December 29, 2012
katherine st asaph: deadgirlfriends: “Even though pop music is great, some people are...



who cares what the means of production are at this point? If mixing into the corporate industry machine taints anyone, it taints everyone equally, so let’s all stop worrying about divisions between highly visible industry-promoted artists and accept everyone’s art as valid, regardless of whether they’re produced by someone who has worked with Justin Bieber or not.

Make sense?

no, i make music, i care deeply about the means of production, it is an entirely sensible and reasonable thing for me to care about. i stop short of saying that your listening experience should be defined by extramusical trivia about the means of production, but if we’re having a conversation about music i think the means of production is a relevant, legitimate thing to bring up and i’m going to do it at every given opportunity

OK, that’s fair. So then, does this disagreement come down to you feeling like the Charli XCX record was put together by people who were more interested in figuring out what would sell than making music to express deeper feelings? And is that why Sky Ferreira as a comparison to Grimes is cool with you, but Charli XCX isn’t? I’m not being sarcastic by asking this, I’m really trying to understand where you’re coming from. 

(Source: thetruthaboutcatsanddogs, via thetruthaboutcatsanddogs)

  1. attackondemand reblogged this from gaysagainstgaga and added:
  2. ohmomoko reblogged this from thetruthaboutcatsanddogs
  3. sofiacoppola-mermaidporn reblogged this from thetruthaboutcatsanddogs
  4. p3anutbuttervibes reblogged this from thetruthaboutcatsanddogs and added:
    UMMMM fuck offf, you have no right to classify ANY act as manufactured or not. Your approach is tactless and hurtful.
  5. badhotelart reblogged this from thetruthaboutcatsanddogs
  6. softcough reblogged this from thetruthaboutcatsanddogs