Why isn't my askme question valid?

January 26, 2006 4:32 AM

Is my AskMe question valid?
posted by MetaMonkey to etiquette/policy at 4:32 AM (74 comments total)

I'd like to settle this so my question can either be deleted or be answered without too much noise. I have no desire for a flameout, just want to sort it out one way or the other. I honestly thought it was a good question that could provoke some interesting responses.

I have found nothing in the guidelines or wiki which suggests the question in invalid.

The criticism seems to be that the question is a) unanswerable b) unspecific c) some people don't like Captain Beefheart

Assuming these criticisms are true, a and b apply to a good number of otherwise accepted AskMe post, for example Why did consciousness evolve?

So is the question valid, and if not, why not?
posted by MetaMonkey at 4:32 AM on January 26, 2006

For me, it's got nothing to do with c) whatsoever and everything to do with a) and/or b)

I will have no further part in this discussion, either here or on Ask.Me, as I tried to answer there why I felt the question was invalid, and you can refer to my posts there should you be interested.
posted by benzo8 at 4:41 AM on January 26, 2006

No, it's not valid. It's unanswerable, kinda dumb, and should probably be deleted.

However, people posting things like "Why does Bush suck?" smacks of the kindergarten paste-fights that occur in every thread on the blue once folks realize it will be deleted. That sort of behavior should be flatly unacceptable on AskMe, and I'd timeout those responsible.
posted by cribcage at 4:41 AM on January 26, 2006

it's got nothing to do with c) whatsoever and everything to do with a) and/or b)

Ok, I shall post a brief defense and leave it at that,

a) Unanswerable:

I provided a few ways to answer the question

I'm interested in any kind of answer, for example music theory (though I am not a musician), word play, mood, vocal range etc.

I imagined that Beefheart's music employs a number of unusual or interesting musical tricks and methods, and musicians familiar with his work would be able to explain this somewhat. This was the kind of answer I was expecting. Disillusioned's answer is a step in this direction. Existing articles on the subject of the question are also of interest, for example Melissa May's link.

b) Unspecific

Again I refer to the above quote, I thought I was fairly specific.

My impression is that the question is deemed unanswerable and awkward as there is no definite, factual answer. However, as with many AskMe questions there are many possible answers, though no definite one. I suspect my phasing could have been improved to make the question more appealing, for this (and the spelling errors!) I apologise unreservedly.

Essentially the question seems to be as reasonable an investigation of consciousness and psychology as, say; why is music pleasing to the human mind? why do I get jealous of my girlfriend hanging around with other guys? why am I scared of clowns? All of which would seem like fine AskMe's to me also.
posted by MetaMonkey at 5:04 AM on January 26, 2006

If MetaMonkey had instead phrased the question thusly:
"What elements of musical theory does Captain Beefheart use to create what comes off as such a unique sound?"

Or, perhaps, "what about a particular band or musical group's sound draws me so to them—for example, a certain quality of Captain Beefheart tickles my fancy... what can be said about the elements of his awesomeness, as I perceive it?"

It's not as if he's linking to his own eBay auction of the tunes, here.

Which is to say, he probably should've phrased it slightly differently, but it's not worthy of the "Bush suck" comparisons at all.
posted by disillusioned at 5:04 AM on January 26, 2006

nope. sorry. try again.
posted by crunchland at 5:19 AM on January 26, 2006

I thought the question was valid, if suffering a bit in the vagueness/phrasing department. The word "good" and the word "sucks" do tend to bring out people in AskMe who want to say "Oh no it isn't" for whatever reason.
posted by jessamyn at 5:21 AM on January 26, 2006

Huh, I didn't think it was necessarily that bad. It wasn't a question I was rushing to answer because, you know, I don't care, but I didn't feel compelled to shit on the green. That's not to say that shitting on the green is bad per se. I mean, sure, sometimes I do enjoy a good metaphorical feces tossing. But just, not in that thread. *shrug*
posted by Plutor at 5:27 AM on January 26, 2006

Jessamyn, this is probably a long shot, but could the question be edited to say 'why does Captain Beefheart's music affect my consciousness so dramatically and profoundly'.

