Topic: Do all hipsters hate Muse, or is it just Pitchfork? (Read 52840 times)

MooMan1 · « **on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:16 »

I personally enjoy them a bunch, but after reading the Pitchfork reviews, I'm wondering how representative they are of the rest of the hipster views. So, I ask the topic question.

imapiratearg · « **Reply #1 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:19 »

People on here seem to either think they're pretty okay or hate them altogether. As far as my memory serves, anyways.

Me, I don't really feel strongly either way about them. I think they had one or two really pretty songs, but other than that are pretty boring.

Thrillho · « **Reply #2 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:20 »

You read Pitchfork, and as such I am going to out-hipster your hipsterness and say I am too hip for Pitchfork.

I hate them, but for my own reasons dictated in the thread about ringing ears.

PassiveTheory · « **Reply #3 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:26 »

I like Muse.

MooMan1 · « **Reply #4 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:27 »

I don't read Pitchfork, actually. I found the specific article while on a Wikipedia binge where an excerpt from the review of Black Holes and Revelations was quoted.

De_El · « **Reply #5 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:43 »

Quote from: DynamiteKid on 23 Jun 2008, 13:20

I hate them, but for my own reasons dictated in the thread about ringing ears.

Seriously? Of all shows that had to do terrible damage to your hearing and give you tinnitus, it was a Muse show? That's fucking awful. I'm so sorry.

Scandanavian War Machine · « **Reply #6 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:44 »

i have never heard of Muse.

i guess i'm not very hip.

...or i'm ultra-hip? i don't really know how these things work.

Plasticity · « **Reply #7 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:54 »

I don't hate them, I just think their sound is a dumbed down version of other band's sounds, so why should I bother listening to them.

the Goat · « **Reply #8 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 13:56 »

What a bizarre question.

onewheelwizzard · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 14:07 »

Meh. Muse are a pretty good band. They seem to me like a great band for people to discover right around the middle of high school, kinda like Modest Mouse, QOTSA, or The Flaming Lips. You know, bands that have really cool and varied back catalogs that show change and evolution, and that are capable of instilling in someone the motivation to explore music for the sake of exploring music, but are just slightly too widely enjoyed to singlehandedly give someone the sense that they have a unique perspective on music. Bands like Muse are good for being someone's first real favorite. However, people who have had more extensive experience with trying out new genres and learning about musical history are probably not going to have any revelations when they come across Muse.

I expect that Pitchfork hates Muse because the people who write Pitchfork really want for the people who read their work to be of the latter category. Seems to me like a silly reason to denigrate perfectly competent rock musicians. Let FM radio have its rare sweet spots.

benji · « **Reply #10 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 14:19 »

Perhaps it's because I didn't discover them in high school, but I'm more in the indifferent category then anything. I like them fine, but I don't go seeking them out.

Then again, I don't think I'm a hipster and I don't read pitchfork very often, so maybe this question doesn't apply to me?

Thrillho · « **Reply #11 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 14:44 »

Quote from: De_El on 23 Jun 2008, 13:43

Quote from: DynamiteKid on 23 Jun 2008, 13:20
I hate them, but for my own reasons dictated in the thread about ringing ears.

Seriously? Of all shows that had to do terrible damage to your hearing and give you tinnitus, it was a Muse show? That's fucking awful. I'm so sorry.

Yep. It wasn't Nick Cave, which was the loudest gig I've ever been to. It wasn't blink-182 or Bloodhound Gang, which were just stupid fun. It wasn't Ryan Adams which was just out and out magnificent. It wasn't even Audiogene, where I was one of only about 100 people there, got half naked in a church and got about twelve things signed and had the time of my life. IT WAS MUSE. MY SECOND GIG EVER.

suitupletsgo · « **Reply #12 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 16:10 »

incredibly boring and overrated band is incredibly boring and overrated.

it's not a hipster thing. in fact, the majority of hipsters I've seen love this band.

PassiveTheory · « **Reply #13 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 16:17 »

Quote from: onewheelwizzard on 23 Jun 2008, 14:07

Meh. Muse are a pretty good band. They seem to me like a great band for people to discover right around the middle of high school, kinda like Modest Mouse, QOTSA, or The Flaming Lips. You know, bands that have really cool and varied back catalogs that show change and evolution, and that are capable of instilling in someone the motivation to explore music for the sake of exploring music, but are just slightly too widely enjoyed to singlehandedly give someone the sense that they have a unique perspective on music. Bands like Muse are good for being someone's first real favorite. However, people who have had more extensive experience with trying out new genres and learning about musical history are probably not going to have any revelations when they come across Muse.

I expect that Pitchfork hates Muse because the people who write Pitchfork really want for the people who read their work to be of the latter category. Seems to me like a silly reason to denigrate perfectly competent rock musicians. Let FM radio have its rare sweet spots.

QFT.

IronOxide · « **Reply #14 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 16:55 »

I sort of like muse.

