god this might be one of the most out of touch celebrity takes ive heard in a while. for starters, a celeb doing a meal collab with mcdonalds has never made someone uncool. but the stupid art kid "no one understands my art but im also going to judge when i don't understand theirs" thing isn't what's bothering me the most...
it's the "rejection of commerciality ‘just because’ is such a boring and immature argument that is perhaps more suited to some mediums than others but in general I find to be elitist in a way that does not thrill me whatsoever" bit.
no one rejects commerciality "just because". they do it because the over capitalization of every little aspect of our lives and world is a disgusting sign of the road we are heading down as a society. they do it because the 'brat-ification' of kamala harris' politcal compaign is soulless and takes away from the fact that our government is actively trying to harm us. they do it because almost half of the world's population (44% i believe) is living in extreme poverty, because 10% of the world's population possess 76% of the wealth, and that number keeps rising. they reject major corporations because those corps are lobbying in support of israel, or donating meals to the idf. calling people boring for not wanting to participate in a system that blatantly steals from small communities, supports mass genocide all the world, and destroys the beauty of world we live in is such a cruel, out of touch thought that only a rich white women who hasn't had a real job in a very long time could have.
sorry that people wanting to reject capitalism and make a better world is thrilling for you. also, not all art needs to trigger a rabid, swiftie or bts style fan base. some people actually like music, and aren't basing everything of the paracosial relationship they have with an artist.
seems neither english class grammer lessons or art school taught you anything.
It seems you are projecting your own reasons for rejecting commerciality onto the general public but the conscious masses simply don't exist. the people she's talking about do exist and are a great percentage of the overall people who show this sentiment, and from experience, are ironically closer to rightwing believes and being completely oblivious to the very real effects of commerciality you mention. Here in south america, it's pretty common to hear people absolutely hate the mainstream, especially when it comes to elements of it that have roots in niche caribbean/african cultures. Of course, not all of it will be literally *just because*, it will often be wrapped with "poisoning the youth" or "it's low art" reasonings, but that's far from any real critic of actual commerciality.
I see your point, but I dont think she was hating on people rejecting popularity as a form of boycott against capitalism (I know the way I put that was an oversimplification) but rather people hating on popular things simply because they are popular. You claim that “no one rejects commerciality ‘just because’ ” but I don't find that to be true. I've met/encountered people who do because they want to feel different than the norm and be unique, sometimes even to feel “superior to the masses”. I'm not claiming that as a general rule but as an observation.
No that’s not what either one of us is saying. Just let art speak for itself. Appreciating someone’s craft and defending their abhorrent negation of others right to feel angry about objectively harsh and painful realities are two separate activities.
This. I'm sure there are people out there saying that she is stupid, but no one making that much money is "stupid". Empty, yes. Manipulative, obviously. Insatiably fixated on controlling the public narrative? Check. Definitely not an anarchist lol. But the biggest reason why resorting to calling someone like Charli "stupid" is a bad take is because it will never persuade a fan base cultivated around the actually immature notion of acting like a brat. And honestly these people do need Jesus, not in some megachurch although they'd probably get down with that before just shutting the fuck up and de-toxxing and learning to take care of another living creature. You can't be a cunt all the time and then talk about patriarchy. Like, she is a part of patriarchy. Yung Lean is the wisest person I know? Fuck.
What is most gross about selling out (so like specifically moving from the underground to pop) is the violence of silencing others and walking over their corpses, and taking up an unnecessary amount of space because the art DID NOT speak for itself. Or it didn't clearly receive the critical acclaim she is deprived of even after receiving literally all that is humanly possible. The notion that critique for the sake of making others reflect more deeply into their own lives, their own fears, their own boredom, makes it an exercise in elitism is such an inversion when that's what she is actually doing on these substacks.
She's like art school is triggering and then talks shit about people who can't respond, like it's frankly just about as alarming as hypocrisy can get. Speaking of Matt Copson saying that "real recognizes real" like calm tf down. The loops within her logic here are such a great example of intellectual gymnastics that only a sell-out is capable of. She is not in control, and never will be, because SPOILER--nobody is god. Elitism can def come from a place of embitterment and insecurity about ones own lack of financial success as an artist but one thing should be really clear, and that is that the only kind of elitism that has the power to "control" others is capital. Period. She is actually serving Leninism imo and distancing herself from America and LA here, but it's still the same game...control, control, control others, form cliques, steal, lie and deny deny deny
sorry but hilarious to berate someone on their grammar whilst spelling it wrong.
also get a grip, most people don't reject commerciality as a show of anti-capitalistic sentiment (even if they should). there's a lot to critique in her take, but this is not it.
