Thinks he's smart

>Thinks he's smart
>Writes surface-level pop commentary about obvious subjects
>Gets sucked off by normies who enjoy seeing something slightly more clever than they are

Attached: GUEST_30afc52b-3e3a-4f82-81d6-59ecae61781a.jpg (488x488, 46K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/swRkBEDmaqk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-irony
youtube.com/watch?v=isjKlXGSve0
youtube.com/watch?v=wKrSYgirAhc
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Thinks he's smart
>Writes surface-level pop commentary about pop music on a brazilian bongo tuning forum
>Hopes to get sucked off by normies who enjoy people criticising normies

>Thinks he's smart
>Writes meta posts turning the OP's words against him
>Hopes to get sucked off by normies who think that's clever

>brainlet can't into post-irony

>post-irony requires not being a brainlet

samefag

why do you even care about lyrics
it's a really well produced pop rock throwback album

>throwaway album
ftfy

FJM is a pure example of people liking an artist simply because they were told to.

He's pretty talented but he either fails to or flat out refuses to understand the most fundamental point of songwriting– be CONCISE. If you can't make profound, incisive or political points without beating your audience to death with heavy-handed images or overblown metaphors, then you shouldn't be trying to make those points in the first place. There's no poetry to his lyrics, its all just 'hypercritical self-aware midwest hipster' bullshit. If I wanted to listen to his level of discourse I'd go to a slam poetry night, at least their poems are shorter than his songs

>B-but I do get it

Why do you care about what I wrote in my post? Because words mean things, and if they're going to be there, they might as well mean something worthwhile. Lyric writing is often neglected and said to "not matter" simply because it is far more difficult to write good lyrics than good music, just like how it's far more difficult to appreciate good lyrics than good music.
Putting this simply: if lyrics "don't matter" to you, you're dumb. You don't understand what good lyrics can do for a song. You have a sub 120 IQ.

You're underestimating his subtlety
youtu.be/swRkBEDmaqk
Listen to this a few times and explain the genius

cover is cringe so probably won’t give it s listen

post of the year

Naming something "generic pop song #3" and then writing an actual soul-bearing song isn't subtlety. It's a cheap trick. It's going "ha ha see i did the opposite aren't I clever"

It's as on-the-nose as it gets.

So he writes pseudo-satirical pop songs that are just as underwhelming as his more pretentious and long-winded ones? Wow, he really must be a genius huh

>you don't like the same things as i do, so you're stupid

Attached: 1505728192247.jpg (678x1024, 75K)

Not at all what I'm saying, not even close. If you like different lyrics than me, that's fine, you can have your tastes. But if you think that lyrics don't/shouldn't matter, so you just ignore them? Yeah, you're a fucking retard. Sub 120 IQ.

That's not what's genius, post irony is the distain toward ironic sensibilities but being unable to return to sincere sensibilities
The title is there out of spite, you are supposed ignore it out of spite engaging with the post ironic mode
The song is genius because it deconstructs his own relationship with God, a big part of his life growing up etc the entire I love you honeybear album is about God and not his wife
The important parts, he sings about how he's subservient only if God NEEDS him, and that they are both equally benign
Anyone with a religious past would be able to identify that is the ultimate reconciliation with a religious past etc
Its brilliant song writing and a wonder that he can capture it in song

Wagner turning in his grave rn

I said in my previous post:
> if they're going to be there, they might as well mean something worthwhile.
>if they're going to be there
You can obviously leave lyrics out of your music and that's fine. Especially if you can't write them, for the love of god then please leave them out. But if you write a pile of sloppy, on-the-nose, artless dogshit verse and try to pretend like that's not what it is because "lyrics don't matter tee hee," then you're a retard.

for a second I thought you were talking about fantano.

