Quote:
Right. If I don't like his music, I'm a hater. It couldn't be that I objectively just don't think he's that great. Well why don't I hate Marilyn Manson and in fact bought his albums? I mean he's also very rich, why is it that I chose Bieber? It couldn't be that Bieber simply sucks. So if we take a famous metal band, like Dimmu Borgir, and show it to you, I assume you won't like it. So is it ok for us to say you're just hating and you're incredibly jealous?This is getting common: when someone says "I don't really like X" immediately someone yells out "WHY U HATIN? Ur just jeluz lol"
If you ask me if I'd like to have his money? Well of course, I can think of lots of interesting things I'd do with it. I'm happy with my life anyway, but why not? Does that make me jealous? Well just as much as I am of every single other person with more money than me. And for those accusing me of disliking him because of something else, I'd like to be clear that from a musical objective perspective I think he sucks. It's not that I'm taking it out of context or that I'm anti-Pop, it's simply that I think there's nothing to captivate my attention there, nothing that makes me feel anything like good music usually does. I think the lifeless trolls that spam the internet with constant posts of Bieber hating are indeed jealous, if I don't like something I simply don't listen to it. But I don't think anyone here is like that.
I am almost certain that you are very much confusing personal taste with objectivity.
Though I'm not sure how much insight or interest you take to pop music, it's very clear that you're not all that into it, and as a result, lack certain understanding of the entire concept or context of the genre'. Even though you say you do, your posts read otherwise. You could be a hater of pop for all I care, there's nothing wrong with that (as long as you're not actively hating on it). Much like myself, I don't like the whole Rap/Hip-Hop/R&B, Classical, Country, Heavy Metal or Opera. But, if I come across a piece that is obviously well made, regardless of my taste, I would give it props if asked about it.
You can objectively dislike certain artists and genres, but when you use the term objectively with like and dislike, it almost becomes oxymoronic (no offense). Unless you have a very well founded and an informed opinion of the subject and context. If Justin Bieber factually has proven himself as a competent artist (may this be of rapping skills, singing, performing and showmanship), then that makes his a good artist. I agree, sales and grossing don't always reflect talent, but, those two factors are strongly correlated to each other (and that's reality). Whether you like him or not, dislike his music or not, it appeals to you or not; well in your case obviously it does not on all counts here. Then the matter is simple, your opinion of him and his music is extremely subjective. If you can't see someone's talent, then it means that your bias is blinding you from being objective. And please don't take this the wrong way, this is a common factor and perspective among many many people. In fact, it's a lot easier to be subjective than objective, and many... and I MEAN many (and I'm talking about intellectual individuals here) actually get confused.
With your Manson example, I'll take myself here for example. I've heard some of his stuff, maybe 2-3 songs. Didn't like it and couldn't stand it. Clearly on first reaction I would utter something like, "MAN, THIS SUCKS big time"... but that of course is bias and taste. If someone is to ask me genuinely what I think of his music, would I be justified to say that it sucks? Objectively, no I won't be. But, I would be justified to say that I hate his music and it simply does not appeal to me and I don't get or understand it.
Obviously you're not jealous here of anything (well, maybe you want all of his money, and me too), but you're definitely mixing terminologies and jargon usage of subjective vs. objective.
Here are some examples I heard: Maroon 5 sucks because he doesn't have a strong voice. But realistically, Maroon 5 is an accomplished artist that produces very nice songs with catchy melodies that are easy to listen to; hence, good pop.
Miley Cyrus has been criticized as a bad singer and artist with sucky music..
Is this really true, objectively? What's her target demographic (well, when she did sing.. not sure what she does now). And how her vocal abilities and range? Can anyone objectively claim that she sucks or not that good? Fact is, she very much is that talented.