100% this. The “commerciality” is capitalism, of which exploration is inherent and we understand that because it’s us who feels it. More celebrities need to understand the entirely unjust system they profit off of, someone like Roger Waters from Pink Floyd is amongst the very few who do.
soooo funny you've tried to diminish her saying "no english or art class could save her" while heavily exposing your own lack of knowledge in both the topics.
let me help you out as a grammAr devotee whose first language has one many times harder: the 'just because' in "rejection of commerciality 'just because' is such a boring and immature argument [...]" defines and isolates the type of 'rejection of commerciality she's speaking of. so, even though i agree with your views, Charli did not write what you've responded to AT ALL. she's criticizing this one specific cause for 'rejection of commerciality' and it is clearly as water.
also, she did not write a single letter nor implied anything about your hating related to mass/global vs niche appeal. it was quite the opposite actually... but i'll leave it to you to try and figure it out for yourself.
truly madly deeply wild you've spent your time writing this angry answer to things she did not say! almost cool.
ur just fucking lame. and thats ok. grammar, english class, and all that other bullshit doesn't matter either clearly (because you aren't using it correctly) its a false stolen language. you would be full of yourself if you were charli xcx too. shes been a niche nobody for so so long. 2024 being her true breakout stardom year after a almost 2 decade long career is anything but out of touch. she damn near the most IN TOUCH celebrity. completely organic and not annoyingly calculated like your taylor swifts, sabrina carpenter, chappell roan and madonna WANNABES. move around and go listen to how im feeling now.
First of all no one stated here that rejecting popularity/commerciality equals rejecting capitalism. Second of all there is no need to drag her by erasing her Indian heritage, or putting words in her mouth. Also, check your own „grammer”.
This just goes over your head, and that's okay. Delve into Camusian philosophy if you'd optionally like to understand; but sounds like you are far from interested.
I think what you’re describing isn’t so much an opposition between cool and commercial, but between what’s alive and what’s empty. The moment something dies isn’t when it becomes visible everywhere ,.it’s when the work loses its internal identity ,when it stops taking risks because it has to please everyone, when it no longer allows for failure, when there’s no space left for discomfort/disturbance. That’s when it becomes smooth and anonymous, and therefore boring.
In the end, there’s nothing left to feel. Cool dies there, because there’s no longer a position being taken, no emotion to share.
On the other hand, when something is born very specific and later becomes popular without being polished in order to get there, then coolness can survive. Even if people appropriate it imperfectly, it remains a living version of itself, because it still holds an internal fidelity and it’s that internal identity that makes it cool.
The day when the boring truly wins isn’t when everyone is watching, it’s when no one feels anything anymore.
Brat, and the other tracks that TikTok helped push into the spotlight, will never be boring, because they were shaped with a real identity.
Thank you for creating this Substack, Charli. It really shows that you’re an artist with a real way of thinking and a true identity and that’s what’s cool.
I agree with the alive and empty explanation, I think she didn't investigate further what "cool" actually means in this context. When she is thinking about "cool" it might be about what goes beyond simply mass appeal, to actually capturing an audience with some level of authenticity and substance. She doesn't investigate that those two ingredients must be present for what she calls "cool" though; authenticity and substance. She has these two things present in her music and in the way she expresses herself, but I don't think she always gravitates towards it in her personal life or her tastes.
Inserting Taylor swift makes me think you have really poor reading comprehension skills, based on what I just read I feel that would be the opposite of what she is talking about.
why the opposite? Taylor Swift is good execution but safe, virtuous but boring, commercial viable and Risk averse, she is the blueprint for all commercial pop artists
of course It wasnt her, the point is that you lift a rock and thousands of borin commercial safe repeated NPC virtuouse but with nothing to say artists come out. Taylor Swift is the god of mediocrity, It representa boringness and uncool, its a summary for the type of artist Charli saw that night
Remember: “The rejection of commerciality ‘just because’ is such a boring and immature argument.” It seems as though her disillusionment with the show came more from the energy of the crowd and the fact that everyone was largely indifferent. Taylor Swift shows are pretty much exactly the opposite of indifferent for everyone involved. If she had just disliked the music but the majority of the crowd was very hyped and into it, I highly doubt she would've left feeling the same way.
