literally pop music for people who are too socially conscious to admit they like pop music
>>66478806
>BORING. UNINTERESTING. TRITE
That's why people are talking nonstop about her. Sure...
>>66478847
>session musicians
Grimes doesn't need session musicians. She also produced herself all of her stuff.
Bjork not only needed a lot of session musicians instead playing by herself those instruments, but she also needed a lot of producers. Bjork is just another mainstream pop artist. What's the difference between her and Beyonce, except quirkness?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemonade_%28Beyonc%C3%A9_album%29#Track_listing
Both Bjork and Beyonce are very overrated. They need a lot of men to help them making their music. Grimes needs just mixing and some art direction.
>>66479083
foool
>>66479013
>Grimes has somehow managed to say nothing, do nothing, and yet be popular.
What kind of metaphysical bullshit is this? She did 4 albums and an EP, fooool. She toured all over the world, she did interviews, she did photoshoots, and so on. Are you dumb?
>>66479120
>he calls that an argument
>>66479013
>I can't in good faith say I legitimately like her.
You can't because you're a tired hipster. Your whole post stinks of pretentiousness and bullshit. Your retarded post doesn't make any sense. Let me explain to you why she's popular: she makes music that some people can relate to it. Music that people LIKE. This is the reason, not your mumbo jumbo shit.
>And she's also Canadian
So fucking what? Isn't she an artist because she's Canadian? Fuck off.
When you realise how wonderful she is, everything else is shit...
>>66479268
It's just that Canadians are just as bad as Americans except worse because they think they aren't, plus Americans are inexplicably worshipful of them for some bizarre reason.
>>66479295
canada seems like a cool place to live and I'm not even from the united states
>>66476768
lets try to keep discussion of her in one thread>>66476791 more people will hate on her if you keep spamming threads
>>66479295
I'm not American, nor Canadian, but I think Canada is a cool place. It has an image of a place with nice people. It's a stereotype but it has some truth in it.
>>66478806
>The only reason /mu/ likes her is because she's good for a fap or two.
Tmi dude. Tmi.
>>66478880
Nope - I think her and her music are fantastic. There are evidently at least a handful of people with brains on here pretty regularly who legitimately like her/ think her music is awesome. You just have to sift through a lot of hateful/sycophantic garbage to see it - 'tis the cures of an open system.
>>66476768
why do you only compare her to female artists
>>66479013
>I can't in good faith say I legitimately like her.
Then be a grown-ass man/woman and admit that you actually don't. I know altruism is a very difficult thing for hipsters to understand, but practicing it occasionally can do wonders for your psyche.
Can someone please start gorespamming grimes threads
Im so fucking sick of this shit
>>66479268
AD HOMINEM
he's totally right, and if you weren't a consumerist sheep you would understand that her whole persona and aesthetic is a shitty marketing scheme to con 'snowflakes' like you
>>66479323
Literally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbZzD5o9K_A
>>66480031
>same person
>same kind of writing style
Yes, ad hominem. That dumbass (you) deserves that. You're also very ignorant: learn more about her origin / story. She started singing in places like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7rM67NPhZ8
Her success grew naturally, not through marketing schemes. She's an indie artist, not Madonna or Lady Gaga (artists with deep pockets for marketing).
>>66480189
who the fuck are you people
like fuck off with your fucking shilling for your garbage fucking dog-faced artist
this new grimes fad is literally some of the most cancerous fucking shit ive ever seen on this fucking board
>>66480113
why is this unlisted? how did you find it?
>>66480214
Who the fuck are you? What the fuck you're doing in this thread? If you don't know this artist, get the fuck out of here. It's not for you, fuckwit.
>this new grimes fad is literally some of the most cancerous fucking shit ive ever seen on this fucking board
U mad?
>>66476768
I quote enjoy her instagram. She is so cute.