See

>a song is genius because of its lyrical content
I value a more holistic approach in songwriting– nuanced lyricism is good but it isn't everything, especially when your approach to structure is just 'let me ramble on until I stumble onto an interesting point that would make a good chorus'. At least with Sun Kil Moon its an aesthetic choice and ties in with his direct style storytelling, for FJM its simply because he's so self-absorbed that everything he touches turns to wank. FJM is the Steve Vai of lyricism, prove me wrong

The level of artistry, that being experience and the ability to communicate it within a certain paradigm is what makes it genius
You don't have to like it, I prefer pre-surreal art over surreal art because of it uncertain nature but I can understand surreal art, which is essentially what your argument boils down to now that I've pointed out the clear value of FJM and his pieces

> post irony is the distain(sic) toward ironic sensibilities but being unable to return to sincere sensibilities
That is not what post-irony is. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-irony
>The title is there out of spite, you are supposed ignore it out of spite engaging with the post ironic mode
Yeah you can describe it that way but at the end of the day he's doing the exact same thing as a teenage girl sarcastically titling a ukulele video in her bedroom "another dumb song #2" - it's a cheap trick that anyone can do.
>The song is genius because it deconstructs his own relationship with God, a big part of his life growing up etc the entire I love you honeybear album is about God and not his wife
The important parts, he sings about how he's subservient only if God NEEDS him, and that they are both equally benign
Anyone with a religious past would be able to identify that is the ultimate reconciliation with a religious past etc
Its brilliant song writing and a wonder that he can capture it in song
It didn't strike me as genius. It struck me as sincere and soul-bearing - it wasn't bad, but it wasn't as clever as FJM wants me to think it is, and that's my problem with him. The "post-irony" thing is a gimmick, it's not big-brained or deep or hard to understand. It's just not that clever.

>why do you even care about lyrics
So you admit upfront you're retarded?

I like this album. His best since I Love You, Honeybear. I like Father John Misty and none of you can stop me. I don’t even want to explain why nor could I because I’m not smart enough to articulate my point.

>I prefer pre-surreal art over surreal art
>which is essentially what your argument boils down to
what are you talking about? there is no surrealism in the fact that harmony can indicate certain emotions, moods or feelings far better than any lyrics ever could. That's not surrealism, that's just the synaesthetic nature of music (everything you can say about musical harmony you can also say about the function of colour in visual art, this kind of exchange between mediums is nothing new). What FJM does is write vapid indie-folk songs with slightly more lyrical depth than one would typically expect from the genre. However lyrical depth cannot elevate the music if the potent emotionality and depth of expression isn't there in the instrumental, and I personally don't think it is. You want a lyrically inspired record that doesn't scrimp on the meat and bones of the song, go listen to Sufjan Stevens.

>That is not what post-irony is.
>Distain isn't sincere
Hmm..
>Yeah you can describe it that way but at the end of the day he's doing the exact same thing as a teenage girl sarcastically titling a ukulele video in her bedroom
But it's not, that's irony masking sincerity - it's not a cheap trick either, it's how people communicate when old modes become vilified - oh she's putting out music she thinks she's sooo goood etc vs she's aware that I will be upset by her talent and is appealing for my sympathy so on so forth, FJM goes a step further, sincere song, sympathise, isn't communicating useless - it's necessary for the same effect
>it wasn't as clever as FJM wants me to think it is
Cleary you're delusional from outrage if you can't comprehend storytelling in song, it's not genius because he's saying look how profound, he's not or because it's post ironic, it's genius because he captures an entire journey, which in reality is not a straightforward as the song makes it out to be, in a simple song, it's so simple that once you grasp the idea it keeps pouring out, it's brilliant

i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with post-ironic personalities in general. you see them everywhere on twitter, tumblr, here, reddit, it’s a fucking epidemic and i’m sick of it.

>post-irony
>a new mode
yeah, no, this has been the norm amongst the indie underground scene for 3 quarters of a decade now.