This is such a brain dead take if you’ve ever been to a geese show or frankly even listened to them once. The way geese perform as well as their sound fundamentally do not match up with her description of the show she saw in any way. And geese has absolutely not taken the “safe route” with their music. On a post where she focuses on the issues of people hating things “just because they become popular” here you are doing the exact thing while very clearly having no clue what you’re talking about
Getting killed is significantly more boring and safe than 3D Country basically devolving into a very one dimensional sound (ie his voice which at most points is lazy) leaving innovation in the dust (ie 3D Country (for relative comparison) was memorable and distinct while getting killed was not memorable and just made me rather listen to their influences). I may not have a full analysis but my brain is brimming with intuitions about how the recent fawning for getting killed is really just a fad purely cultivated from the superficial aspects of music (i.e. aesthetic-core, ‘taste’-confirmation, repetitive familiarity (not to be mistaken with sincere nostalgia)) that gives me icky feelings like I’m supposed to like this …. But like I just don’t. Fyi, I have never heard Geese live and imagine they could be very good, so I’m uninformed in that regard so rather than pulling from that my feelings come from their composition and recorded performances. I listened to the entirety of getting killed at home without distractions, attention to lyrics in front of me, peace of mind, and I felt nothing.
Honestly feels like you're jumping to conclusions on Dominic's response here - he evidently isn't solely hating on Geese because of their recent popularity; he's given a very valid critique on why he dislikes their new material and why it makes him feel similar to the way she did. Imho, equally as dangerous as hating something because of its popularity is the opposite phenomenon: praising mediocrity because you're scared to be contrarian (as Dominic alludes to with his mention of "taste-confirmation"). Both are bad, and we can surely find a middle ground! In this case, we can acknowledge that Cameron is a special artist and Geese is a special band, and we can still appreciate them and their rise to stardom while maintaining a discerning palate.
avant garde/risky VS mainstream/safe is an old as fuck controversy, black people didnt invent It even though for the specific case of the US black people because of the african roots were huge important part of what is cool
this is very Deep as the commercial/artistic tension also applies to real life, we are supposed to walk that like between freedom and comformity, between fantasy and reality, Charli one day Will realize she is the modern versión of Lope de Vega Who was commercial but cool and he had haters like Quevedo for exactly the reason she is talking about, being innovative VS selling to the market, the answers to all of this are on the spanish golden century dynamics between literary figures, she is realizing stuff that is 400 years old, hope she continúes her literary education
bordem does feel like death at times, but i think, at least for me, that’s a response born from constantly needing to be “on.” sometimes life feels so performative, that the performance starts to feel more real and real. when the comedown hits and it’s just me doing something that seems uncool, bland, etc…example being at home coloring, reading, writing it feels boring when really it’s glorious. boring let’s me be me.
I think this is an interesting perspective. I fundamentally disagree though. I think you conflate commercialisation and popularity. Things shouldn’t be disliked just because they are popular, but they can be disliked because they pursue maximisation of profit at the expense of awareness of the impacts this has on other people, the environment, etc. It doesn’t become uncool because it’s popular but because the art (which has intrinsic value in itself, created for the sake of art and expression rather than money) starts to negative principles of greed, selfishness, it starts to reflect upon extreme commercialisation. If you read this, Charli, I’m not directly using this to critique you, more the principle you have laid out. As I understand it, as music artists, you have to pursue the commercial aspect because, while you are creating art, ….. I’m sure the record label wants a return on investment of music videos, production, etc. But when you have certain artists releasing 100 vinyl variants (plastic that will never degrade) of the same album - with maybe an extra voice note the only difference - purely at the extent to transferring wealth from their fans to themselves and media corporations, I think this stops the art remaining authentic and good-intentioned, as in my view, it becomes clouded by greed and selfishness, it is no longer an authentic (unless of course commercialisation is the admitted goal) . Extreme commercialisation is a choice reflecting a lack of self-awareness/authenticity, which is often what brings about human connection to other people’s art. This is not the same as popularity ( even if they often go hand in hand).
