Stasis probably intended this as a joke, but I have no sense of humor or fun, not understanding the appeal of artists like AWK, so my sadness culminates itself in cold views of music.
Speaking of sad people;
Anyway, this thread is one that I would actually be interested in starting. I'll start with a topic I think a lot of people here are going to be on one side of, but hopefully some devil's advocates can stir the pot and inspire some posting:
Does rock criticism in its current form support works of high art, or does it cater more to that which sells more copies? Extrapolating on this, if it caters more to that which sells more copies, is there a foreseeable future wherein the greats of rock music are determined based on true innovation and not sales, a la other forms of music such as jazz and classical? Further, has rock ever attained an album that can be considered high art to be admired to the same degree as the literature of Hugo, Joyce, etc. or the fine art of da Vinci or even the masters of other musics, such as Stravinsky, Stockhausen, Mozart, Coltrane, etc.?
So, whip out the Ray-Bans and the turtlenecks - time for another art discussion where we take music too seriously.