>>66476768
Popping tags
upper uchelon for no reason
new jersey
DIAMONDS DIAMONDS DIAMONDS
DIAMONDS DIAMONDS DIAMONQDAS
DIAMONDS DIAMONDEAS ON ME
>>66480189
i'm not the same person but i have no way of proving that, nor would i bother to if i could, because your hopeless denial and delusion wouldn't allow you to believe it, even if the truth was right before your eyes.
you haven't done anything to refute our points. in fact, separating her from madonna or lady gaga (despite her obvious connection to pop music) is proof that she's capitalized off of marketing herself as some countercultural savior
>>66480237
Came across a link to it from a written interview, as far as I recall. Can't remember where.
>>66480415
>i'm not the same person
You're that fucking same. Same pretentious writing style. You don't fool anyone. You and your arguments are shit.
>you haven't done anything to refute our points
OUR? WTF, do you have multiple personalities now? I refute your points now: they're shit. Happy now?
>>66480498
>Same pretentious writing style
i know it may be hard for you to believe, but there are multiple people who are able to eloquently write their thoughts
>I refute your points now: they're shit
good argument
>>66476768
THIS THREAD IS A CONTEMPORARY ART PIECE
>>66480562
Sans capitalization and punctuation, of course.
>>66476768
good pic of her
too bad you're wrong
>>66480644
i don't need capitalization or periods at the end of my posts to eloquently express my thoughts
>>66480694
>too bad you're wrong
Opinions...
Here's your (You).
>>66480724
Good, because they wouldn't make very much sense there since punctuation and capital letters normally belong at the beginnings/endings of sentences.
>>66480826
>nitpicking grammar
sure is strawman in here
>>66480724
You're so pretentious you don't even need capitalization or periods. Jesus Christ, you're impossible...
>Strawman
I'm not sure you know what that word means.
>>66476768
>>66481081
you're pursuing an argument that has nothing to do with my original argument whatsoever.
>>66481298
Which was?
>>66479013
>>66479051
just let people enjoy whatever music they enjoy, dude, no need to project your feelings on everybody
k i lied about not wanting to prove it. here's proof we're not the same person to that dumb anon.
>>66481570
i'm just sick of these uninformed drones flooding this board with their irrational obsession
>>66481641
forgot pic
>>66481641
just filter "grimes" and that's it, I'm a regular poster in grimes threads and when I do enjoy her music a lot I wouldn't be this obsessed if she were a he
I don't talk for everyone on that thread, of course, but we can both agree that there wouldn't be always a general if she was ugly or a guy
don't let spammers and obsessed guys like me hate her
>>66479083
>grimes doesn't need session musicians
Because her music isn't as good
>>66478752
yeah jfc
>>66481450
Is your argument the the inline quote or the root text in that post?
>>66478847
man brian wilson was only one person from this list, what an asshole. what a hack. what a cock. grimes is better than me and i want her to step on my testicles
>>66481814
they're both saying the same thing. i'm just reiterating what that anon said.
I want Grimesposters to leave
>>66479013
I like leaving these little truth bombs, then going off and coming back to the pure incoherent rage.
Literally everyone who replied to me said nothing. They did not understand what I was saying and so argued unrelated things. Like the guy who thought I was denying her popularity[>>66479159] or the guy who reinforced his ad homs with inarguable, nebulous truisms, and who did not understand that the "Canadian" bit,... was a joke [>>66479268]. But my favorite has to be this bloke [>>66479937]. By some autismal comprehension failure came under the impression that I cannot say that I do not like grimes. This is why you don't try to argue on the internet when you don't fully have a grasp on the English language, folks. Figure of speech and nuance just go right over your head, and you get really literal.
>>66481881
Ok. So...
>she's the face of the commodification of counter culture
What counter culture could she reasonably be said to be the face of? I'm not aware of any counter cultural movements with nearly the breadth of disparate influences as what you find if you study her art or music, unless you consider the Internet itself to be a counter culture (which it isn't - the Internet has already been an integral part of mainstream culture for decades.)
