I understand that ultimately, you felt your intentions were good. The piece was, I will say, grammatically sound. That's about the extent of it.
In saying the piece is patronizing, I don't feel that necessarily everyone on here is ganging up on you - because, well, you've made valuable contributions elsewhere on the forum. I do think, however, that your piece is a tad condescending - and that's an understatement.
First of all, you're writing this rant as though you're a jaded vet about "today's youth" when you're attempting to appeal to your peer group. Just using the distinction of saying that they're "today's youth" definitely sounds as though you're talking down to them, and as though you feel yourself to be separate from that group somehow. No one likes being talked down to.
Perhaps if you'd phrased it something like, "I've noticed that many of my peers..."
Just a thought.
Otherwise, tone down on just listing bands you dig and bands that you consider filth, because not everyone is going to be as deeply involved in music - and music is a very personal thing.
Believe it or not, I've met many people who are very talented musicians, very knowledgeable about music, and who are adults who aren't fans of the purported "best band ever" Radiohead. Musical taste is subjective.
If you'd gone more into the technicalities instead of citing examples mocking your idea of "mainstream" music, the piece itself would have had a greater impact. I'm not talking completely nerding out and saying, "Such and such has NO real grasp of tonality," but stick to the chord progressions bit - that was nice and actually not subjective...
Although even with that, how many of your favorite bands have used very simple progressions in their songwriting? I mean, Hell, NMH's most popular song is a simple 3 chord song.
And for the record, in op/ed writing, you CAN have a solid opinion without coming off as a total prick. Food for thought.
__________________
It's a hand-me-down, the thoughts are broken
Perhaps they're better left unsung
|