Music top
10/20/50/whatever lists are kind of silly when you think about it. Don't get me
wrong, I love making top lists of my favorite bands and records because
basically they're fun to do. In my lifetime I've done and written countless top
lists of records and bands that I like and I'm probably gonna continue to do
more in the future. So, this is definitely not anti top lists column. But, I
want to say some things about this topic, so hear me out.
If you are music fan
and you are doing music top lists for your own sake and the merit of these
lists is your own personal musical taste, there's absolutely nothing wrong with
that. I or anyone else don't have to agree with your list but it's your
personal taste and opinion, so who really gives a fuck, after all you are doing
it for fun. But, the problem I have with are those journalist quasi official
top lists in magazines, newspapers and on web portals and shit. You know those
„The most important 20 punk rock records of all time“ lists and similar crap.
These kind of lists are usually not judged by merit of quality of the band's
music/record or how influential is the band, it's mostly based on a hype around
some bands, being that some old so called legendary bands or some newest hype
bands. People who make these lists are not doing 'em because of the love and
appreciation for the music of the bands but because the editor told them to
write this kind of article, that's basically it. So, these kind of lists are
pointless, dumb and something to laugh at while eating breakfast.
There are sometimes
lists done by a music fans that are written in that similar hype-rock-me-baby
style and I find these kind of lists to be quite odd. One good example is
recent list/article called „100 Best Punk & Emo Albums of the 2010's on:
http://www.brooklynvegan.com/100-best-punk-emo-albums-of-the-2010s/ This list
is written by a dude called Andrew Sacher, I don't know who's this dude, so I
don't wanna drag his name here. I'm sure he's a fan of all these bands he
listed here, but this list is from the very beginning completely wrong. If the
title was: „Best post punk albums of 2010's“, that would be more appropriate
then saying all of these 100 albums are falling into punk genre which is kind
of ridiculous. I could go on and on about lots of bands from this list that
don't have anything to do with punk and why is that but the topic of this
column is not about that. But, I'm gonna add that bands like Paramore in no way
can be called a punk band, even their early records, they were from the beginning
just a pop band, nothing more. So, this list is pretty weird and doesn't really
have much to do with punk music even though it's presented like that. Also, to
label bands or records „emo“ as a music genre in this day of age is also kind
of silly, just saying.
Let me explain more
reasons why I think sometimes these kind of lists doesn't make sense and are
kind of pointless. I will say again, if you're doing the list for fun, more
power to you, have fun and make your own the most ridiculous music list in the
universe. But, if you are trying to make a point with your list and you are
writing more serious article about it, then maybe it's not bad to make some
rules and limits, because if it's called top 10 (or more) best records/bands,
then the list should justify that. For example, maybe not doing the best 100
records of some period, you can rather make a list of all the music you've
listened in some period because that's basically it what you are doing, you
just named it „the best 100 records of my ass“ list. Because if you are gonna
name every record you liked from some period, you don't have to make the best
50 or 100 list, that's just pointless.
What I'm trying to
say is that these top lists usually work the best if they are limited to a
certain period, town, country, label, music genre or something else for that
matter. For example if I'm gonna do top 10 of 80's hardcore punk records from
Boston USA, this is quite easy because I narrowed the list to a certain town,
music genre and a time period. And there
were lots of great Boston hardcore punk records in the 80's (especially in
1982-1985 period), so it's quite easy to make your own top 10 list of the best
Boston 80's hc/punk records. But if you are doing the best 100 hc/punk records
from some time period, that's already all over the place and the lists that are
sized to less are mostly more fun because you have to give a more thought to
choose your favorite top 10 bands/records of a certain period or whatever.
Every few years just
for fun I do for myself a list of top 20 best hc/punk records from the 80's
just to see if anything changed in my opinion. While few records are different
every few years, there are those that will never leave this list like first D.
R. I. record, first Circle Jerks 12˝, first Adolescents album, first T. S. O.
L. album, Youth Of Today and you get the picture.
So, if you wanna do
your crazy top lists for your own sake, go for it! If you are writing more
serious article and making a list, think about why you think that certain band
or record is important to you and why do you think that other people should
listen to it. And fuck the hipster hype lists, I don't wanna hear it!
I am the Snake and
I'm Deadly_138