>goddamn this. it's literally pop music for people who are too socially conscious to admit they like pop music
>The best way to describe Grimes’ ethereal, kind of nuts music is in her own words: “Pop through a different circuit”.
Grimes writes pop music. Why is that a problem?
>>66482520
original poster here, not the guy you're replying:
>What counter culture could she reasonably be said to be the face of?
Hipsterdom. the current trend of mining past trends and fads. the wrong generation, generation. The irony for the sake of irony people.
> I'm not aware of any counter cultural movements with nearly the breadth of disparate influences as what you find if you study her art or music
oy vey, goyim... my ass puckered at how cringe that was.
>Grimes writes pop music. Why is that a problem?
No one arguing that this is the problem. Again, an example of being unable to comprehend subtext and meaning. Nuance just flies over their head. Sorry, if you're looking to be spoon fed I'm not going to do it. Try a little harder. I refuse to write in this goofy, absurdly literal and surgical manner where you take every retard who might misconstrue what you say into consideration,... just to appease you dumb cunts. I thought everyone here was above middle school reading levels.
If you think anyone is arguing that because it's pop=bad, then you've failed to follow the thread of conversation.
>>66479927
Couse male artist > female artist
>>66482520
>What counter culture could she reasonably be said to be the face of?
as said before, she's the face of the commercial counterculture. have you ever noticed that in the last 5 years, corporate pop music has cashed in on the idea of marketing pop music as being "indie"?
see:
>mumford and sons
>foster the people
>lumineers
>imagine dragons
>grimes
>etc.
entrepreneurs realized that being an "indie hipster" was fashionable among the kiddies and so they exploited that by cranking out accessible pop music that is disguised as being unique, hip, and indie. this way the wannabe counterculture can get their indie cred without actually listening to challenging music.
>>66482785
so isn't really the problem the people who think "challenging" = better?
>>66482947
not the guy you're replying,
Those people are annoying, and I don't like those people. My original post was more giving the reason why I find her unlikable, and how I think the people who like her misguided and hypocritical. Also the line about her just being fap material might have also hit a bit too close for some. I mean come on, the comparison the OP OP made demanded ridicule and examination into grimes whole image and music.
Who honestly would list grimes as one of their favorite, or even bring her up in conversation regarding the merit of musicians besides someone who's fat, ugly and a women .... or someone who faps to her.
>>66483148
I think taste is subjective, you're implying it's not, so we'd really get nowhere arguing
>>66482947
no. the problem is is pop artists exploiting normie hipster wannabes. it's the principal
>>66483197
Who is arguing about tastes? I'm not. You can surely use subjectivity as a riposte to my argument, but it would be ungracefully ham-handed... it's a weak cop out and intellectually dishonest. You know lists of actually good music would not include grimes.
Music can indeed be quantified, and it objective truths can be applied to it. Just because you, me, or someone else differs an opinion says nothing about the whole. the majority. anecdotes don't disprove a pattern.
Everything is subjective.If people were dissuaded from talking about music because of it's subjective nature, not only would we get nowhere no one else would.
>>66482706
>Hipsterdom.
Grimes isn't a hipster and never engages in irony. She's a surrealist yuppie:
>A surrealist yuppie is a type of person who's between the hipsters and the mainstream, who's still doing creative things, but isn’t disdainful of mainstream success. Just because something is engineered by a bunch of guys in suits doesn’t make in necessarily bad. We think PSY is the king of the surrealist yuppies because he's really rich and successful. He writes songs for pop stars, but he's also a total weirdo and clearly very intelligent and talented. He’s doing interesting and subversive things in the context of pop music. He’s the most successful surrealist yuppie that we know.
http://www.austinchronicle.com/daily/music/2012-10-04/surrealist-yuppie-grimes/
>No one arguing that this is the problem.
Here:
>>66482785
>entrepreneurs realized that being an "indie hipster" was fashionable among the kiddies and so they exploited that by cranking out accessible pop music that is disguised as being unique, hip, and indie. this way the wannabe counterculture can get their indie cred without actually listening to challenging music.
