Sir Stewart Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 It was the sixties. You'da hit it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lammycat Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 The title of the thread should be: Define "Prolific" On My Terms p.s. Who the eff is Robert pollard?! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 The title of the thread should be: Define "Prolific" On My Terms p.s. Who the eff is Robert pollard?!Bob Mould in a wig Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 This place needs more Jules. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 This place needs more Jules.word Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The High Heat Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Suddenly I miss the low volume of traffic on this board. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 No, I wouldn't. What are you a fucking English professor, man? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shakespeare In The Alley Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I was funnin.Yes, I see this now. My B. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tinnitus photography Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 The title of the thread should be: Define "Prolific" On My Terms p.s. Who the eff is Robert pollard?! hasn't yr copy of _Alien Lanes_ come in the mail yet? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Continue the argument here! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 abundantly inventive (one of the definitions of prolific) suggests a qualitative character. An artist could be prolific in the sense of producing a lot of work, but at the same time NOT prolific if the work was not inventive. Conversely, an artist could be prolific with one album, if that album showed an abundance of inventiveness, and at the same time NOT prolific if that was his only work in 20 years.The actual definition to which you refer contains the phrase "marked by abundant inventiveness or productivity ." The issue here is the word "inventiveness," which you are interpreting as a qualitative measure. Rather, in this context it is still a measure of quantity: the invention of many things. Similarly, "creativity" is usually assumed to denote a measure of quality, but in this context it means the creation of many things. Before you accuse me of twisting the definitions of these words to suit my purpose, try this aggregated collection of dictionary definitions for "prolific" and see if you can find anything that speaks to quality rather than quantity: http://www.onelook.com/?w=prolific&ls=a No really, click through all of those definitions. I'll wait. The first of those links includes a definition with this phrase: "very productive, in an intellectual sense." If you keep clicking through the links, it will become clear that the meaning concerns quantity of work, not quality: "Producing abundant works or results," for example, and "producing ideas or works frequently and in large quantities." Nowhere do these definitions allude to quality. The use of the word "inventiveness" in the Merriam-Webster definition, in this case, has only clouded the issue, because these days we automatically assume that "inventive" is a qualitative assessment rather than a quantitative one. It doesn't take a lot of further investigation of its context within the definition of "prolific" to confirm that this is not the case. An apple tree that produces inedible apples is not abundantly productive, therefore not prolific. So, when applied to music, an artist that produces bad music (subjective as it may be) is not abundantly productive, therefore not prolific. It's that simple TO ME. Yet you all continue to tell me I'm wrong. And the only explaination offered up as to my being wrong is either that I'm just wrong or that blue does not equal orange.It may be that simple to you, but it's also wrong. You simply misunderstand what the word means. It's OK -- you're not alone, obviously. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 If I put out 179 albums this year, can I win the award, since the decade isn't over? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The High Heat Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Whatever happened to Dick Ctionary? I thought he'd live for this moment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 If I put out 179 albums this year, can I win the award, since the decade isn't over?I love you like a brother. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I hated GBV for a long time and all I had was B000. It was equal parts B000 and the insufferable Pollardites. I do love it now, but Alien Lanes is what made GBV/Pollard click for me. Specifically, As We Go Up, We Go Down. And yes, From a Compound Eye is the shiznit. Look it up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Runaway Jim Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 It may be that simple to you, but it's also wrong. You simply misunderstand what the word means. It's OK -- you're not alone, obviously. I just disagree with you. And obviously, others do too. I don't consider your opinion to be the end-all, be-all on the matter, but it seems you do, which is thick-headed and just kind of assey. I'm glad it's become so important to you to continually tell me I am wrong. But I'm not. And again, thanks everyone for the GBV recommendations. It's pay day and I play to stop and try to find one or two of their records and give them a shot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 If pictures are worth 1,000 words, I've got about a gazillion for this one. Damn that pic is great. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Does it bother you that much? no, but you do! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I just disagree with you. And obviously, others do too. I don't consider your opinion to be the end-all, be-all on the matter, but it seems you do, which is thick-headed and just kind of assey. I'm glad it's become so important to you to continually tell me I am wrong. But I'm not.You are wrong. This is not a matter of opinion. You are desperately willing something to be true that simply isn't. And now you're insulting me. All I ever did was say you're wrong, which is a perfectly civilized thing to do. I may have been terse, but I have not insulted you, questioned your intelligence, etc. -- I've merely stated that you are incorrect. You're the one who decided to take that extra step into nastiness, so, have fun with that. And you're still wrong. I am not expressing my "opinion." I am stating fact. If you don't like facts, I don't really know what else to say. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Runaway Jim Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 You're a piece of work, man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tinnitus photography Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I hated GBV for a long time and all I had was B000. is it possible to hate a record which contains "Gold Heart Mountain Queen Directory," "Tractor Rape Chain," "Peephole" and "Queen of Cans and Jars"? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
plasticeyeball Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 is it possible to hate a record which contains "Gold Heart Mountain Queen Directory," "Tractor Rape Chain," "Peephole" and "Queen of Cans and Jars"? Oh, it's possible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tinnitus photography Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 You are wrong. This is not a matter of opinion. You are desperately willing something to be true that simply isn't. while interpretation of word meanings isn't as cut and dried w/ certainty as mathematics, i think Cryptique is correct and it boggles my mind that others can't grasp this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 You're a piece of work, man.I like to think so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tinnitus photography Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Oh, it's possible. you might just not like killer wigouts. which is ok, i guess. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.