Not that user, but
>it's genius because he captures an entire journey, which in reality is not a straightforward as the song makes it out to be, in a simple song, it's so simple that once you grasp the idea it keeps pouring out, it's brilliant
Yeah, it feels like genius if you've never heard a halfway decent folk album in your life I guess. Let's not kid ourselves, FJM is an okay songwriter- his songs aren't elegantly simple because his simpler songs feels too thin in their lyrical content to stand on their own.

I mean hell, FJM basically captured that journey as you described it perfectly on I Love You Honeybear. That album was genuine and interesting because he was singing about something he actually gives two shits about (his wife) instead of being pseud.

Packaging
I'm saying you like your things to be delivered in a certain manner but you're also saying that things not packaged as such are bad
No argument that sufjan is better than FJM but sufjan isn't doing what FJM is and if you were able to grasp what it is he is doing you would understand why he's a worthwhile listen

yo this guy's mad about words LMAO

2020
>i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with post-ironic personalities
1985
>i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with ironic personalities
1850
>i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with sincere personalities
800
>i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with pre-modern personalities
Historically; no
I love you honeybear is him projecting God onto his wife not coming to terms with his own suffering in relation to god

>>i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with post-ironic personalities
>>i think there needs to be a state-sponsored genocide of people with ironic personalities
both of these are good ideas.

Chronic irony or post-irony should be considered a personality disorder. You ever talk to people like that? Totally insufferable.

the fact that FJM inspires this much autism only proves to me that he’s right and deserving of the spotlight he receives. Indie rock needs more pretension again.

I always thought this was just story of a dude who takes himself eay too seriously. Josh Tillman is a fucking dork irl and that's why his FJM persona is so intertaining. Either way his sexy arrangements will always make me come back for more

Attached: 1556768264755m.jpg (1024x813, 112K)

FJM is a character you retard.

I was going to write a SA on why your a dumbass but i'd rather not argue on the autism fest that is fjm's lore

nobody has ever complained about people with sincere personalities, and rightfully so. you are full of dog shit and you know it.

>fjm fans

Attached: 1556223863487.jpg (349x242, 67K)

> it's necessary for the same effect
Yeah no. If he titled the song something sincere, even blatant, like "my journey with god," nothing would have been taken away from what he's saying in the song. It is unnecessary, and it is faux-clever.
>Cleary you're delusional from outrage if you can't comprehend storytelling in song, it's not genius because he's saying look how profound, he's not or because it's post ironic, it's genius because he captures an entire journey, which in reality is not a straightforward as the song makes it out to be, in a simple song,
Clearly you're delusional, because the whole time you were talking about post-irony and how genius it is, and now you're saying that this song isn't genius because of post-irony, it's because of stoytelling. I already told you that I liked the sincere, soul-bearing aspect of this song, I get that he's telling a story. It's not GENIUS, that part of it is just good - it's definitely tainted by the silly "so random" title though.

I didn't even want to talk about YOUR favorite FJM song, which is actually ok as a song. I want to talk about his dogshit songs like Pure Comedy or Ballad of the Dying Man. Two of the most insufferable proselytizing clown shows ever written.

kek he looks like charls in that pic

Also
>>That is not what post-irony is.
>>Distain isn't sincere
>Hmm..
I don't know what you're trying to say with this, or what you think I said, but what you described literally is not post-irony.
>post irony is the distain toward ironic sensibilities but being unable to return to sincere sensibilities
Post-irony is either a return to sincerity from irony, often acknowledging the irony in the process, or a state where you can no longer tell whether something is being ironic or sincere. It has nothing to do necessarily with DISDAIN for irony or not being able to return to sincerity. That is your own highly specific invented interpretation of it. Post-irony achieves either (i) having something absurd be taken seriously or (ii) be unclear as to whether it is meant to be ironic. IT's also gay as hell.

>Mozart
>Beethoven
>FJM
One of these doesn't belong, can user guess which one?