In other words, accessible pop music (clearly not an apt description of Grimes, but I digress...) is intellectually inferior.
OP, I think you might want to pay more attention to the content of your own thread...
>>66483418
>Music can indeed be quantified, and it objective truths can be applied to it.
this is what I don't agree with, and what I meant to be in disagreement when I said "taste is subjective"
Sorry, nope. Grimes started out alright, her first stuff was very abrasive and experimental, but Art Angels is trash trying to save itself with the "artsy" label. Fuck her, fuck her tumblr politics, and fuck Art Angels
>>66483444
I'm not going to reply to your "not a hipster, surrealist yuppie" argument, and instead just let it marinate there.
>OP, I think you might want to pay more attention to the content of your own thread...
Obviously goading in explanation, but whatever.
First of all, we are not talking about pop music[full stop]. We're talking about the grimes being a commodification of counter culture. There is an important difference here. The fact that it is presented in the form of pop music is irrelevant. Are you really this dense?
>>66483444
>surrealist yuppie
jfc
>>66483555
I really don't want to go down a rabbit whole with you about this, so all I'll say is that perhaps when you say it's subjective that you actually mean "the rules or lines are harder to define" because when you say something is subjective it is a dismissal of any judgement of said thing.
And perhaps I did not articulate myself well, what I more or less meant was that there are objective QUALITIES in music that can be quantified. If you thought I meant that there are objectively good or bad music, then that wasn't what I was saying. Saying anything is objective is in art is a tough subject but it does exist. My only real example as someone who studied theory is that the resolving the tritone is objectively good, and that harsh noise is objectively bad, to humans, to the way we experience reality. A bunch of these good musical qualities, these good clever word plays(which are all just patterns our brains find appealing btw) put together can lead to the the end result of music that is, as close as possible just universally considered good. You're the one who brought up subjectivity though.
Can someone dislike my hypothetical master piece, sure, does that refute the whole? no. is more or less where I was getting at
>>66483865
if you think that then how can you say this?
>Who honestly would list grimes as one of their favorite, or even bring her up in conversation regarding the merit of musicians
how is grimes' music objectively bad?
>>66483656
>I'm not going to reply to your "not a hipster, surrealist yuppie" argument, and instead just let it marinate there.
Smart choice. To be quite honest I'm still not quite sure what to make of the whole 'surrealist yuppie' thing myself, other than to recognize that it is a very interesting thought.
>We're talking about the grimes being a commodification of counter culture.
What part of the counter cultural landscape do you think she is commodifying through her art, and why do you think that is a problem?
>>66484024
>What part of the counter cultural landscape do you think she is commodifying through her art
he literally said, she's commodifying counterculture.
it's the complete bastardization of what used to be a rejection of commercialized popular culture.
what's happening now is that counterculture, or the rejection of commercial culture, is being commercialized. it's an ironic tragedy.
>>66483971
In the line you quoted I was more or else attacking the credibility of those people who would put grimes as their favorites list. Who would compare grimes to great artists, such as listed in the OP. Tastes are subjective.... I wasn't arguing that
I know we've kind of meandered off into a tangent about subjectivity, so I don't blame you much, but that's your fault.
When speaking about music that is the crème de la crème grimes would not fit the bill. And the people who would put grimes over these artists are questionable and should be criticized.
>>66484024
>Smart choice.
Are you aware I was making fun of you, not commenting on surrealist yuppiism, and that I was saying that, what you said, refutes itself? I'm honestly unsure
>What part of the counter cultural landscape do you think she is commodifying through her art,
If you don't understand the inherent counter to contempory culture by being retro then I can't really help you. Also, tumblrites, SJW's they're under the impression they are counter culture and not establishment. This is just conjecturre, but I bet grimes believes in the patriarchy and that she is fighting the man, or whatever... that whole image has no bite, says nothing, because that is how EVERYONE IS.