If Julia Fox collabs with Amazon, she wouldn’t be cool because Amazon workers have to pee in cups when making deliveries and Amazon destroys the planet and drives mass consumption. Because she would put her own commercial gain above moral principles , this would give grounds to dislike a popular thing. It doesn’t matter if they happen to also be popular as a result or stemming from commercialisation, and it doesn’t matter if the “thing” was originally good intentioned if it then becomes something reflecting immoral ends .
Again, I don’t direct this as you but it’s something to think about in response to your point. Of course my point is subjective according to morals, but yeah.
fillet o' fish meal and it comes with mini beanie baby holding a cigarette- and the box is a NYC scene and the paper that comes with the meal is all black, mixed with *gem tones*
When brat first came out I listened on my bike everyday and just found it so pure and honest and fun and hilarious. Like someone's diary. But now it can be hard to remember that feeling after it became everyone else's gimmick/capital and the meaning became so twisted.
“Disliking something purely because of its widespread popularity or links to commercialism comes with a distinctly art school type energy”
THIS!!!!
The idea that for something to be cool it has to also be underground or undiscovered, is a projection from people who are clinging to coolness, and in turn this makes them uncool. Cool does not try, it does not battle, it does not claim to be cool.
I think there’s a lot of different ways to look at this one thing I will say is it doesn’t necessarily have to be a projection, for example, I am a small artist in an area that has a really flourishing underground music scene, I enjoy talking to small bands, having relationships with them and participating in the community of underground music. I do think people get on a high horse for only liking underground music and it can be seen as pretentious, and I think a healthy music taste should consist of both in my opinion. I also think sometimes it can be hard when you’re of lower socioeconomic status to look at celebrities and music artists who have so many resources available to them to make music. So I think it’s multifaceted, and there are many reasons to be more drawn to underground music.
I agree a healthy music taste should consist of both!
In no way am I saying that underground music isn’t cool and nor are the people who like it. I used to go to heaps of underground punk shows as a teen and recently have been heavily involved in the underground rave scene in my area. What I have observed in both those environments, is people who only listen to underground music and then loudly hate on popular music, do it because they are trying to make cool part of their personality. Looking down on others for liking something mainstream is uncool I think.
Charli got her start in the underground music scene. She began performing at illegal underground raves in London and that’s how she was discovered. Now after the success of Brat she’s considered a mainstream pop star. It’s the natural progression of the grind when you make it in the music scene (I mean if you don’t come from money already). Which is why I think for the people I spoke about, it is a projection. I think it stems from some form of jealousy or a feeling of needing to be accepted, hence “trying” to be cool.
I think you can do both. Like for example I’m in a band and I want to pour everything that I can into it and wanting it to be successful or wanting people to hear my music does not Negate my authenticity in it. But I see what you’re saying and thatI think you can definitely go too far and sell your soul til there’s nothing there.
Another insightful piece not just about your creative process, but how you perceive it and the relationship your fans (and people in general) have with it. Thank you for sharing!! And for the record you're cool as helllll 😎🖤
god this might be one of the most out of touch celebrity takes ive heard in a while. for starters, a celeb doing a meal collab with mcdonalds has never made someone uncool. but the stupid art kid "no one understands my art but im also going to judge when i don't understand theirs" thing isn't what's bothering me the most...
it's the "rejection of commerciality ‘just because’ is such a boring and immature argument that is perhaps more suited to some mediums than others but in general I find to be elitist in a way that does not thrill me whatsoever" bit.
no one rejects commerciality "just because". they do it because the over capitalization of every little aspect of our lives and world is a disgusting sign of the road we are heading down as a society. they do it because the 'brat-ification' of kamala harris' politcal compaign is soulless and takes away from the fact that our government is actively trying to harm us. they do it because almost half of the world's population (44% i believe) is living in extreme poverty, because 10% of the world's population possess 76% of the wealth, and that number keeps rising. they reject major corporations because those corps are lobbying in support of israel, or donating meals to the idf. calling people boring for not wanting to participate in a system that blatantly steals from small communities, supports mass genocide all the world, and destroys the beauty of world we live in is such a cruel, out of touch thought that only a rich white women who hasn't had a real job in a very long time could have.
sorry that people wanting to reject capitalism and make a better world is thrilling for you. also, not all art needs to trigger a rabid, swiftie or bts style fan base. some people actually like music, and aren't basing everything of the paracosial relationship they have with an artist.
seems neither english class grammer lessons or art school taught you anything.