FJM of course because he is way more talented and is a musical genius unlike those old farts
These are my favorite albums btw

Attached: numale-gay_music.jpg (520x520, 125K)

>sufjan but not carrie&lowell
>arcade fire but not reflektor
>green day
>tpab
>RTJ

oh no no no no no no

I dislike FJM but that user’s picks are better than yours. He even picked the one non shit FJM album.

funeral and illinoise are very amateurish, going back they're rough, even cringy, compared to their newer, more mature stuff. If you actually think funeral is better than reflektor, you're either a child or have the mind of one. even contra is the worst VW album. Absolutely not better than my picks.

New modes are a response to the failings of the old modes so by definition yes they have, it's often referred to as naivety
The opposite is true, it's the ability to recognise your surroundings that brings on these personalities, a post ironic person would get on much better in today's landscape than an ironic one and even more so than a sincere one
Of course it would have it wouldve lost all subtlety, it wouldve been a preachy. What's clever is the phrasing, to say God needs him as opposed to saying he needs god forces a post ironic narrative, its both sincere and ironic if you think about the endless implications and its a better resolution than its ironic and sincere equivalents - it's historic, showing how the species enslaved themselves to a deity and eventually reconciled. If you're looking for something more profound than that you simply won't find it, I think you need to consider the possibility that I'm right
FJM isn't the be all end all, album wise I love u is his best, pure comedy is overrated etc but there is a lot to him if you just want, the night josh tillman came to our apartment is the be all end all anti-incel soundtrack, absolutely phenomenal
He does kek
Distain at irony is post ironic, it's a sincere reflection on irony, and generally the only one as the transition beyond irony is due to irony being a terrible
>having something absurd be taken seriously
Telling an omnipotent being who created you "I'm still here for you if you need me, neither one of us matters" and implying it's the final hurrah for dealing with religion is very much that
>IT's also gay as hell.
Yes, do judge something you only just discovered
Oh you joker, you

>uses cringy as a means of legitimate criticism
If you find songs like Casimir Pulaski Day and In The Backseat cringy, you are a soulless husk.

>showing how the species enslaved themselves to a deity and eventually reconciled. If you're looking for something more profound than that you simply won't find it, I think you need to consider the possibility that I'm right
LMAO. THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
This perspective seems deep to you, but it's a perspective I grew out of when I turned 15. It's one of the most basic, arrogant, pretentious takes on God you can make. You need to consider the possibility that there are perspectives above and beyond yours that are far more complex and developed. Tillman's "God is dead" stuff is on the level of early-2000s era "new atheism," appealing to edgy teenagers.

>Yes, do judge something you only just discovered
I've been involved in and known about post-ironic internet culture longer than Josh Tillman has been making music. You literally defined it incorrectly and are so impressed with yourself for even knowing the term that you assume anyone who disagrees with you has only just learned about it. The reality is I find it uninteresting precisely because I understand it better than you, just like how I find FJM obvious and trite because I understand him better than you, not the other way around. Learn a little humility or at least attempt to consider that the person you're talking to isn't coming from the place you assume. Tillman's ideas are new to you, so you are impressed with them. They are not new to me.

Wow rekt! He’s got a beer belly too

Like game of thrones

Not him but Im curious, what other artist has done songs about God needing his followers and not the other way around?

Wow harsh and
true

Lyrics only matter somewhat. Yeah yeah yeah in a song can be a good lyric but is a terrible poem. Sorry it’s nice when a song has great lyrics but they’re absolutely secondary to melody. You can make up any meaning to lyrics, you as the listener are giving them meaning.

Example - when I heard common people when I was 12 I didn’t know what the song was about yet I still liked the song but only later did the lyrics add another layer of depth when I could understand what he was singing about.