This reflects my intention much more clearly, should encourage useful answers and deflect those uninterested by the Captain.

Again, sorry for the poor choice of phrasing, I'm coding when not looking at MeFi so the english language part of my brain is basically turned down to 'low'.
posted by MetaMonkey at 5:27 AM on January 26, 2006

I don't think MetaMonkey is guilty of asking a bad or unanswerable question. At most, he is guilty of asking a question that might seem like a bad question to a lazy reader who was in too much of a rush to snark to bother reading the "more inside."

Benzo8's initial post, as well as those of grouse and fixedgear, were noise, and I flagged them as such. If you truly believe that the best way to help a questioner is to point out a flaw in their question, there are tactful and helpful ways to do it. In the thread in question, I thought Bunglin Jones did a good job of this sort of thing.

Disillusioned offers some good examples of how MetaMonkey might have made his question more snark-proof. I view such preemptive anti-snark precautions the way I view locking your front door--it's something you'd be wise to do, but it's too bad that there are jerks out there who make it a necessity.
posted by yankeefog at 5:29 AM on January 26, 2006

MetaMonkey, it's okay to just add that to the comments, editing a post others have already answered is sort of confusing to people. I think since the question has gone to MetaTalk the snark should stop, so hopefully you'll get some answers to your question now.
posted by jessamyn at 5:31 AM on January 26, 2006

It's a good question. Wait and see if somebody who isn't busy trying to earn a metacool merit badge answers it. Ignore everyone else.
posted by srboisvert at 5:32 AM on January 26, 2006

I'd like to settle this so my question can either be deleted or be answered without too much noise.

it will be (deleted or answered without too much noise). now, what was the point of this metatalk thread?
posted by quonsar at 5:39 AM on January 26, 2006

what was the point of this metatalk thread?

To reduce noise in the AskMe thread.
posted by MetaMonkey at 5:43 AM on January 26, 2006

I've added a comment updating the question to reflect the helpful comments here in MeTa. Thanks for responses all.
posted by MetaMonkey at 5:45 AM on January 26, 2006

However, people posting things like "Why does Bush suck?" smacks of the kindergarten paste-fights that occur in every thread on the blue once folks realize it will be deleted. That sort of behavior should be flatly unacceptable on AskMe, and I'd timeout those responsible.

Yeah, I should have posted that here instead of in the green. But I think benzo8 is right on.
posted by grouse at 5:57 AM on January 26, 2006

There are loads of "help me understand the appeal of X" questions on AskMe. I don't see that this one is any different from those.
posted by dame at 7:39 AM on January 26, 2006

A more pressing question, to me, is why disillusioned is self-linking via a redirect to Pandora in his comment.

He did it here too.
posted by rocketman at 7:47 AM on January 26, 2006

And here, and here.

I'm just pointing it out. He seems like a helpful member, but don't know how the community would feel about this.
posted by rocketman at 7:53 AM on January 26, 2006

This kind of falls into the "what is the deal with x" kind of question which never really works out (popular ones in the past include "why do people like U2? (because they suck)") because there's no real answer and so much of it hinges on one person's opinion of something.
posted by mathowie at 9:02 AM on January 26, 2006

What a ridiculous discussion. It's absurd to act as though there's no possible insight into what makes some music good; there are people whose profession lies in the analysis of music. benzo, I have no idea why you're so hostile to the idea of musical analsysis and bent on this idea of complete subjectivity.

Unfortunately, as I don't know the first thing about Captain Beefheart, I can't provide any assistance. But if you asked the same question about The Beatles or The Beach boys, I could write you pages and pages with specific details, some very technical, others not so much. Just because something is art doesn't mean it can't be analyzed and explained at least partially, that a given person's understanding of the devices used in particular piece of music can't be increased.

It's not at all like a "Why does X suck?" question, which is needlessly inflammatory and not answerable in any constructive way.
posted by ludwig_van at 9:30 AM on January 26, 2006

If musical analysis is a satisfactory answer to "Why is X cool?", then why wouldn't it be a satisfactory answer to, "Why does X suck?"