They have that one song that makes me think of Philip Glass, and I guess that's alright.

suitupletsgo · « **Reply #15 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 17:54 »

Quote from: Anyways on 23 Jun 2008, 17:23

Quote from: suitupletsgo on 23 Jun 2008, 16:10
it's not a hipster thing. in fact, the majority of hipsters I've seen love this band.

Man you've seen pretty fucking backwards hipsters.

definitely not disputing this. hahaha.

Nuance · « **Reply #16 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 18:01 »

I typically enjoy their songs the first few times I hear them, but for some reason I get sick of them incredibly quickly. They're like those Popcorn Chicken things at KFC. The first few bites are incredible, but by the time you get to the bottom of the box I'm ready to swear them off for a year.

Noct · « **Reply #17 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 20:10 »

I was under the impression that the Pitchfork et. al. was fairly meh on Muse, with the opinion that they have a great live presence. I don't have any personal experience with them live, but that was the vibe I got from the couple of Pitchfork pieces I've read about them.

sean · « **Reply #18 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 20:19 »

Quote from: Anyways on 23 Jun 2008, 14:03

I don't mind them, but I have never found them particularily interesting either. They are placed firmly in the "I've got better things to do"-category of bands in my head.

jeph · « **Reply #19 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 20:22 »

Their music irks me, but it's nothing I would go into a fit of nerd-rage over.

Pretty fun to play in Rock Band, I'll give them that.

Jackie Blue · « **Reply #20 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 23:32 »

I find them okay, but wouldn't go out of my way to buy their albums or anything.

I do think they've gotten better with that last record than they used to be. It wouldn't be terribly odd if their next one is really good. Stranger things have happened, like Death Cab For Cutie making my favourite song of '08 so far ("I Will Possess Your Heart", the 8-minute album version).

Tom · « **Reply #21 on:** 23 Jun 2008, 23:35 »

what jeph said

parm · « **Reply #22 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 04:53 »

I really like Muse. I don't know if I count as a hipster or not. I'm not even sure what one is any more, to be totally honest.

öde · « **Reply #23 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 05:52 »

No hipsters 'round here, man. Honest.

dalconnsuch · « **Reply #24 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 07:25 »

i say screw the overhyped nazi-like hipsters that jerk off to their elitist pissant excuse of music taste

i don't like muse per se but not for any elitist hipster crap, i just don't like em, i don't have to have a giant technical list as to why like pitchfork does "like omg they didn't follow the key pattern for the minor like omg they are SO completely off of my itunes forever and EVER!" (only minorly exaggorated by a guy whos at everyshow i'm at, i have call him stereotypical-over-elitist-hypster guy for long, prick for short) i think people can like whatever the hell they like even if i despise it becuase we're all iono, snowflakes or some shit

GenericName · « **Reply #25 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 08:28 »

Wait.
Waaaaaaait.

How is Pitchfork a hipster?

ampersandwitch · « **Reply #26 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 08:37 »

Quote from: dalconnsuch on 24 Jun 2008, 07:25

"like omg they didn't follow the key pattern for the minor like omg they are SO completely off of my itunes forever and EVER!"

You're trying to say that hipsters care about adherence to music theory/technicality? What?

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #27 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 08:47 »

I have to say I don't hate Muse.
But, aren't I a hipster? If you really want to call me that.
Hey guys, don't you feel like QC is a breeding ground for hipsters?
It must be Jeph's fault that we always get all of these hipster bashings around here.
His comic is too pretentious. Jeeze Jeph. Way to go. (Don't hurt me.)

Funk Thompson · « **Reply #28 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 08:50 »

@#$% what the hipster rags say.

In St. Louis, we have Playback:STL as our local indie rag. They put on a show every week showcasing new "talent." The bands invariably suck, can't play their instruments at all, can't sign, have no synergy amongst themselves - and end up on the cover of the mag while the real indie stars (read: the bands who actually have talent and skill) of St. Louis don't even get their shows listed.

St. Louis Sound is looking to have gone the same path.

It is a @#$%ing joke.

As for Muse, I have only so far heard Knights thanks to the fantastic video. I really like Knights of Cydonia and was even debating on catching them when they came through town, but have not yet had time to check out any of their other material.

Thrillho · « **Reply #29 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 09:57 »

Quote from: Funk Thompson on 24 Jun 2008, 08:50

It is a @#$%ing joke.

So is fucking censoring yourself, suckjob asshole cocksucker cuntface.

imapiratearg · « **Reply #30 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 10:33 »

Now was that necessary?

Kai · « **Reply #31 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 10:53 »

Hipsters may not exist. but what about them FATSTERS? we can't deny the threat of the fatsters.

Johnny C · « **Reply #32 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 11:46 »

Quote from: tommydski on 24 Jun 2008, 10:35

To group them into an easily digested category for the sake of convenient prejudice is narrow minded to say the least.

What about "members of Muse"?

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #33 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 11:47 »

Out of context jokes are funny!
HIPSTERNATION HERBLUGH

Misereatur · « **Reply #34 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 12:01 »

Quote from: tommydski on 24 Jun 2008, 10:35

I don't think there is such a thing as 'Hipsters'. I think it's a joke.

