MusicMistress said:
The term was invented in the 90's ,by MTV, in case you weren't aware of it's origin.
Actually I suspect that you're wrong about the term "hair metal" having been invented by MTV - but that's completely irrelevant. The point is that the term exists and is widely understood to refer to a particular subgenre of rock.
MusicMistress said:
When Glam bands were having their hey dey, there was no term "Hair Metal". Fans of grunge and punk called these bands "hair bands" to deride the music and the culture.
Irrelevant. I'm not exactly a big fan of grunge but I understand the meaning of the term "hair metal" - meaning the term is in widespread currency.
MusicMistress said:
Today, however, true music enthusiasts have an appreciation for all music and wont cast dispersions that redicule any form of music by what a band's hair looked like in the 80's.
Granted. But who here has cast dispersions on or ridiculed any musical genre based on what "a band's hair looked like in the 80's"?
MusicMistress said:
If you cant take the arguments seriously, then why start such a controversial thread?
If the arguments were better, I could take them seriously. Yours girl is a case in point. You've studiously avoided addressing the question of the thread and have chosen instead to challenge my usage of a term in widespread currency.
And since when is Heart such a controversial topic?
MusicMistress said:
You seem to be a catalyst to arguments.
Hmmmmm. And you've resurrected this thread to do something other than argue about whether I should even be using the term "hair metal"? A clear case of the pot calling the kettle black don't you think?
MusicMistress said:
I agree your time would be better served sipping cognac, pipe in hand, and reading Finnegan's Wake.
Yuck to the first two. But "Finnegan's Wake" you say?
MusicMistress said:
I find it extremely humorus that you would mention computer science 101, like this weighs any merit in a music discussion.
And your mention of cognac, a pipe and "Finnegan's Wake" does then? You could also try rereading your first post. You went on for several paragraphs without even once mentioning Heart, the subject of this thread.
MusicMistress said:
As far as being politically motivated to NOT call the bands "hair bands", is rubbish. There is nothing political about glam metal.
On that point you're correct. I apologize. Of course your motivation wasn't "political". The word I want is "frivolous". Your objection is frivolous. Satisfied?
MusicMistress said:
You just don't get it do you? Glam metal was about raunchy lyrics, great guitar hooks, looking good, decadence, and having fun.
No. You're the one who doesn't get it. When have I made any blanket statements about glam metal? You're making the mistake of assuming that anybody who uses the term hair metal must be a fan of grunge and guilty of deriding glam/hair bands. But that assumption is simply frivolous.
MusicMistress said:
If Glam Metal was so terrible....
Had I said glam metal "was so terrible", then perhaps I'd be in a position to answer your other questions. But since I haven't, you'll have to ask somebody else.
MusicMistress said:
Now take that to night school 101!
Hopefully not to a Logic 101 course! Your arguments would have me flunking out the first day.
MusicMistress said:
Exactly, there is a sound that accompanies glam metal, not just a look.
Yes, I agree! Now did Heart, or did Heart not, record music that fit that sound? I must admit that I'm not clear as to what you were trying to demonstrate by comparing the two Heart songs.