John Maus is a fraud

[pitilesscensor]

Since you responded to everyone but me I'll post this again. I'd like to hear your response.

I don't know how else to say it but John Maus is a fraud, his live shows where he basically screams over his previously recorded music are cringe inducing. I also think he has mental problems, during interviews he rambles on and on like a lunatic and can't stay focused on a single topic for more than three minutes and never says anything concrete, typical post modern mumbo jumbo. His hero's are scumbags like Theodor Adorno and their likes meanwhile he sucks at the capitalist teat he and others that share his philosophy supposedly despise by being a part of the "culture industry" they demonize. I used to like his music now all I can think about when I listen to it is how toxic it's underlying message is and how insane and out of touch with reality post modern marxists are.

Just because John makes music and does live shows to make money doesn't make him a "fraud." This is a basic tu quoque fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

Also, I don't think you fully comprehend what a product of the "culture industry" is. John's music does not and is not intended to make his audience passive or docile. It isn't the same old mainstream garbage that these (to quote John) "candy ass manikins" at the VMA's are making.

As for Adorno, he was warning us of a society that is docile and passive because these were the conditions in Germany before Hitler came to power.

I agree that vapid consumption of repetitive garbage intended to normalize and promote individualism is obscene and dangerous. However, this couldn't be further from what John Maus represents or participates in.

[AppTrans]

I don't see a point investing time in things I dislike - it's really that elementary. It sounds like you're angry and don't want to be incorrect about projecting your fixed assessment of a man and his work. Perhaps you felt duped and felt you needed to police us...which is unconstructively perverted and far from noble. Haven't heard from a single one you've saved, man.

Artifice is fraudulent...it's an illusion. All rational animals are frauds; they've invented language and have assigned meaning to things that don't have meaning. What's the fucking point?

Don't know if you're on a mission to convert people from the transgressive ways of John Maus (sounds fucking ridiculous) because that's really the "superiority" element at hand. Don't want to dismiss constructive areas of existence, but yeah, I'll be lazy when it comes to a gland's opinion on something.

[Harry]

I don't see a point investing time in things I dislike - it's really that elementary.

Donald Trump is representative of the ugliness of humankind
Nothing to admire whatsoever

sorry app, but i have to point out disingenuity when i see it.

i think richard is just expressing an opinion and has every right to. i don't have to agree with him, and he's not winning any converts to his view anyway.

The reason I say lock the thread is simple - there is no conversation to be had with a troll.

then don't engage in the conversation!
shutting down debate is a form of censorship which is becoming all too prevalent nowadays.

[AppTrans]

yo Harry, I don't have to invest very much time to post gifs and a couple lines on the internet, which if you didn't know, is designed for laziness no "disingenuity" here. I'll reword it: I have no manifestos on things I dislike - it's kind of a double standard for whatever ideology I might possess. But Harry, it seems that you were searching for that call-out. Good to know.
I certainly have opinions on things I don't like. Who doesn't?

I don't know, Richard, your opinion is valid because it's your opinion - the initial thought was "Mausspace attack"
It sounds like you're smart... just some asinine territorial pissing nonsense on my end

[Harry]

not trying to be facetious here richard, but can you educate me as to what a post modern marxist is and why maus is qualifies as one?
i've been trying to look it up and the terms "post modern" and "marxist" seem to be opposing views anyway?
i can't make head or tails of it, being the non-academic i am. do you mean cultural marxist?

[dadajack]

I don't know how else to say it but John Maus is a fraud, his live shows where he basically screams over his previously recorded music are cringe inducing. I also think he has mental problems, during interviews he rambles on and on like a lunatic and can't stay focused on a single topic for more than three minutes and never says anything concrete, typical post modern mumbo jumbo. His hero's are scumbags like Theodor Adorno and their likes meanwhile he sucks at the capitalist teat he and others that share his philosophy supposedly despise by being a part of the "culture industry" they demonize. I used to like his music now all I can think about when I listen to it is how toxic it's underlying message is and how insane and out of touch with reality post modern marxists are.

Richard D. James is a rich hipster's fraud

[jessepidaflop]

I don't know how else to say it but John Maus is a fraud, his live shows where he basically screams over his previously recorded music are cringe inducing. I also think he has mental problems, during interviews he rambles on and on like a lunatic and can't stay focused on a single topic for more than three minutes and never says anything concrete, typical post modern mumbo jumbo. His hero's are scumbags like Theodor Adorno and their likes meanwhile he sucks at the capitalist teat he and others that share his philosophy supposedly despise by being a part of the "culture industry" they demonize. I used to like his music now all I can think about when I listen to it is how toxic it's underlying message is and how insane and out of touch with reality post modern marxists are.