>it's historic, showing how the species enslaved themselves to a deity and eventually reconciled
This is a great place for me to explain further why Tillman doesn't impress me. What you're saying here is a BAD historic take. Saying "the species enslaved themselves to a deity" is edgy atheist teenager 101. It's embarrassing. It shows a lack of understanding of religion, how it developed, its philosophies, its personal effects on people who believe in it, the good and subtler bad sides of it, the fact that there are many people much smarter than you who are extremely religious and have very good reasons to be so, and if you tried to go toe-to-toe with them with a take like this you would be absolutely embarrassed. Religion and God are not as simple as you or Tillman think - age will reveal this to you, I cannot explain it in a Yea Forums post, and the reddit atheist stance that he takes on the subject is practically the DEFINITION of what a person does when he THINKS he's far more clever than he actually is. It reveals vast swaths of ignorance, of life experience he does not have, of nuance he is blind to, of possibilities he has not considered. You will never hear someone truly intelligent or wise speak the way Tillman speaks in his songs.

Lyrics matter more depending on the genre. In folk music and hip hop your song can live or die on them alone.

Not artists, but plenty of the "new atheist" guys prattled on with that take for years before Josh Tillman wrote any of it in his songs. Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens - it's an old and tired take, the idea that god didn't invent people, people invented god, it's such a dull and disenchanted and WRONG view of the world and religion. It's an immature and narrow-minded understanding of God and what God can be because it's a reaction primarily to the Catholic idea of an old man in the sky. The reason why it's a bad take is because these people are reacting to the "old man in the sky" god, which is OBVIOUSLY incorrect, but there are so many beautiful, subtle, interesting, even scientific (YES, scientific) possibilities of what a "God" could be that are thrown out by this perspective before they are even considered. This is why it's so bad. I'm sure there's other artists who have edgy atheist songs but I can't name any because I try to avoid them usually.

Im not saying I disagree, it is an immature take. That said how it’s done through a song could matter- it could be used as a mechanism to vent frustration with fate or with the need to feel needed, it may be the take of one’s conceited side. If its balanced with nuance and subtlety it could be interesting. Fjm aint that.

Good songwriting doesn't have to be deep and have hidden meanings, something can be poetically plainspoken

You are insufferably pretentious for thinking that because people like his catchy music they're "normies" and you're some elite fucking music listener that only listens to complex deep music

his lyrics doesn't have to be complicated, people like his lyrics because he's funny. it goes over your head because you have no sense of humor, so you just think it's him trying to be clever and normies sucking it up. when it's really not that deep, he just has a nice voice and he can fucking play an instrument well. there are lots of people like him, it's not that series

serious* fucking autocorrect

Samefag

Now that I think of it Vampire Weekend actually did it fairly well on "Modern Vampires of the City," on it ezra admits wanting to believe in god but not being able to help himself - a much more refined attitude than FJM's. An Of Montreal lyric also handles the idea better than FJM ever did on Gronlandic Edit - youtube.com/watch?v=isjKlXGSve0
"I guess it would be nice to give my heart to a God, but which one - all the churches filled with losers, psycho or confused"
Not exactly subtle, but still, much more mature than Tillman.

Give me your take on what he's saying in the song because neither one of you seems to understand
>God is dead
He's not saying that, he's being religious post ironically, God is good and alive and can't die for the very reason the moment ideas are accepted they have to begin transforming with us and cannot be discarded as the past is set in stone, it's a pro religious song "servitude without being on your knees"
>it's personal effects on people
You're getting closer
>if you tried going toe-to-toe
They would agree because he's not an anti religious atheists
He's not saying anything of the sort that the intellectual dark Web supposedly is
He's not making any implications that people made God, more so that God has no alternative to transform with the people who he created, "if you need me I'll still be here, if either on of us disappears, we both disappear"
Where's the atheist rhetoric, I don't see it

Attached: zizek_frown.png (916x935, 918K)

>Where's the atheist rhetoric, I don't see it
*ahem*
youtube.com/watch?v=wKrSYgirAhc
"Oh, their religions are the best

They worship themselves yet they're totally
obsessed
With risen zombies, celestial virgins, magic
tricks, these unbelievable outfits
And they get terribly upset

When you question their sacred texts

Written by woman-hating epileptics"

Tillman is not a pro-religious guy, and the song you're talking about is most certainly not a pro-religious song.

