"Overrated" largely a generational concept?

I don't think "overrated" is gerenational-related...if pure EGO-related... let me explain:

Peter Rideout wrote:  Hmmmm... I wonder if the whole "overrated" thing (at least in regard to older albums) often breaks down along generational lines.   For those of us "of a certain age," we "were there" to experience the impact some of these ground-breaking, "important" albums and artists (ITCOTCK, SEBTP, Foxtrot, Brain Salad Surgery, TAAB, CTTE, Sgt. Pepper's, etc.) made at the time, and we may thus often treat the albums with a certain nostalgic reverence. (We rate with a view to the album's place in rock/prog history, and our own lengthy, happy, youthful history with it.)   With NO disrespect intended, I often find myself assuming, when I read some post saying how this or that widely-loved classic is "overrated"  (I still hate that word because of what it implies about the album's fans and fond reviewers), that the writer must be much younger than I, and just wasn't there to feel what we did when the music was fresh and new, and really stood out from the prevailing norm. (Thus, I tend to take such disparaging, glaringly counter-to-the-majority statements with a HUGE "grain of salt.")   I also think,  when classic albums inevitably garner a lot of gushing praise, that new listeners may approach them with the unrealistic expectation of being "blown away" (you'll see that a lot in their subsequent reviews: "from all of the previous reviews, I was expecting to be blown away, but I wasn't), or of having some sort of revalatory, life-altering, quasi-religious experience.   What do others think? Is there a generational, "you had to be there" kind of phenomenon at work in these cases? We see it time and again: 40-something reviewer gives top rating, teen/twenty-something reviewer knocks it down because "it didn't blow me away."   Or is it just the innate cynicism of youth? Yes, I was a teen, and I have a teenage daughter, so I have some experience with this "everything sucks, especially what you like, Pops) mindset.   Waddaya think? Would big band or swing music, say, likely hit me anywhere near as hard, at this point, and so long after the form's initial societal impact, as it would have someone for whom this was the "rebellious" parent-offending music of his youth?

Jim Garten wrote: Time is irrelevant - lunchtime, doubly so...

peter_gabriel wrote: why are so mad at us (teenagers) for having an opinion of something? i dont found a classical to be bad, but if I think an album is bad I will say it, dont care if its old or young now you are acting like a children.. why is it so important for you, the way we talk about classical albums... just hear the music with your mates..

Again, I am not angry at anyone.

I am just trying to have a sensible, grownup conversation with different people about a concept we should all have an opinion on, as this site has such a diversity of age groups:

How does experiencing music at the time it is evolving differ from coming to it years later?

To what extent is art "of it's time," and best (or as Mike suggests, differently) experienced by an audience from (and during) that time? Wouldn't a "revolutionary," even "dangerous" band (as the Doors were said to be by the American establishment at the time) be only fully "experienced' by their contemporary audience, with the Vietnam War and the draft still going on, as Jim crooned 'The End" or "The Unknown Soldier"?
(Lyrics, particularly political ones like those, can be especially topical, and "to the moment," speaking directly to the audience's concerns and world view.)

On a related note, how does aging effect how the long-term music listener reacts to music? Do we view the music we get into while younger (and first starting to really explore music, likely in the company of like-minded friends) differently than that which we come to when older, "seasoned" music listeners, with less, perhaps, of a sense of wonder?

Is popular (rock) music (prog too) not "to the moment?" Is its immediacy not part of it's appeal?

I know we can still thoroughly enjoy good music from before our time (I like lots from before mine), as most of our younger prog fans do. I know we older listeners can also gratefully "discover" albums from the era of our youth, that we had not heard then, and, of course, we can get into new music made by bands much younger than us. (I do all of that.)

I know all of those things -- I am just wondering about the roles of age and "timing" in the reaction to art (music). I know myself, and I have my thoughts on the matter -- what do others think?


BTW, thanks to all for the responses thus far -- some really good ones, from all angles and points of view! I'll respond to my esteemed colleague Mike next.