But if you asked the same question about The Beatles or The Beach boys, I could write you pages and pages with specific details, some very technical, others not so much.

I'm happy for you. I could match you, page for page, with an analysis of why both bands suck. So now we're back where we started, which was benzo08's point that you appear to have misunderstood: If the question could be answered definitively, that answer would constitute a recipe for success; and if such any recipe existed, every musician would be rich and we wouldn't have Stone Temple Pilots.
posted by cribcage at 9:52 AM on January 26, 2006

Self policing is good, but a little goes a long way. I would hate to see everyone get so defensive that more folks feel they have to accompany their posts with preemptive MeTa self-callouts.

It would seem that the best thing to consider in such things is intent. What is the post trying to achieve? In this case, I think they were genuine in looking for insight from others as to the appeal of a musician who is pretty far from anything heard in the mainstream. A little abstract maybe, but so are many other AskMe questions that often generate interesting comments. I found the discussion informative, personally. Maybe the question could have been phrased differently, though.
posted by First Post at 9:54 AM on January 26, 2006

Anyone have an good "first album" to recommend to someone who's never heard of Captain Beefheart? Thanks!
posted by Witty at 9:59 AM on January 26, 2006

and if such any recipe existed

Oh but it does :)

So then, do you cats think all questions to AskMe should have some sort of concrete, quantifiable answer? That all these questions about relationships and emotions and the human experience are just ground clutter? (Certainly I can't defend 'em all...yeesh. I'm just asking if that's what's being advocated.)
posted by First Post at 10:05 AM on January 26, 2006

there's no real answer and so much of it hinges on one person's opinion of something.

Matt, all due respect, but that's just not true. If you read the AskMe thread, you'll see some thoughtful answers that (I suspect) are helpful to the person who asked the question. benzo8 is being a dick for some reason; please don't abet him.
posted by languagehat at 10:12 AM on January 26, 2006

This post was deleted for the following reason: "what's the deal with x?" questions aren't a good use of ask mefi

I'm really rather surprised by the deletion, as the majority of posters in this thread, and Jessamyn seem to consider it valid, and especially because there are some great answers if you wade through the noise.

Also, I don't think it really was a 'what's the deal with x', it was a specific, answerable question that recieved specific answers.

If this is (a new) policy, I suggest putting it in the AskMe guidelines or the wiki, both of which I checked. Though I really don't think deleting a question of this type fits with standard AskMe policy at all.

I don't have energy to fight for this or anything, but I'm rather sad it's been deleted, seems to me it adds a lot more to the AskMe repository than the majority of highly specific entirely self-serving questions.
posted by MetaMonkey at 10:28 AM on January 26, 2006

Jesus Christ, Matt, I just checked and discovered you deleted the thread. That's just not right. You've allowed yourself to be bullied by a couple of people who for reasons best known to themselves waged a jihad against a perfectly good question. If you're going to delete every AskMe that isn't "What is this strange object?" or something else with a unique, concrete answer, AskMe is going to be pretty empty. I could go down the green now and delete a whole bunch of questions that aren't any "better" than this.

I'm disappointed.
posted by languagehat at 10:29 AM on January 26, 2006

On non-preview: I absolutely agree with MetaMonkey.
posted by languagehat at 10:29 AM on January 26, 2006

This kind of falls into the "what is the deal with x" kind of question which never really works out (popular ones in the past include "why do people like U2? (because they suck)") because there's no real answer and so much of it hinges on one person's opinion of something.

Matt, please re-consider. In short: It doesn't really fall into "what is the deal with x", it was working out, it doesn't hinge on opinion and it has nothing to do with U2 or the subjective merit of any other band someone else likes.

It is an answerable question essentially about music theory.

I can see how it looks otherwise at first glance, but please glance again, past the snark and slightly poor question phrasing and reconsider, in light of the great answers toward the end of the thread. The defense rests.
posted by MetaMonkey at 10:37 AM on January 26, 2006

Alternately, what if I posted, "Why is this site an example of a good website? There's something about it that I can't put my finger on that makes it very easy to find the information I'm looking for and I'm not certain what it is."