>thinks he's smart
>is on a chan
>responds
You played yourself.

>criticism = anti
For all the talk of being superior to reddit and 15 year olds yikes
Surely religious people are supposed to worship themselves and not God
>Inb4 the Bible is the word of God any pushback is atheism

To expand: of course the song is pro religious, the journey details how to STAY religious given the state of culture and religion within it

>criticism = anti
You misunderstand at every single turn.
It's not just "criticism," it's unhedged, unqualified, bad criticism. It's reddit-tier criticism. "Hur hur christians r just worship magic zombies."
It's a dunce's take on religion.

And again, generic pop song #3 is not pro-religious. He's saying that if he dies, God dies. In other words, he created God, and this God is personal to him - it is a relative God, an imaginary God, serving no purpose other than that of a make believe friend, but he still derives comfort from it. - this is the only good insight of the song, in that it reveals something about his personal attitude and feelings, but it's based on a bad interpretation of God.

>Inb4 the Bible is the word of God any pushback is atheism
I literally said myself that the catholic version of an old man in the sky god was obviously incorrect. The point is that it's not an insightful thing to say by any stretch of the imagination unless you've literally never toyed around with these ideas before.

Ends the song with
>Each other is all we got
Us and religion, the good and bad, its how it is and will be, its criticism in the face of the unchangeable its nowhere near reddit
It would be bad criticism if he was sincere he's not - if he was sincere he wouldn't be religious himself, it's far more a meta commentary than a commentary, the disconnect comes from you not listening to the album with the prerequisite understanding, where you say I misunderstand is you not being able to truly into post irony, I hate having to keep saying post irony it's just something you either get or you don't, I don't even like pure comedy that much as an album but you're thoroughly missing out if you can't engage with I love you the right way

You're wrong and you don't understand post-irony. Post-irony is not a brush that you can paint over things to make them profound, it's not a picture frame that you can swap out to turn a turd into the mona lisa. He's not saying what you think he's saying.

>it's shallow on purpose so it's deep

Liberals like Tillman don't believe in god.

Actually they do now, but only ironically.

isnt that most artists

he should go back to resenting women

Attached: MI0003834125.jpg (500x458, 67K)

OF COURSE IT IS, IRONY WAS, SINCERITY WAS TOO, how is finding new way of looking at things not profound, to successfully synthesise concept is profound, have you been so devoid of originality you have lost touch with what it's like, he makes it look so simple you just gloss over it, you're inept
Im surprised it took this long, don't visit any modern art galleries any time soon you might not be able to handle it
Go read up on tillman, he's religious, he's family is extremely religious hence why all his music is about religion
I love you honey bear is him projecting God onto his wife as a crutch to deal with his relationship with God and getting upset when she isn't an ideal being who he can't help but love anyway with all her flaws, it's great

>Go read up on tillman, he's religious
This is still missing the point tough that you would need background knowledge on the artist to "Get" what he's trying to say. That shows the music cannot convey that on its own merit.

nah i would never use "normies" unironically without the quotations

You assumed he's not religious just because you can't follow storytelling in a song, it's on you not me, I recognise sensibilities, you sperg out if someone says anything you consider "reddit" - that itself is a sensibility, you lack self awareness
This but post ironically (yes I samefagged, but out of spite)

Not even in hip hop, tons of classic hip hop songs have lyrics that work
Well in song form but are nonsensical. Look at Wu Tang most of their lyrics are nonsense

Tillman thinks he's David Foster Wallace but he never manages to be anything further than a John Green

Lol “wrong” it’s so obvious man invented god. It’s not based of Catholicism you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about.