It seems you are projecting your own reasons for rejecting commerciality onto the general public but the conscious masses simply don't exist. the people she's talking about do exist and are a great percentage of the overall people who show this sentiment, and from experience, are ironically closer to rightwing believes and being completely oblivious to the very real effects of commerciality you mention. Here in south america, it's pretty common to hear people absolutely hate the mainstream, especially when it comes to elements of it that have roots in niche caribbean/african cultures. Of course, not all of it will be literally *just because*, it will often be wrapped with "poisoning the youth" or "it's low art" reasonings, but that's far from any real critic of actual commerciality.
10000%
I see your point, but I dont think she was hating on people rejecting popularity as a form of boycott against capitalism (I know the way I put that was an oversimplification) but rather people hating on popular things simply because they are popular. You claim that “no one rejects commerciality ‘just because’ ” but I don't find that to be true. I've met/encountered people who do because they want to feel different than the norm and be unique, sometimes even to feel “superior to the masses”. I'm not claiming that as a general rule but as an observation.
No that’s not what either one of us is saying. Just let art speak for itself. Appreciating someone’s craft and defending their abhorrent negation of others right to feel angry about objectively harsh and painful realities are two separate activities.
ur just inherently saying to “create your fucking art” and dont elaborate any further outside of your music. lame.
This. I'm sure there are people out there saying that she is stupid, but no one making that much money is "stupid". Empty, yes. Manipulative, obviously. Insatiably fixated on controlling the public narrative? Check. Definitely not an anarchist lol. But the biggest reason why resorting to calling someone like Charli "stupid" is a bad take is because it will never persuade a fan base cultivated around the actually immature notion of acting like a brat. And honestly these people do need Jesus, not in some megachurch although they'd probably get down with that before just shutting the fuck up and de-toxxing and learning to take care of another living creature. You can't be a cunt all the time and then talk about patriarchy. Like, she is a part of patriarchy. Yung Lean is the wisest person I know? Fuck.
What is most gross about selling out (so like specifically moving from the underground to pop) is the violence of silencing others and walking over their corpses, and taking up an unnecessary amount of space because the art DID NOT speak for itself. Or it didn't clearly receive the critical acclaim she is deprived of even after receiving literally all that is humanly possible. The notion that critique for the sake of making others reflect more deeply into their own lives, their own fears, their own boredom, makes it an exercise in elitism is such an inversion when that's what she is actually doing on these substacks.
She's like art school is triggering and then talks shit about people who can't respond, like it's frankly just about as alarming as hypocrisy can get. Speaking of Matt Copson saying that "real recognizes real" like calm tf down. The loops within her logic here are such a great example of intellectual gymnastics that only a sell-out is capable of. She is not in control, and never will be, because SPOILER--nobody is god. Elitism can def come from a place of embitterment and insecurity about ones own lack of financial success as an artist but one thing should be really clear, and that is that the only kind of elitism that has the power to "control" others is capital. Period. She is actually serving Leninism imo and distancing herself from America and LA here, but it's still the same game...control, control, control others, form cliques, steal, lie and deny deny deny
sorry but hilarious to berate someone on their grammar whilst spelling it wrong.
also get a grip, most people don't reject commerciality as a show of anti-capitalistic sentiment (even if they should). there's a lot to critique in her take, but this is not it.
100% this. The “commerciality” is capitalism, of which exploration is inherent and we understand that because it’s us who feels it. More celebrities need to understand the entirely unjust system they profit off of, someone like Roger Waters from Pink Floyd is amongst the very few who do.
exploitation*
A celeb doing a mcdonalds meal collab has absolutely made someone uncool, to me anyway xD.
soooo funny you've tried to diminish her saying "no english or art class could save her" while heavily exposing your own lack of knowledge in both the topics.
let me help you out as a grammAr devotee whose first language has one many times harder: the 'just because' in "rejection of commerciality 'just because' is such a boring and immature argument [...]" defines and isolates the type of 'rejection of commerciality she's speaking of. so, even though i agree with your views, Charli did not write what you've responded to AT ALL. she's criticizing this one specific cause for 'rejection of commerciality' and it is clearly as water.
also, she did not write a single letter nor implied anything about your hating related to mass/global vs niche appeal. it was quite the opposite actually... but i'll leave it to you to try and figure it out for yourself.
truly madly deeply wild you've spent your time writing this angry answer to things she did not say! almost cool.