Edited by Peter Rideout - March 22 2007 at 02:43

stonebeard wrote: Peter Rideout wrote: I also think,  when classic albums inevitably garner a lot of gushing praise, that new listeners may approach them with the unrealistic expectation of being "blown away" (you'll see that a lot in their subsequent reviews: "from all of the previous reviews, I was expecting to be blown away, but I wasn't), or of having some sort of revalatory, life-altering, quasi-religious experience.   What do others think? Is there a generational, "you had to be there" kind of phenomenon at work in these cases? We see it time and again: 40-something reviewer gives top rating, teen/twenty-something reviewer knocks it down because "it didn't blow me away." At this time in my prog journey, I am definitely looking for that new thing to blow me away. I can name a few albums that, though I can give a 5-star review to many albums I own, will always be untouchable. Close to the Edge, Selling England By the Pound, and Images and Word will be associated forevermore with feelings I hope to recapture with new music. What's that you say, Pete? Images and Words with those classics? I gues there's that idea of having to grow up with it, eh?   Peter Rideout wrote: Or is it just the innate cynicism of youth? Yes, I was a teen, and I have a teenage daughter, so I have some experience with this "everything sucks, especially what you like, Pops) mindset. Not everyone is like that.

I know, Andrew -- I couldn't teach if I believed otherwise, and thanks for your excellent response!



Edited by Peter Rideout - March 22 2007 at 02:49

Wow, this has been really interesting.......
I must say I totally agree with The T, I find the "X is rubbish" argument the thing that drives me most insane, and the thing that really makes me blow a fuse,... either excuse your self from the table (ie keep schtum) or be realistic (I don't like that, it's not to my taste). Having said that, those types of discussion lack passion, and passion is required with music (I believe) I don't care if your opinion is different to mine as long as it has passion and conviction...... saying something merely for the impact of the words will make me angry.

I also have to agree with some of what Peter's initial points were..... although I am not sure if it is generational, maybe more "sibing rivalry"??? I don't know, but I do sometimes see it more as that "stick poking in the weak spot" that siblings find so entertaining.

However, the generational thing does come into play a lot, and I don't want to come over as disrespectful, [because I am in awe of the many kids here who have found prog in such a difficult musical landscape] but I think there are some things that you can't "get" at a young age.
I also remember the anticipation of waiting for some albums, the 'listening parties' at friends houses, the sheer JOY of some stuff....... and I regularly see this stuff labeled "overrated" by someone who was in nappies (or not even born) at the time. That is infuriating, because it feels like you are negating my youth. Of course you are not, and of course we are basing this on feelings...... there is no way we can predict the feelings of others, but as long as we remain POLITE and as long as we LISTEN as well as TALK then I think that everyone here can have equally valid and interesting points of view.

I might think more when I am more awake............ ........but I might not!!!

prog-chick wrote: I also remember the anticipation of waiting for some albums, the 'listening parties' at friends houses, the sheer JOY of some stuff....... and I regularly see this stuff labeled "overrated" by someone who was in nappies (or not even born) at the time. That is infuriating, because it feels like you are negating my youth. Of course you are not, and of course we are basing this on feelings...... there is no way we can predict the feelings of others, but as long as we remain POLITE and as long as we LISTEN as well as TALK then I think that everyone here can have equally valid and interesting points of view.

Well said, P-C...

I, too, remember the 'listening parties' at friends' houses, the long and intense discussions afterward, the replaying of certain tracks to make sure we "get" exactly what the musicians wanted us to... or sitting in dumbfounded silence the first time we heard 'Misunderstanding'

I think there's also an inherent laziness in the word 'over-rated'; instead of saying "I don't like this [classic] album, it's not to my taste, because...", it's a lot easier to say "nah - that's over-rated"

How about underrated?

Although the late '60s and '70s albums don't have the same impact as they did on many of you guys and girls, I still love a lot of the releases just as much.  I'd love to have been around when the Softs were in full flight and touring, I'd love to have seen VdGG in their heyday, but alas, I cannot, but I do have their records (both studio and live) to fall back on.  Nothing really beats a live concert by a favourite band (unless it's a stinker - Jim, was that you?) of course.  The music would have been fresh back then, as nothing like it had gone before.

There's an inherent problem with many modern bands and that's a lack of creativity in many respects.  They have the musical ability, but they try too hard to sound good and often end up sounding mediocre.  Bands from the '70s not only tended to be more original compositionally, but they were also treading new ground and people were more difficult to please.

Music has been saturated now.  You get a lot of progressive moments in a lot bands' music now and so to those brought up in the '70s, the music sounds less original in many respects.

My parents have often commented on my music saying "oh, they were doing stuff like that back in the day".  Of course, they are correct.

What does annoy me quite a bit though, is youngsters nowadays who basically hate regressive music.  I have a friend who dislikes anything that whiffs of old music.  He likes fresh sounding music and dislikes minor notes.

Anyhow, this has turned into more than I planned, so do continue on and get back on topic.

I don't really need to be up yet -- in view of last night's sleep-depriving posting frenzy, perhaps another hour of sleep is in order....


Later, progholes!

Ignore me then, Peteykins! 

Have a good sleep.  That sounds like a good idea.