“Important” records vs. “good” ones

There seems to be some confusion about this A.V. Club piece. Here’s how I see it: certain records are able to make a broad splash on mass culture in terms of sonic influence, politics, style, etc., albums like Sgt. Pepper’s or Nevermind or OK Computer. Albums that try to push things forward. Pretty self-evident, right? Other records — the merely “good” — are the ones we connect with on a personal level, records that feel smaller and humbler, like Real Estate’s Days. Records that become cult favorites. You see more of the former on magazine lists and more of the latter on blogs, hopefully.

What’s changed since the landmark-album days of the past is culture itself, which has split itself into semi-overlapping niches in which no single album can be as Important as the Beatles or Radiohead once were. So yes, the measure of “importance” has changed, but its use as a euphemism for ambition/exposure/impact remains relevant — and has less to do with white men on Pitchfork attempting to establish hierarchies than it does Albums A Lot Of People Might Actually Talk About In 10 Years.

I agree that 2011 was basically an ambition-free twelve months. Frankly, the Skrillex album is the most important record of the year—or would be, if anyone over the age of 20 liked it.

1. hndrk liked this
2. themarq liked this
3. beattheindiedrum reblogged this from rawkblog
4. beatsrhimesandlife liked this
5. bmichael liked this
6. thirdculturekid liked this
7. grouppttherapy liked this
8. rawkblog reblogged this from airgordon and added:

   by citing this kind of thing...Internet, you’re not giving enough credit

9. hi54lofi liked this
10. tankboy liked this
11. imathers liked this
12. airgordon liked this
13. airgordon reblogged this from rawkblog and added:

    am really not trying...long Tumblr post, but a few things: I didn’t call

14. postmodernblues liked this
15. rawkblog posted this