You clearly didn’t comprehend her message. So ironic.
ur just fucking lame. and thats ok. grammar, english class, and all that other bullshit doesn't matter either clearly (because you aren't using it correctly) its a false stolen language. you would be full of yourself if you were charli xcx too. shes been a niche nobody for so so long. 2024 being her true breakout stardom year after a almost 2 decade long career is anything but out of touch. she damn near the most IN TOUCH celebrity. completely organic and not annoyingly calculated like your taylor swifts, sabrina carpenter, chappell roan and madonna WANNABES. move around and go listen to how im feeling now.
First of all no one stated here that rejecting popularity/commerciality equals rejecting capitalism. Second of all there is no need to drag her by erasing her Indian heritage, or putting words in her mouth. Also, check your own „grammer”.
Pls explain “mass genocide all over the world” you sounds like internet word vomiting slop
Oh fuck off
This just goes over your head, and that's okay. Delve into Camusian philosophy if you'd optionally like to understand; but sounds like you are far from interested.
kkkkkk pq o comentário de um hater é o mais curtido? jesus
you just don't get it. and that's ok.
girl 🫠
babe wake up a new charli xcx substack just dropped
I think what you’re describing isn’t so much an opposition between cool and commercial, but between what’s alive and what’s empty. The moment something dies isn’t when it becomes visible everywhere ,.it’s when the work loses its internal identity ,when it stops taking risks because it has to please everyone, when it no longer allows for failure, when there’s no space left for discomfort/disturbance. That’s when it becomes smooth and anonymous, and therefore boring.
In the end, there’s nothing left to feel. Cool dies there, because there’s no longer a position being taken, no emotion to share.
On the other hand, when something is born very specific and later becomes popular without being polished in order to get there, then coolness can survive. Even if people appropriate it imperfectly, it remains a living version of itself, because it still holds an internal fidelity and it’s that internal identity that makes it cool.
The day when the boring truly wins isn’t when everyone is watching, it’s when no one feels anything anymore.
Brat, and the other tracks that TikTok helped push into the spotlight, will never be boring, because they were shaped with a real identity.
Thank you for creating this Substack, Charli. It really shows that you’re an artist with a real way of thinking and a true identity and that’s what’s cool.
ILY <3
this is such a great comment, thanks for writing this <3
I agree with the alive and empty explanation, I think she didn't investigate further what "cool" actually means in this context. When she is thinking about "cool" it might be about what goes beyond simply mass appeal, to actually capturing an audience with some level of authenticity and substance. She doesn't investigate that those two ingredients must be present for what she calls "cool" though; authenticity and substance. She has these two things present in her music and in the way she expresses herself, but I don't think she always gravitates towards it in her personal life or her tastes.
when y’all read charli’s substack do you imagine her accent like in her interviews or is it just me
yes 😂
I want to petition Substack to make one of the post reading voices Charli’s. Separately, also Sue Perkins.
lmao I read in a British accent too😂
only way to read this
I know we never will but I'm keen for the tea on whose show you're referencing here that made you feel depressed
my headcannon is the 1975
why? you can insert 90% of shows, Taylor Swift and everyone Who not only wants money but safe money
Inserting Taylor swift makes me think you have really poor reading comprehension skills, based on what I just read I feel that would be the opposite of what she is talking about.
why the opposite? Taylor Swift is good execution but safe, virtuous but boring, commercial viable and Risk averse, she is the blueprint for all commercial pop artists
say what you will but swifties CARE. the opposite of "just dropping by"
true in reference to the shows but i see this quote as something that could be directly related to her "The second you apply a
'something for everyone' approach to art in an attempt to deliberately appeal to more people that, in my opinion, is the moment that coolness dies.
It was not Taylor Swift lmao. Did you just... not read it at all? Why do some of you feel so compelled to bring up Taylor Swift any chance you get?
of course It wasnt her, the point is that you lift a rock and thousands of borin commercial safe repeated NPC virtuouse but with nothing to say artists come out. Taylor Swift is the god of mediocrity, It representa boringness and uncool, its a summary for the type of artist Charli saw that night
Remember: “The rejection of commerciality ‘just because’ is such a boring and immature argument.” It seems as though her disillusionment with the show came more from the energy of the crowd and the fact that everyone was largely indifferent. Taylor Swift shows are pretty much exactly the opposite of indifferent for everyone involved. If she had just disliked the music but the majority of the crowd was very hyped and into it, I highly doubt she would've left feeling the same way.
