My writing style

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but after reading my own posts, I realized that compared to many professional music review sites (and many non-professional sites as well), my pieces are a great deal more personal and spend far more time analyzing albums and songs on purely musical and entertainment merits, as opposed to significantly commenting on any historical, artistic, and socio-cultural values.

While this may appear to be an "amateurish" review style, I write this way not because of a lack of knowledge, but because I geniunely believe that the main arbiter of a song's quality is whether it is enjoyable to listen to. A song could be the most politically and historically important song in the world, but if it isn't pleasant to hear, I can't honestly say that it's a great song. On the other hand, a song can have have utter nonsense lyrics, but if they sound great, then, well, it's a great song. That's why, for example, I love Weezer's Green Album despite its lack of overarching historical significance to all but hardcore Weezer fans. On the other hand, I'm not too fond of the Sex Pistols' Never Mind The Bollocks; sure it may have launched punk rock back in 1979, but most of the songs are pretty tuneless, and no matter how "important" it is, I basically never listen to it.

I don't mean this to criticize those reviewers who do consider historical and cultural values; I think it's great that such information is available out there. And, of course, my writing isn't totally bereft of this - I have certainly included it in places (it's just not my primary focus). But in general, my criteria of a song's value is simple - if I enjoy listening to it, in my opinion it's a great song.

Well, hopefully this disclaimer of sorts wasn't really necessary, as I hope all readers will enjoy this blog regardless of whether you agree with my musical assesssments. But I did want to put it here just in case.