Can You Take Me Lower?

One of my all time top 5 favorite movies is High Fidelity.  And in it, John Cusack's "Rob Gordon" observes:

... what really matters is what you like, not what you are like... Books, records, films -- these things matter. Call me shallow but it's the fuckin' truth...

I don't agree with it completely.  What you are like matters more.  But, yeah, we all make judgments about what we like; books, records, films, etc.  And we make 
judgments about associating with people based on those things.  If something is not up to our own personal tastes or critical standards, we might turn our noses up at it.  If we find out somebody likes a band or TV show that we find unappealing, perhaps we roll our eyes.

Facebook comments in Youtube form

But in an age where so much of a our communication seems to occur through social media, where we seek "likes" and "retweets", our glibness seems more pronounced, our sarcasm sharper.  So it's not enough to just say to ourselves, "Ugh, I can't believe they like that!"  We have to put it out there.  It needs an audience, whether online or in person.  And, like I said, it can often be flippant, glib, caustic, or just flat out mean.

 I have to recognize my hypocrisy, because I'm as guilty as anyone.  

Which brings me to Creed.  I'm pretty sure I don't know anybody who is a fan of Creed, or at least openly a fan.  In fact, when I look them up on Facebook, nobody I know shows up as "liking" them.  I never got into their music.  I'll confess I kinda' like "My Sacrifice."  The rest, not so much.  "With Arms Wide Open", pure overwrought, syrupy schmaltz.  If I had a friend who was a Creed fan, would I tease them, give them shit?  Sure.  But I wouldn't denigrate them, or anybody who's a Creed fan for that matter.

Writer Drew Aisles blogs about music/pop culture for the City Pages.  I think it's safe to say he finds a great deal of fulfillment listening to some visceral, unfiltered power punk music in a small club, imbibing some cold beverages made from hops.  A review of some of his work shows he's insightful (I am one of those who feels very awkward running into people they've only been introduced to once before), he's acerbic in his commentary, has a strong point of view, and often punctuates his work by taking aim at himself (I can always appreciate that).

But recently, this piece caught my attention:

Laughing at Scott Stapp's Downward Spiral Makes You Even Worse Than Creed

A punk fan defending Creed's front man?  In City Pages no less, or any Village Voice publication for that matter?  Yep, that really happened.  And you can certainly find any number of unflattering pieces written about him or his band through their publications.

This is a writer who, whether by choice or through assignment, attended the Imagine Dragons concert last Spring (which, by his own admission, he may not have been sober for) and wrote a review with thinly veiled contempt.  And here he is standing up for Scott Stapp.

Some key passages:

   

...  many of us are using the fact that we simply don't like him as a license to pump our fists in some sort of warped triumph and pleasure as we laugh at someone's misfortune.

But it's not misfortune. "Misfortune" is a word we use when a car splashes a puddle on you... What is going on with Scott Stapp is honestly more of a tragedy, the way it is to see anyone desperately struggle with a legitimate illness. Regardless of whether we want to acknowledge it, Scott Stapp is a human being with friends, family and other people who care about him, who are being forced to watch him deteriorate in the public eye.

Oh, but wait, there's a difference between him and other people, right? Doesn't Scott Stapp suck? ... Shouldn't it be OK to make fun of him?

... Whether Stapp is suffering from a drug addiction that's triggering his delusions or he's in the throes of a schizophrenic episode, mocking the suffering of another person is worse than anything he's ever done. 

I was troubled by the headline (I used it to title the link to the original article).  At first glance, I found it to be at odds with the core theme of Aisles' piece.  But I wasn't sure if it was an editorial choice, or something direct from the article.  But then there's the final line:

In fact, it's worse than any song that Creed has ever written. Do you really want to be worse than Creed?

I was troubled, because here's Aisles taking what could be considered an unpopular position, and I'm not sure how he's trying to tie it all together.  Is he trying to keep some level of street cred by suggesting, Scott Stapp was in Creed, and Creed sucks, so Scott Stapp sucks, and putting him down is worse than that because he already sucks.  Or is he turning the mirror back at us?  If you think Creed/Scott Stapp is so awful, then why would you lower yourself by doing something that's worse?

I hope it's the latter, and not the former.  Particularly given some of the responses:

Fuck him and his shit music.

Dudes a total tool. I didn't put him in this place....he did. So fuck Scott stapp and motherfuck creed. Lame!

The world would be better off lol what a chump. Weak minded fool.

Stapp sucks. Hope he blows his head wide open.

(My disappointment, yet lack of surprise, about those comments could easily be an entirely separate piece about how the internet has reduced the quality of our communication.  Taken away a sense of responsibility for our words, and the ease with which they become ugly, even violent.  How too often communication can can revel in a lack of empathy.)  

Laughing at other people's misfortune is nothing new.  And I'm not using misfortune now as Aisles defines it.  I'm giving that term a bit more weight. It's part of comedy's foundation.  And most writers, comedians, performers, etc. have used others' misfortune to get laughter and/or applause.  As an audience member, a performer, a person, I've done it.  We all have.  But reveling in it, taking delight in it, particularly when it does become tragic, there's certainly something graceless about that.  

I guess I'm bemoaning that fact that we are so quick to show contempt for what others like, when it doesn't fit our tastes.  And the ease with which we condemn, when it's not deserved.

I think Justin Bieber is a spoiled little twit punk, and I don't like his music.  And while I may  not understand why some people do, that singular fact doesn't lessen them as people, doesn't make them worthy of my scorn, and certainly doesn't cause me any harm.  But I do think he's worthy of being mocked. And if someone I knew was a huge Bieber fan, I think I'd probably enjoy a lively & funny conversation debating the merits behind that choice.

Back in 2007, former Late Late Show host Craig Ferguson (wish that wasn't so) proved that he was truly unlike any of his pears, by delivering a monologue about Britney Spears that I think succinctly captures what  Aisles is writing about.