There is an archetypal caricature based on massive exaggeration of the trends of a particular cross section of youths. I suppose it could be described as a meme of sorts. The comic QC is somewhere between a parody and an homage to this concept. It's amusing to think that these characters exist and there are thousands of them around the world. This is also a useful theory to market towards, as we have seen from American Apparel et al.

In general, such labels are used as an amalgamation of anything you don't like so you can project your own insecurities onto a group of people. Sometimes it's because of their skin colour, sometimes it's because of their sexuality or gender. It can be anything you don't like. People that wear Converse. People that listen to Jazz. People who don't eat meat. Anything that irks your world view can be thrown into a loose umbrella term for absolutely anything you want to hate. Your individual pet peeves personified on a hive of imaginary cookie-cutter people.

The truth is that there aren't really easily manageable factions of people. Humans are individuals. They have individual likes and dislikes which are determined by everything that has ever happened to them in their life. To group them into an easily digested category for the sake of convenient prejudice is narrow minded to say the least.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #35 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 12:36 »

That is excellent. Thanks Mise.

Betagold · « **Reply #36 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 13:10 »

Tried them. Didn't like them. Won't be listening to them anytime in the near future.

benji · « **Reply #37 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 14:17 »

I think most people that refer to themselves as hipsters do so with at least a little irony, but I've met one or two who will tell me that they're hipsters with entirely straight faces. I agree with Anyways that, while it's certainly a caricature, it's a caricature that at least some people take on as an identity. Its an easy cop out to view people as categories instead of individuals, and we all do it, but many of us do it to ourselves as well as others. People assume identities because they're safe. It takes a lot of thought to decide who you are, and its scary for many people to think "I am the only one." Identifying with a group, any group, allows you to have a sense of self without as much work, and also gains you a sense of community. Whether we're talking about fashion, music, religion, politics, or what have you, taking on an identity answers a lot of questions for you. So we can say "I don't believe in labels" all we want, but it probably isn't true, and in the end, when people are applying the labels themselves, they can hard to avoid.

Funk Thompson · « **Reply #38 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 14:26 »

Quote from: imapiratearg on 24 Jun 2008, 10:33

Now was that necessary?

I had it coming. I keep forgetting which forum I'm on, and self-censoring out of habit.

Please don't lock me under the stairs again!

Jackie Blue · « **Reply #39 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 14:37 »

Hipsters may not be as well-defined as other subcultures have been (goth, metal, grunge, punk) but I do think they exist.

They're those douchebags who wear dress shirts and ties to Interpol concerts.

MusicScribbles · « **Reply #40 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 14:45 »

I thought that was part of the old mod-punk scene?

Jackie Blue · « **Reply #41 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 15:01 »

Addendum: They're those douchebags who have emo hair and wear dress shirts and ties to Interpol concerts.

The old mod-ska-punk shirt-and-tie look is a different animal altogether.

Scandanavian War Machine · « **Reply #42 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 15:15 »

i don't know about that, i think those are just called "teenagers" now.

when i think of hipsters (which thankfully, isn't very often), i think of this.

Jackie Blue · « **Reply #43 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 15:18 »

Actually that guy on the right is pretty much what I was talking about.

That girl in the middle is pretty cute.

Scandanavian War Machine · « **Reply #44 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 16:02 »

i'd like to point out that i never said any of that and, in fact, would rather not take place in this discussion.

but i will say this and only this:
i try not to judge people on looks alone, so when i see people dressed like that around town i usually think "hey, they're dressed like hipsters but they could be totally good people." it's after hearing them talk or talking with them myself that i deem someone a "hipster"

Johnny C · « **Reply #45 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 16:57 »

Jesus Christ if you're going to identify hipsters by looks at least read Vice.

Jackie Blue · « **Reply #46 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 17:15 »

Quote from: tommydski on 24 Jun 2008, 15:47

Why do we assume that because they dress sorta funny that they are elitists or that their reasons for disliking particular music is less valid than anyone else's?

When did "we" say that we do? I don't. I was just saying it's an identifiable subculture just like any other.

KickThatBathProf · « **Reply #47 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 17:32 »

Oh, semantics!

Jackie Blue · « **Reply #48 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 17:56 »

Quote from: tommydski on 24 Jun 2008, 17:19

A better way to put that would have been "Why would one assume".

Perhaps you should ask one who does assume. I don't see anyone saying that hipsters automatically have bad taste in music. That would just be silly.

In my experience hipsters like a few great bands, a bunch of good ones, and a few terrible ones.

That's more than I can say for most people in the rap, hard rock, or country subcultures.

medicatesleep · « **Reply #49 on:** 24 Jun 2008, 20:03 »

Personally, I like Muse the first time I hear 'em...

WHEN THEY WERE CALLED RADIOHEAD.

waka waka waka

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Do all hipsters hate Muse, or is it just Pitchfork? (Read 52840 times)

MooMan1

PassiveTheory

MooMan1

Plasticity

PassiveTheory

dalconnsuch