>and why do you think that is a problem?
Finally a good question. I honestly had to think about this one because I have a boner for free market capitalism, but I also have a faggy rebellious side that gets perturbed when shit that was once edgy, underground on the fringe gets accepted by soccer moms.
I can't really answer it, sorry. don't want to think that deeply
>>66484458
you seem like straight out of /pol/, maybe I'm wrong
>>66484458
>when shit that was once edgy, underground on the fringe gets accepted by soccer moms.
yeah that's the problem that i have with all this bullshit. it's not just grimes, but she's certainly contributing.
>>66484216
Culture and counterculture are completely amorphous terms. Culture is in a constant state of flux - always has been, always will be, and counterculture is - by definition - whatever culture is NOT at that given time. In other words, it is also constantly in a state of flux. Why is this relevant? Because it means that any era's counterculture is destined to become another era's mainstream culture and - eventually - vice versa. It's a natural recycling/renewal mechanism for human society that has been going on since the beginning of recorded history.
So what if a lone artist toiling away in her bedroom studio seems to have a particular knack for divining where the current boundary line between culture and counterculture is? Why is that so threatening to you?
>>66476768
I've never listened to her but I can tell she's untalented and that's why I hate her.
>>66484668
I don't post on /pol/ but I am self-aware enough to know I sound like them. I guess I'm an long, long estranged /b/tard, Although I haven't been there since 2008. Honestly once music became my main obsession /mu/ is the only board that is relevant to my interest since /prod/ and /comp/ became a regular thing. When I do happen to wander out of there, and get baited into threads like these my edgy style of writing comes out. I honestly have a distaste for it, too... but when I'm not talking about music, and instead some meta political shit it just comes out that way.
>>66484811
it's cool dude, though I don't agree with many things you say you make some interesting points
good night
>>66484458
>Are you aware I was making fun of you
Yes - the best way to deal with idiocy is to ignore it.
>but I also have a faggy rebellious side that gets perturbed when shit that was once edgy, underground on the fringe gets accepted by soccer moms.
It's called Hipsterism (aka caring more about where a thing falls on the cultural/countercultural divide rather than what that thing actually is.) There's nothing wrong with admitting that you're a hipster - I have a number of good friends who are hipsters.
>>66484783
you're right. at least about that. i still can't stand her music, but i at least see where you're coming from about culture and counterculture constantly swapping places. i think the reason why it makes me mad is because it's sad to think that some assholes are profiting off of tricking normies into thinking that they're special snowflakes, when in fact they're part of the majority. but i guess some other countercultural movement will spring up in response to that soon enough.
Arguing semantic: the thread
>>66485176
>implying you're above it
>>66485307
You got me
I'm just the designated guy that points out obvious things from the sidelines.
>>66485353
being aware of it only proves malicious intent, and you've fallen for my semantics trap card arguing minutia is my specialty
>>66485154
>More or else why I, personally think it's one of the reasons that makes grimes a shit artists is because she more than likely unaware of it.
She's hyper-aware of it and has been FOR YEARS - it's a huge part of what makes her so damn interesting:
>Is your success about the right aesthetic and the right sound at the right time?
>"Everything is about doing the right thing at the right time. There is a degree to which I evaluate the world around me and try to predict what I think will work and what won’t. It’s kind of fun, how much this whole thing feels like politics. I can’t think about that stuff while I’m actually working or it ruins my process, but it’s fun to have a thing you’ve made, and think about how you can contextualize it and try to read into what you think will be cool, or how you could potentially make something cool."
http://www.spin.com/2012/12/grimes-interview-2012-big-year/
>And let's not even get into the actual musicality of her work...
Trust me - you don't even want to go down that road with me (and no - "indie" voice isn't a new or remarkable thing.) I'm the conservatory-trained professional musician/composer who's been dropping harmonic analyses of Grimes' songs in these threads of late. I can tell you exactly why her music - in terms of pure music theory and the like - is filled with strokes of genius.