Good design and good music are often similarly ineffable and there is a body of work about what makes some music work and some music not, just like design. Seems to me some of this work was starting to come out in the thread before it got derailed.
posted by stet at 10:48 AM on January 26, 2006

I thought it was a stupid question until I saw some of the answers. I had dismissed Beefheart as noise that some people insisted on claiming to like so that they could be "different". The links provided by some of the helpful members cause me to reconsider. I may need to give it a second listen.
posted by Carbolic at 11:14 AM on January 26, 2006

First: "Bullied"? "Waged a jihad"? That's quite a lot of melodrama, considering MetaMonkey posted this thread himself. Maybe downshift the indignation a notch or two...?

Second: I don't understand how this question was different from the U2 question. If you believe it is, please explain why.

Finally: Let me try restating your defense. "Matt, this deletion is unfair because if I had simply asked for an analysis of Captain Beefheart's music, the question would have been OK." Now if that's your objection, then I agree. But we've discussed before, and agreed, that AskMe questions are deleted if they explicitly mention homework; whereas if the poster omits why he's asking, we let it stay. Maybe that policy is semantic and maybe it's arbitrary — I agree, it's both — but that's the way AskMe has always been, and this instance seems no different.
posted by cribcage at 11:30 AM on January 26, 2006

Well, undelete the question, reword it as MetaMonkey requested, delete the unhelpful noise (including my own) and preserve the answers given, if that helps.

Here's the thing: benzo8 was flat wrong. It is possible to discuss art and what makes a particular record/artist/work remarkable without invoking personal taste. It happened here, for instance. To be pedantic, the question asked "Why is this poem so widely anthologized?" but how far off is that from "Why is this poem considered so good?" If we have the ability to show a poster why he or she should reconsider a poem with unclear merits, why shouldn't we be able to explain to someone why they might actually love a record?

Not being able to explain the "why" myself, I posted a link. However, others were able to articulate it and very well, especially sleepy pete, whom I encouraged to post in that thread. It is upsetting to see what he and others wrote purged for no good reason.

I am asking as a person who values AskMe very much: please reinstate this question.

(Witty: Try Lick My Decals Off, Baby as a starter course.)
posted by melissa may at 11:50 AM on January 26, 2006

Well, undelete the question, reword it as MetaMonkey requested, delete the unhelpful noise (including my own) and preserve the answers given, if that helps.

That won't help. Significantly rewording a question and then pruning the thread that that question didn't generate in order to justify the undeletion is like three different flavors of wrong.
posted by cortex at 11:58 AM on January 26, 2006

(That is, a simple undeletion would be better than a contrived and essentialy fictional replacement. I don't agree often with the "deletions are untenable violations" camp at the comment level, but reworking a thread like that is just ridiculous. If it can't stand as it is, it oughtn't stand at all.)
posted by cortex at 12:00 PM on January 26, 2006

languagehat: If you're going to delete every AskMe that isn't "What is this strange object?" or something else with a unique, concrete answer, AskMe is going to be pretty empty.

Did you look at the AskMe page before posting this? It's full today of non-chatty questions.

Many of you are claiming that since there are methods of analysis that can determine whether and why Captain Beefheart is good this is therefore a good AskMe question. OK, then does every MeFite get to ask "Why is [musician/writer/artist/architect/choreographer/TV chef/race-car driver] so good?" once a week? That'll be fun.
posted by nicwolff at 12:01 PM on January 26, 2006

melissa may: You're kind of sending witty into the deep end of the pool. Why not start at the beginning with Safe As Milk?
posted by StickyCarpet at 12:02 PM on January 26, 2006

Ok, then leave it be. Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with the original wording. Noise is pruned all the time from AskMe threads, so you can reclassify that from a flavor of wrong to a common AskMe beverage.

I do think there's something wrong with deleting a question that produced great answers, or with any deletion that's not of noise.

(And yeah, Safe As Milk. Duh. I should have stayed out of the pool altogether today, or stuck with the Dead Man's Float.)
posted by melissa may at 12:06 PM on January 26, 2006

...ask "Why is [musician/writer/artist/architect/choreographer/TV chef/race-car driver] so good?" once a week? That'll be fun.