Richard D. James is a rich hipster's fraud

you don't like aphex twin? :-(
not trying to deviate, that just hurt a bit

[LadyLazarus]

I'm not gonna lock this thread and I can pretty safely assume Dean won't, either. Everyone is entitled to post as long as you're not some spambot selling Nikes and diet pills (in which case I will reign hell fire upon your spamming ass). Richard has not disrespected anyone here. No reason to get personal. No one has to agree! Anyway I'm not at all surprised that John Maus continues to arouse strong emotions one way or the other. Discussion is good. Hate is better than apathy. I'm used to people hating my music, from John Maus to Joey Pizza Slice. I just don't really care.

[LadyLazarus]

P.S. I dig Aphex Twin. Selected Ambient Works 85-92 is a good album to paint to.

[Gibby]

it's your forum. i just didn't see any real engagement here, just trolling.

[Butterslice]

Malicious or not, this richard fellow seems to have used a tactic common on the likes of Youtube and Facebook, but one I've never seen on such a small relaxed online forum. That is, he made a bunch of assertions about a subject without backing them up or fleshing them out (why is Maus a fraud? How do you define "fradulent" artistic behavior? Why is Adorno a "scumbag?" How exactly do his interviews indicate mental illness? Etc.) and proceeded to selectively respond to comments containing fallacies and showing general unwillingness to tease a cogent argument out of him, thus creating the false narrative that the board is composed of "rigid" and "intolerant" individuals. Those who did want to see a fully developed argument from him and discuss the issue at length, or who offered positive and encouraging remarks were ignored. This individual may have meant no harm, but his comments are fairly characteristic of the juvenile "free speech" crew that is more concerned about whether an argument or opinion is totally welcomed rather than whether or not it has any veracity. I invite him to return and address this point. I have a few questions that concern his intriguing first comments.

[RareGoat]

Malicious or not, this richard fellow seems to have used a tactic common on the likes of Youtube and Facebook, but one I've never seen on such a small relaxed online forum. That is, he made a bunch of assertions about a subject without backing them up or fleshing them out (why is Maus a fraud? How do you define "fradulent" artistic behavior? Why is Adorno a "scumbag?" How exactly do his interviews indicate mental illness? Etc.) and proceeded to selectively respond to comments containing fallacies and showing general unwillingness to tease a cogent argument out of him, thus creating the false narrative that the board is composed of "rigid" and "intolerant" individuals. Those who did want to see a fully developed argument from him and discuss the issue at length, or who offered positive and encouraging remarks were ignored. This individual may have meant no harm, but his comments are fairly characteristic of the juvenile "free speech" crew that is more concerned about whether an argument or opinion is totally welcomed rather than whether or not it has any veracity. I invite him to return and address this point. I have a few questions that concern his intriguing first comments.

NAILED IT.
Thank you.

[possiblegrenade]

Malicious or not, this richard fellow seems to have used a tactic common on the likes of Youtube and Facebook, but one I've never seen on such a small relaxed online forum. That is, he made a bunch of assertions about a subject without backing them up or fleshing them out (why is Maus a fraud? How do you define "fradulent" artistic behavior? Why is Adorno a "scumbag?" How exactly do his interviews indicate mental illness? Etc.) and proceeded to selectively respond to comments containing fallacies and showing general unwillingness to tease a cogent argument out of him, thus creating the false narrative that the board is composed of "rigid" and "intolerant" individuals. Those who did want to see a fully developed argument from him and discuss the issue at length, or who offered positive and encouraging remarks were ignored. This individual may have meant no harm, but his comments are fairly characteristic of the juvenile "free speech" crew that is more concerned about whether an argument or opinion is totally welcomed rather than whether or not it has any veracity. I invite him to return and address this point. I have a few questions that concern his intriguing first comments.

NAILED IT.
Thank you.

[LadyLazarus]

I ain't afraida no trolls. Impotent arguments are quickly shown up for what they are and you don't have to be sycophantic to totally disarm them.

[hugopresser]

I think Richard should be allowed to express his opinion without everyone taking a giant dump on him