"Monsters 1: Lordi wins Eurovision. Surprised to see many people on my flist making a big deal of this. Let's face it, their lyrics suck and musically they're as competent as KISS or Twisted Sister (i.e., not at all). Basically, they're a crap band in glam monster outfits."
Normally I am beyond impressed with the content of your posts on live journal. Both here in your private journal and elsewhere. But I'm going to have to call you on this one. As you seen to have your head wedged firmly up your ass.
You have made the mistake of assuming that since this band isn't for you, it must not be for anyone. It looks like you made the same mistake regarding Kiss and Twisted Sister aswell. So you don't like Glam rock in general. Does that mean no one else should?
Your claim that KISS and Twisted sister suck, should tell everyone just how good your taste is(n't). Rolling Stone magazine seems to disagree with you on Kiss's musical abilities. Placing their album 'Alive' a 159th place on the list of top 500 albums of all time. Ahead of such artists as: Radiohead, Prince, Bob Dylan, Marvin Gaye, Bob Marley, Aerosmith, Parliament/Funkadelic, The Rolling Stones, Elvis Presley, R.E.M, AC/DC, Michael Jackson, Pearl Jam, Pink Floyd, Beastie Boys, U2, Bruce Springsteen, Pixies, Erik B. and Rakim, Queen, Black Sabbath, and The Grateful Dead.
The essence of the issue is: What makes (music) a band "good"?
I think all will agree the answer to such a question is HIGHLY subjective. I personally think Lordi's lyrics rock(pun intended). But in an intentionally campy and over the top fashion. I find the fact they make so many puns in a foreign language very impressive to be honest. Lordi is totally a joke. Tomi(Mr. Lordi) doesn't take himself seriously at all(unlike GWAR). The whole thing is supposed to be tongue-in-cheek. That being said, they are hugely successful at pulling this joke off. Perhaps more pertinant to my point, I would be willing to bet you have only heard/seen that single song/video. Am I right? Passing judgement on any band after such a small bit of exposure seems more than a bit premature.
The fact you don't get it/like it is a shame. But for you to say they suck is out of line.
"Surprised to see many people on my flist making a big deal of this." Because you don't know the background store. A huge portion of Finnish national identity is constructed around an intense inferiority complex. Aftering being either Sweden's or Russia's bitch for the past 1200 years, several catastrophic famines and civil wars, and the whole war reparations thing with Russia post WWII. Finns are a bit beat down in the national ego department. A lose in any international competition, even something as utterly ridiculous as the Eurovision contest, hurts every Finn that hears about it. Conversely a win in any international contest effects Finns deeply. For over 30 years the Eurovision song contest has meant national embarrassments for Finland. Years of not only not winning but in many cases of getting 0 points(a true disgrace). Have meant most Finns cringe just thinking about Euro vision. So to send a band that almost everyone assumed was a guaranteed 0 to the contest. But then to place first, with a new record score, and best Russia by one of the largest margins in eurovision history. It's just huge here.
Finland isn't Australia or America. It's not some huge country with a massive population. Where all kinds of interesting things happen all of the time. Finland is 1/23 the size of Australia, with only 1/ 4 the population. We don't do big military operations around our region. At the 2004 Athens games Australia got 49 medals(17G,16S,16B). Finland got 2(silvers). The only times Finland usually wins international competitions is when tax rates or economic competitiveness start getting compared. Then we take home the dubious honour of having the highest aggregate tax burden of any country on the planet. Which basically no one cares to even thing about.
So you see, to a Finn, winning this competition is a very big deal.
The heat must be getting to you. vittulinen mies.
Normally I am beyond impressed with the content of your posts on live journal. Both here in your private journal and elsewhere. But I'm going to have to call you on this one. As you seen to have your head wedged firmly up your ass.
You have made the mistake of assuming that since this band isn't for you, it must not be for anyone. It looks like you made the same mistake regarding Kiss and Twisted Sister aswell. So you don't like Glam rock in general. Does that mean no one else should?
Your claim that KISS and Twisted sister suck, should tell everyone just how good your taste is(n't). Rolling Stone magazine seems to disagree with you on Kiss's musical abilities. Placing their album 'Alive' a 159th place on the list of top 500 albums of all time. Ahead of such artists as: Radiohead, Prince, Bob Dylan, Marvin Gaye, Bob Marley, Aerosmith, Parliament/Funkadelic, The Rolling Stones, Elvis Presley, R.E.M, AC/DC, Michael Jackson, Pearl Jam, Pink Floyd, Beastie Boys, U2, Bruce Springsteen, Pixies, Erik B. and Rakim, Queen, Black Sabbath, and The Grateful Dead.
The essence of the issue is: What makes (music) a band "good"?
I think all will agree the answer to such a question is HIGHLY subjective. I personally think Lordi's lyrics rock(pun intended). But in an intentionally campy and over the top fashion. I find the fact they make so many puns in a foreign language very impressive to be honest. Lordi is totally a joke. Tomi(Mr. Lordi) doesn't take himself seriously at all(unlike GWAR). The whole thing is supposed to be tongue-in-cheek. That being said, they are hugely successful at pulling this joke off. Perhaps more pertinant to my point, I would be willing to bet you have only heard/seen that single song/video. Am I right? Passing judgement on any band after such a small bit of exposure seems more than a bit premature.
The fact you don't get it/like it is a shame. But for you to say they suck is out of line.
"Surprised to see many people on my flist making a big deal of this."
Because you don't know the background store. A huge portion of Finnish national identity is constructed around an intense inferiority complex. Aftering being either Sweden's or Russia's bitch for the past 1200 years, several catastrophic famines and civil wars, and the whole war reparations thing with Russia post WWII. Finns are a bit beat down in the national ego department. A lose in any international competition, even something as utterly ridiculous as the Eurovision contest, hurts every Finn that hears about it. Conversely a win in any international contest effects Finns deeply. For over 30 years the Eurovision song contest has meant national embarrassments for Finland. Years of not only not winning but in many cases of getting 0 points(a true disgrace). Have meant most Finns cringe just thinking about Euro vision. So to send a band that almost everyone assumed was a guaranteed 0 to the contest. But then to place first, with a new record score, and best Russia by one of the largest margins in eurovision history. It's just huge here.
Finland isn't Australia or America. It's not some huge country with a massive population. Where all kinds of interesting things happen all of the time. Finland is 1/23 the size of Australia, with only 1/ 4 the population. We don't do big military operations around our region. At the 2004 Athens games Australia got 49 medals(17G,16S,16B). Finland got 2(silvers). The only times Finland usually wins international competitions is when tax rates or economic competitiveness start getting compared. Then we take home the dubious honour of having the highest aggregate tax burden of any country on the planet. Which basically no one cares to even thing about.
So you see, to a Finn, winning this competition is a very big deal.