You mean it wouldn't be fun?

I'd like to know what makes Mario Batali's food so special, I'd like a choreographer to explain to me exactly what was Martha Graham's contribution to dance, I'd even have a passing interest in what makes one race car driver better than another.

Not in terms of someone's feelings about these things, but about their observed perceptions, analysis, and historical context.

Especially if the subject is pretty much universally recognized as uniquely significant.

Why shouldn't that be fun?
posted by StickyCarpet at 12:12 PM on January 26, 2006

Noise is pruned all the time from AskMe threads, so you can reclassify that from a flavor of wrong to a common AskMe beverage.

Granted, but noise is deleted to serve the thread. If the thread itself is of questionable merit (obviously a contentious "if" in this case, but bear with me), then the notion of deleting noise becomes more like the notion of masking reasonable dissent to disguese the flawed nature of the premise. So we're not talking about the same sort of beverage at all, in that case.

I thought the answers were interesting. I knew nothing about the topic. But that alone is poor justification for not deleting a thread -- any number of poor questions could generate interesting responses. Trying to defend the question after the fact on that basis seems silly considering that deleted threads stick around, these days -- the answers are not lost to the curious.
posted by cortex at 12:14 PM on January 26, 2006

And is anybody really worried that every member is going to post a new question once a week along the lines of: my dog swallowed a dime, my dog swallowed a euro, my dog swallowed a jiao, or my dog swallowed a baht...
posted by StickyCarpet at 12:25 PM on January 26, 2006

Why shouldn't that be fun?

StickyCarpet, you're right -- learning those things (and things like them) could well be fun.

But utterly changing the face of AskMe so that is composed 90% of "Trivia about, and Analysis of, Various Individuals and Groups" would not be so much fun, at least for those who like the idea that it is in large part a problem-solving utility.

It seems like if you want to really dig into Captain Beefheart (or other band foo, or what have you), you could do pretty well to look at the body of discussion and criticism and such available at those points on the web decicated (no doubt fanatically) to that specific subject.

I know that's a slippery slope -- other, less contentious questions can (and probably should) be researched elsewhere first -- but there is a difference between, for example, looking for information on Problem You Don't Even Know How to Frame and searching for critical analysis of a high-profile music act. I'd be shocked if there turned out not to be a rich body of Captain Beefheart content on the web and in books already, for example, and once you know the name Captain Beefheart you're in pretty good shape to start Googling.

A question more specifically about what music-theoretical stuff is going on in a type of music or the psychology of music listening or some such would make a better AskMe question -- and if that's the sort of question MetaMonkey meant to ask, that's great, but it's not the question he did ask, regardless. And if everyone took to asking the sort of question that he did ask, any utility in AskMe as a problem-solving tool would disappear.
posted by cortex at 12:26 PM on January 26, 2006

And is anybody really worried that every member is going to post a new question once a week along the lines of: my dog swallowed a dime, my dog swallowed a euro, my dog swallowed a jiao, or my dog swallowed a baht...

Not really. I am worried about a whole lot of members (even a significant minority) posting a new question once or twice a month along the lines of: hey, what's so awesome about Pink Floyd, what's the deal with French cuisine, does anybody else here dislike Lost, is my wife crazy to like Abba so much...
posted by cortex at 12:28 PM on January 26, 2006

My dog just swallowed a hypothetical so preposterous that he's insisting that we disable the computer, buy a trailer in the desert, and generally refuse all human contact to prevent it from ever happening again. (It doesn't help that he was encouraged by his trainer to devote himself more fully to his sculpture, either.) Thoughts?
posted by melissa may at 12:55 PM on January 26, 2006

Well, this was disappointing. I was enjoying reading something other than "I don't like my boyfriend--should I break up with him?"
posted by hototogisu at 12:58 PM on January 26, 2006

Thoughts?

Diamond-encrusted iPod.
posted by Gator at 1:03 PM on January 26, 2006

hototogisu: are you, like, a bongo player with The Harvey Girls, or just a fan? Its been a big day for Lawrence Kansas.
posted by StickyCarpet at 1:14 PM on January 26, 2006

I'm actually melissa's gimp, but that's a whole 'nother issue.

