Speaking of filler...

[Chris Allen]

On 9/16/05, David Kuznick <dkuznick at alumni.brandeis.edu> wrote:
> 
> Quoting Chris Allen <mysterioso at gmail.com>:
> 
> > If you're gonna assess the word "dated" out of context, yes you're 
> right,
> > but in context, is it not a perjorative term denoting the fact that the
> > period style of the art is overwhelming the content?
> 
> I don't know, since there are a lot of interpretations of what "dated" 
> means.
> And to me, the "80's" vibe doesn't "overwhelm" the content. It's totally
> subjective anyway, and you are also assuming that that's "bad".


I've only ever heard the term "dated" used in a negative sense, so yes, I am 
assuming that.

> Surely BOC's early albums sound like they were recorded in the '70s, but 
> is
> > that the first thing you hear when you listen to them, the songs or the
> > release dates?
> 
> That's a strawman argument, because you assume that's how I experience 
> Club
> Ninja ("It's the 80's!" first, music second).
> 

I don't think so. I realised after posting the above that my grammar was 
very poor, so what I meant may have been obscured.
I'm not making any assumptions about Club Ninja, your listening experiences 
or anything, apart from the assumption that "dated" is always used in a 
negative sense.

Some people will listen to Record A and enjoy it for what it is, others will 
listen to it and not be able to get past it sounding like a record from a 
certain time period, and everything associated with that.
It is, as you say, subjective. My only point was about the negativity & 
meaning of the word "dated".

Is it overly revisionist to review a piece of art from the past in the 
context of today, thus opening the door for a reviewer to 
examine the cultural aspects within the piece, e.g. "I hate that synth 
sound, it's so dated, I'm glad people stopped using that around 1985"?