Well, I think any big hit by virtue of its being so popular has its own merit and deserves respect, even if by most evaluations of it, it's, well, uh, crap.
This is always a question with all kinds of art--why is the "bad" art always the most popular? Why are the blockbuster movies so stupid when great foreign films/art films never get shown? There is some really cool, cheap, artsy and unique clothing out there--why don't people wear that sort of thing instead of just pulling on a hoodie from Old Navy? Why do people just put up pictures of paintings by Monet and Van Gogh that they probably don't even know the names of instead of delving deeper into the art world? Why does everyone insist on reading Dean Koontz novel after Dean Koontz novel when there's so much more worthwhile reading out there?
There are, of course, tons of answers, and no definitive ones. A lot of it strikes me as general laziness, or at least putting art at a low priority in our world. Finding good, obscure artists of any kind takes LOTS of TIME, and it's SO MUCH easier to just put on the radio and pick up the latest Grammy album of the year winner. Instead of shopping for interesting clothing, it's SO MUCH easier to just go to Old Navy and get everything you need there. (Though as a side note, H&M is nicely bringing the more interesting stuff into the mainstream. I think it's done for clothes what the internet did for music, kind of...)
The more controversial argument is about the art/entertainment dichotomy--does it actually EXIST? Are they that distinct? Is great entertainment (like, say, The Mummy, or Futurama) art? Is great art (like, say, 8 1/2) entertainment? Can all of the media in our world be put into one of these two categories, and is it something very special indeed when they intersect? (E.g. Spirited Away, Shiina Ringo, Radiohead, Beatles, Pan's Labyrinth, etc. etc. etc.)
Do we need to lower our expectations when indulging in "entertainment," like when Roger Ebert decided to take blockbuster movies on their own terms? If the only cause and reason of a piece is to entertain, is it not art? Must art challenge? If we're expecting something to be art, do we heighten our expectations?
...is the cause of the disgruntlement of many fans towards musicians they like because one expects art and receives entertainment, or expects entertainment and receives art?
Hm. I'm going to have to think more. But I have to go to my Biology Lecture. That is all for now.
(Hedo—some bands with a permanent piano in the mainstream right now are Coldplay and Keane. I hate them, but there you go.)
|