just because the crowd is cheering It doesnt mean is uncool, uncool people dont support coolness, they embrace mediocrity
Probably Geese
This is such a brain dead take if you’ve ever been to a geese show or frankly even listened to them once. The way geese perform as well as their sound fundamentally do not match up with her description of the show she saw in any way. And geese has absolutely not taken the “safe route” with their music. On a post where she focuses on the issues of people hating things “just because they become popular” here you are doing the exact thing while very clearly having no clue what you’re talking about
Getting killed is significantly more boring and safe than 3D Country basically devolving into a very one dimensional sound (ie his voice which at most points is lazy) leaving innovation in the dust (ie 3D Country (for relative comparison) was memorable and distinct while getting killed was not memorable and just made me rather listen to their influences). I may not have a full analysis but my brain is brimming with intuitions about how the recent fawning for getting killed is really just a fad purely cultivated from the superficial aspects of music (i.e. aesthetic-core, ‘taste’-confirmation, repetitive familiarity (not to be mistaken with sincere nostalgia)) that gives me icky feelings like I’m supposed to like this …. But like I just don’t. Fyi, I have never heard Geese live and imagine they could be very good, so I’m uninformed in that regard so rather than pulling from that my feelings come from their composition and recorded performances. I listened to the entirety of getting killed at home without distractions, attention to lyrics in front of me, peace of mind, and I felt nothing.
Honestly feels like you're jumping to conclusions on Dominic's response here - he evidently isn't solely hating on Geese because of their recent popularity; he's given a very valid critique on why he dislikes their new material and why it makes him feel similar to the way she did. Imho, equally as dangerous as hating something because of its popularity is the opposite phenomenon: praising mediocrity because you're scared to be contrarian (as Dominic alludes to with his mention of "taste-confirmation"). Both are bad, and we can surely find a middle ground! In this case, we can acknowledge that Cameron is a special artist and Geese is a special band, and we can still appreciate them and their rise to stardom while maintaining a discerning palate.
Absolutely aching to figure it out
It was Wolf Eyes
its obviously b** i*****
“The rejection of commerciality ‘just because’ is such a boring and immature argument” 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Oo but it is very interesting to dig deeper into where this argument comes from! The origins of ‘cool’ are political - coolness was a form of radical protest by Black jazz musicians refusing to perform smiling for the white gaze. There’s a lot more context to explore - https://open.substack.com/pub/whatsanu/p/who-killed-cool-and-what-do-we-chase?r=sa2s&utm_medium=ios
avant garde/risky VS mainstream/safe is an old as fuck controversy, black people didnt invent It even though for the specific case of the US black people because of the african roots were huge important part of what is cool
This! To talk about “cool” without mentioning Black music is to reduce, decontexualise and whitewash it…
Just wanted to say that I immediately thought about your essays when I read the title 🤭
Aw thank you!!
"white gaze" did you mean white homosexuals?
this is very Deep as the commercial/artistic tension also applies to real life, we are supposed to walk that like between freedom and comformity, between fantasy and reality, Charli one day Will realize she is the modern versión of Lope de Vega Who was commercial but cool and he had haters like Quevedo for exactly the reason she is talking about, being innovative VS selling to the market, the answers to all of this are on the spanish golden century dynamics between literary figures, she is realizing stuff that is 400 years old, hope she continúes her literary education
bordem does feel like death at times, but i think, at least for me, that’s a response born from constantly needing to be “on.” sometimes life feels so performative, that the performance starts to feel more real and real. when the comedown hits and it’s just me doing something that seems uncool, bland, etc…example being at home coloring, reading, writing it feels boring when really it’s glorious. boring let’s me be me.
Boring feels like my mind is at rest.
me too, i feel safe!
