Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
'okay' is the same as shit.
^I just said this in a thread on the music forum.
Is it true?
Something like things should be separated into only yes, or no. Pretty much.
I kind of agree. If it's OK, then...are you going to listen to it out of choice? Or re-read an 'ok' book?
meets expectations, but then again thinking through that again if you would expect something to be brilliant then it wouldn't be okay...so that voids that one out...
yeah i'm just thinking aloud here.
but a depressing thought when you know you're not capable of "brilliance".
when you could listen to something brilliant instead?
Why bother listening to "okay" music?
yet not as good as perhaps something else....it may seem good to some to look back at the roots of things and demeen themselves to better understand its origin.
Wasn't it bascially "if it's possible to listen/watch something brilliant then is it any better for somethng to be "okay" than to be "shit"?"
I get what restlessboy means (I think)
"all things are either good or ungood"
I see a lot of live bands, the vast majority of which are unsigned and not very well known.
Pretty soon you realise that there aren't that many genuinely shit bands out there. Most bands are reasonably competent at everything they do but, at the same time, no more than competent and generally more than a little derivative.
Pretty soon you get bored with that to an extent where you're grateful to anyone trying anything different, even if it doesn't come off and they do sound a little shit.
And to be honest, where there are things I think are really shit generally I know someone else who loves it (the opposite is true too - of all the music I love I know of people who hate it and I know of people who hate my music too) but all the bands that are okay, everyone seems to be equally indifferent too.
So in actual fact you could make the case that being "okay" is worse than being "shit" in that being "okay" implies you're not taking any risks or doing anything that makes people have an opinion on you and operating entirely within a comfort zone.
is that theyre derivative, unimaginative, play it safe, say nothing bands.
not that theyre ok.
being a waste of everyone's time is not ok. its shit.
being technically shit is ok though.
which doenst make them redundant for being ok.
take, say, maximo park.
i enjoy their music. listening to it, in moderation, at the right time, stirs something inside of me.
theyre not the best band in the world, but i like them.
objectively, theyre good.
if you were to ask me what i thought of them, i'd say that theyre ok, pretty good, as lots of the time i dont feel like listening to them, and they dont do anything particularly unique.
but this "ok" that i've labelled them with is one fully aware of the uselessness of mediocrity. ive labelled them ok in my spectrum of stuff which has its place.
the fact that they dont excite me as much as at the drive-in or million dead in no way makes them shit.
basically, if you keep calling stuff that youve reasoned to be ok and to have its place "shit" then slowly youre cutting off all music until you just listen to your favourite artist, at the risk of them becoming very boring to you.
but wouldn't use the word "okay" to describe them so much as "good" or "I quite like them".
Which I'd argue is stronger than okay which implies "I can tolerate it"
something like MP gets shifted to the middle of teh stuff i like
does what it does
and thus its suddenly shit. when it clearly isnt.
Pass the doobie?
Where would you be now - now, now, now
There's often beauty to be found in the mundane, the everyday, the "okay". Not always, but sometimes.
It just depends if you have the imagination or perception to be able to recognise it before your prejudice kicks in.
If something is 'ok' then it might still have potential or a role of some description. Surely the formative work of people striving for brilliance should not be automatically considered 'shit'.
'Shit' is rather more final than 'ok'. Personally, I think there's a sinister air of arrogance and destructive superiority in the assertion that ''okay' is the same as shit".