Does listening to Muse or Interpol really qualify as "challenging oneself"?
A friend of mine (who is a big Bigger than Ezra fan) worked in post-war Iraq for 9 months. That's challenging yourself.
Challenge yourself by listening to some bluegrass. I don't hear that played much on corporate radio. Or is bluegrass "safe"?
Or are you, or more like the online 'zines you read, the only person allowed to be the arbiter of what is deemed "safe"?
Seems that a person living in a major metropolitan area who listens to bluegrass would be more "edgy" than one who listens to Interpol. Just as an Interpol listener in Demopolis, Alabama would probably be more "edgy" than a Kenny Chesney listener from same location.
Originally posted by redsock:
Originally posted by nkotbie:
Well, my mom has placed both Interpol and Muse on recent mix CD's she's made, and she's by no means hip or with it. She hears a song, likes it, and downloads it, and that's across the board and across radio stations.
It just seems odd to me to criticize one band for having a hit on modern rock radio and not criticize another. If that's the criteria, then there is absolutely no difference between Interpol and Better Than Ezra. And to think different is completely elitist.
Originally posted by redsock:
You don't think the average 35 year old woman from Connecticut would find Interpol or Muse a bit too edgy?
[/b]
Well, for one, your mom is not the average mom. My mom couldn't operate a computer much less download music. And lord knows she would not be listening to Muse or Interpol.
I am not being critical towards Better than Ezra, I have two of their CDs. I'm just saying that they are an example of this corporate "safe" music, which is what people seem to want to listen to. As opposed to more interesting stuff. None of this is terribly surprising, since so few folks actually want to challenge themselves, why would they want to listen to different types of music? [/b]
