>It is appropriate of you to call me out on it, but I must plea
>cop that my knowledge isn't deep enough of the other genre to
>provide too specific data.

understand that my point wasn't to clown or trap you, i just honestly disagree. i could be wrong, of course, so that's why i asked.


>The idea seems to have been
>consistent enough in my own lifetime that I have no reason to
>assume otherwise about the past.

i think that's a mistake. classical music isn't pop music, and maybe the masses didn't appreciate the genius of certain works during the composers' lifetime, but the composers were largely appreciated overall while living, or at least shortly after. if they weren't then we'd probably not know them or their works now. jazz, same thing: while there was catchy jazz (swing, big band, etc.), the maverick musicians who presented more challenging music also had a popular following. i'm not speaking in absolutes here, implying that for a while in jazz and electronic music the most popular artists were also the "best" (an objective concept i don't even believe in anyway). all i'm saying is that high artistic quality and skill were embraced widely until relatively recently in these genres.


>I assume that
>there are always social and institutional factors that result
>in the popularity of some at the expense of the innovators.

in modern times, i agree. regarding classical, i think some composers struggled more than others during their lifetimes for various reasons (race not being as significant then, as i understand most classical composers were or passed for "white"), but if the artistic quality was high enough i think they would've been embraced, their works celebrated and performed before the monarchy/church/government/masses.


>With regards to electronic music, the examples that come to
>mind are those like Fatboy Slim or Prodigy, that despite their
>greater contemporary popularity have not held as much
>historical esteem in succeeding years and more
>innovative/influential peers like Aphex Twin.

i was hoping you'd bring them up because i wanted to say that the popular/breakthrough electronic artists of the late '90s while not being *as* talented as RDJ and his peers were still talented nonetheless, and as i said above, i wasn't speaking in absolutes as far as the most talented = the most popular, just popular. as far as historical esteem, that's what i'm getting at, that younger or just sheltered listeners are being unexposed to these great talents thanks to close-minded, politically motivated critics, bloggers, wannabe writers, and former fans who've turned their backs on the music for various reasons.