Also, it's always a big day for Lawrence, KS. We're just glad to be here.
posted by hototogisu at 1:18 PM on January 26, 2006

there's been a lot of deletions of good and interesting questions here that just don't follow the phrasing tricks* which keep the hammer from coming down and it makes me a little sad.

ARE WE TO JUDGE NEW QUESTIONS ON THE FAILURES OF THEIR ANCESTORS?


* my favorite: "OH IT'S FOR MY NOVEL". mefi loves amateur writers, i guess. guaranteed no deletion. try it. it's like garlic to vampires.
posted by fishfucker at 1:37 PM on January 26, 2006

Hey, that's my dog. And I searched both Metafilter and the Internet At Large for similar situations. AND I tagged it dog, poisoncontrol, pets, and veterinarian so other people can find it if necessary. And, if you are interested, it's supposed to be dangerous because the zinc from the penny and the stomach acid combine to form a dangerous gas.

Not to mention the fact that deleted questions are still there, they just take a little more effort to see. A google search will still turn up the page. If anyone else really wants to know why this Beefcake fellow is so good, they could find a way to phrase it such that it would not be deleted.
posted by Roger Dodger at 1:45 PM on January 26, 2006

Okay, so it's not on google yet. But searching for "Why is Captain Beefheart so good?" yielded this link.
posted by Roger Dodger at 1:51 PM on January 26, 2006

I usually hate it when people post to MetaTalk threads saying "Take it to Metachat" for anything that's inappropriate for MeFi, because in most cases they don't understand the culture of Metachat. However, this is one question that would have been perfect for MetaChat.

If you do come post it over there, make a link to the deleted AskMe thread, because there were some great answers in there.
posted by matildaben at 2:35 PM on January 26, 2006

I agree with Matt that "What's the deal with X?" questions are bad. If metamonkey had posted "What's the deal with Captain Beefheart?" I'd be first in line for calling for deletion.

But that's not what he posted. He posted a question saying "I have a pretty good idea why I love my other favourite artists, but beefheart seems anomalous and inexplicable to me," and asking for an answer that might include "for example music theory (though I am not a musican), word play, mood, vocal range etc." He asked a concrete and interesting question about a topic of importance to him, and gave some fairly specific guidance as to what kind of concrete answer he was looking for.

And before his question got deleted, he got (in addition to some unnecessary snark) some really thoughtful responses that were of interest even to some of us who aren't interested in Captain Beehheart. Stickycarpet's answer deserves to be cited in its entirety. I present it below, and I ask you: isn't this what AskMe is about?

Beefheart is not as naive about music theory and history as he sometimes projects, he was well aware of many forms of obscure world and contemporary classical music.

And his techniques are not all ineffable matters of taste, he developed and repeatedly used specific "tricks" to get his effects.

For instance, his tendency to have the last note of repeated melody modules jump up in a leaping interval, often to an alternating note, creates a kind of quirky mechanical jig.

He composed quite deliberately to portray his formidable visual imagination and often achieves the same trippy Breugal-esque animism in both his music and his lyrics.

His band mates were sometimes distressed by his tendency to lay over those blasting horns and vocals, which can remind me of an intricate and perfectly rendered painting that has wild graffiti spray painted on top of it. But that could work in a painting, even if it distresses the guys who labored mightily on the underpainting.

Many of his compositions would hold up quite well transposed for string quartet.

Another big factor was his charismatic and messianic personality that allowed him to attract some of the worlds best musicians who committed to unholy amounts of study and practice to learn his pieces.

His music has repetitive elements, but it is mostly through-composed, meaning it just keeps disclaiming all the way, so playing it must be not unlike memorizing long passages of Homer.
posted by StickyCarpet at 7:07 AM PST on January 26 [!]

posted by yankeefog at 2:40 PM on January 26, 2006

Okay, so the question was "Why is Captain Beefheart ('s music) so good?"

To me, that means the same thing as "Why do I like Captain Beefheart so much?" And hey, guess what, I don't live in your head, so I don't know. I also do not know what kind of answer you expected from the AskMe thread ("Why, because you are a wise and discerning individual! This calls for a parade!").