365 substack girl
I think this is an interesting perspective. I fundamentally disagree though. I think you conflate commercialisation and popularity. Things shouldn’t be disliked just because they are popular, but they can be disliked because they pursue maximisation of profit at the expense of awareness of the impacts this has on other people, the environment, etc. It doesn’t become uncool because it’s popular but because the art (which has intrinsic value in itself, created for the sake of art and expression rather than money) starts to negative principles of greed, selfishness, it starts to reflect upon extreme commercialisation. If you read this, Charli, I’m not directly using this to critique you, more the principle you have laid out. As I understand it, as music artists, you have to pursue the commercial aspect because, while you are creating art, ….. I’m sure the record label wants a return on investment of music videos, production, etc. But when you have certain artists releasing 100 vinyl variants (plastic that will never degrade) of the same album - with maybe an extra voice note the only difference - purely at the extent to transferring wealth from their fans to themselves and media corporations, I think this stops the art remaining authentic and good-intentioned, as in my view, it becomes clouded by greed and selfishness, it is no longer an authentic (unless of course commercialisation is the admitted goal) . Extreme commercialisation is a choice reflecting a lack of self-awareness/authenticity, which is often what brings about human connection to other people’s art. This is not the same as popularity ( even if they often go hand in hand).
If Julia Fox collabs with Amazon, she wouldn’t be cool because Amazon workers have to pee in cups when making deliveries and Amazon destroys the planet and drives mass consumption. Because she would put her own commercial gain above moral principles , this would give grounds to dislike a popular thing. It doesn’t matter if they happen to also be popular as a result or stemming from commercialisation, and it doesn’t matter if the “thing” was originally good intentioned if it then becomes something reflecting immoral ends .
Again, I don’t direct this as you but it’s something to think about in response to your point. Of course my point is subjective according to morals, but yeah.
Such a good comment
I’d get the Julia Fox Happy Meal
hear me out..
fillet o' fish meal and it comes with mini beanie baby holding a cigarette- and the box is a NYC scene and the paper that comes with the meal is all black, mixed with *gem tones*
the moment you let go of being ‘cool’ is the exact moment you become ‘cool’
When brat first came out I listened on my bike everyday and just found it so pure and honest and fun and hilarious. Like someone's diary. But now it can be hard to remember that feeling after it became everyone else's gimmick/capital and the meaning became so twisted.
lol no, Apple is still about family trauma and also its an Epic saga of dances with narrative arcs with bad guys and cool stuff, its both
that means you havent listened too much to the Apple remix song which is the POV of the mother, that helps restoring the serious message to the song
how is it the pov of the mother?
exactly this
“Disliking something purely because of its widespread popularity or links to commercialism comes with a distinctly art school type energy”
THIS!!!!
The idea that for something to be cool it has to also be underground or undiscovered, is a projection from people who are clinging to coolness, and in turn this makes them uncool. Cool does not try, it does not battle, it does not claim to be cool.
I think there’s a lot of different ways to look at this one thing I will say is it doesn’t necessarily have to be a projection, for example, I am a small artist in an area that has a really flourishing underground music scene, I enjoy talking to small bands, having relationships with them and participating in the community of underground music. I do think people get on a high horse for only liking underground music and it can be seen as pretentious, and I think a healthy music taste should consist of both in my opinion. I also think sometimes it can be hard when you’re of lower socioeconomic status to look at celebrities and music artists who have so many resources available to them to make music. So I think it’s multifaceted, and there are many reasons to be more drawn to underground music.
I agree a healthy music taste should consist of both!
In no way am I saying that underground music isn’t cool and nor are the people who like it. I used to go to heaps of underground punk shows as a teen and recently have been heavily involved in the underground rave scene in my area. What I have observed in both those environments, is people who only listen to underground music and then loudly hate on popular music, do it because they are trying to make cool part of their personality. Looking down on others for liking something mainstream is uncool I think.
Charli got her start in the underground music scene. She began performing at illegal underground raves in London and that’s how she was discovered. Now after the success of Brat she’s considered a mainstream pop star. It’s the natural progression of the grind when you make it in the music scene (I mean if you don’t come from money already). Which is why I think for the people I spoke about, it is a projection. I think it stems from some form of jealousy or a feeling of needing to be accepted, hence “trying” to be cool.
i think coolness resides in authenticity
Which is negated when something is pursued for commercial ends rather than intrinsic ones
capitalism is the ultimate poser
I think you can do both. Like for example I’m in a band and I want to pour everything that I can into it and wanting it to be successful or wanting people to hear my music does not Negate my authenticity in it. But I see what you’re saying and thatI think you can definitely go too far and sell your soul til there’s nothing there.
thank u for letting us into ur brain
Another insightful piece not just about your creative process, but how you perceive it and the relationship your fans (and people in general) have with it. Thank you for sharing!! And for the record you're cool as helllll 😎🖤