Does it really matter what will be “cool”? How about what will be good?
The newspaper article in question which stuck in my craw this morning was a generic Associated Press byline, and contained the following gems of wisdom:
- Got the latest “Death Cab for Cutie” tune on your iPod phone? That’s so 2005.
With the new year about to begin, it’s time to upgrade your electronics, reprogram your TiVo, juice up your music collection, restyle your wardrobe and mark your calendar with all the most-anticipated movies.
- MUSIC: “The parched desert that was 2005 makes for an interesting 2006,” says Craig Marks, editor in chief of Blender magazine.
(2005 was a parched desert?)
- Expect to hear more from R&B songbird Christina Milian and 16-year-old singer-songwriter Teddy Geiger, whom Marks describes as “a Teen People John Mayer.”
(Dear God, just what we need! As if Kevin Federline’s musical release in 2005 wasn’t bad enough.)
Maybe I just woke up on the wrong side of the bed (with a crick in my shoulder, in fact), but the whole concept of changing your listening habits because some AP article says it will be hip in 2006 just grinds my gears. Is it necessary to even write an article like that? Maybe it was just supposed to be funny or somehow enlightening to the masses, but I can’t prefer this fluff over any sort of substance.
Listen to what you like.
**END GROUCH MESSAGE**