On preview: yankeefog, I can see how that intent could be gleaned, but the OP really did not do a good enough job of asking the question there.
posted by jenovus at 2:42 PM on January 26, 2006

we need more questions about buying stuff
posted by mr.marx at 3:06 PM on January 26, 2006

OK - I guess I'm a fairly big player in this trainwreck, so I will recind my comment about not posting further in this thread, as is my prerogative.

I believe the question was wrong for Ask.Me not because it didn't offer the opportunity for reasonable responses (based on music theory, lyricism or whater) or because I don't like Captain Beefheart (who, to some extent, I do). I disliked the question because *no-one knows why MetaMonkey likes Captain Beefheart*. There have been some very good responses to the thread - not least than by ludvig_van, who I respect a great deal. But they still don't answer the question, because them question demands that we all start from the same position, which palpably and plainly, we don't. "Why is Captain Beefheart so good?" is just like asking "Why is my jumper blue?" or "Why did my cat have three kittens not four?" There are reasons, but there is no answer.

The only answer is this: "You like Captain Beefheart, because you like Captain Beefheart." People could give you treatises on Beetheart's compositional techniques, on his lyricism, on his refererences - but none of them would tell you why *you* liked him. The very same treatises my explain exactly why someone else disliked him. And that's the crux.

Now, the reason I bowed out early was because mellisamay decided to move the thread onto a personal attack, about my career and the friends I was looking for. I didn't need that when I merely tried to point out that any thread which asked "Why is something so good" can only ever be based on personal opinion.

But this has become bigger than I ever intended ("ain't that always the case?") so, I agree with the deletion, I disagree that the question was a good one, and I hope that MetaMonkey bothers to listen to the music he likes enough until he finally realises himself why he actually likes its.
posted by benzo8 at 3:22 PM on January 26, 2006

I hope, in the future, you keep your vomit here, and not on askme. Please?

Also, yeah, let's have more threads about buying stuff. And girls. Or maybe buying girls. Yeah!
posted by hototogisu at 3:30 PM on January 26, 2006

I was enjoying reading something other than "I don't like my boyfriend--should I break up with him?"

Me too. And I honestly don't see why the question and thread offended some people so much they want to stomp on its corpse.

I do, however, agree that posting this MetaTalk question was a tactical blunder on MetaMonkey's part. Without the MeTa thread, the AskMe thread would probably still be alive.

Matt: If you're still reading, I still wish you'd reconsider. It's excellent AskMe.
posted by languagehat at 3:35 PM on January 26, 2006

Also, MetaMonkey, if you're still reading this, put up an email address, I've got something you might enjoy reading.
posted by hototogisu at 3:44 PM on January 26, 2006

Would this have gone differently if the question were about Beethoven instead of Beefheart?

Why is Beethoven so good? … I'm interested in any kind of answer, for example music theory (though I am not a musican), word play, mood, vocal range etc.
posted by mbrubeck at 3:49 PM on January 26, 2006

I think it would have gone swimmingly, unless John Cage showed up and started bickering.
posted by hototogisu at 3:56 PM on January 26, 2006

(Okay, maybe not word play or vocal range.)
posted by mbrubeck at 4:12 PM on January 26, 2006

I hope, in the future, you keep your vomit here, and not on askme. Please?

What vomit would that be?

I tried twice to answer MetaMonkey's question with the only answer I believe to be right - that he likes Captain Beefheat because he likes Captain Beefheart. That that's not an answer you deem satisfactory is not, in all reality, my problem. I fail to see where I "vomited" in the thread, even given melissa may's provocation.
posted by benzo8 at 4:21 PM on January 26, 2006

Please don't use Ask.Me to validate your tastes

I'm sorry, could you be any more condescending in your reproach? Though I should admit, I conflated fixedgear's response with yours, so for that I apologize.

...melissa may's provocation

the arrogance never ends, does it? Well, time to go do some laundry.
posted by hototogisu at 4:24 PM on January 26, 2006

I really dislike that this got killed on the basis of a really weak subjective relativism unanswerability argument.

The very best askme threads are the ones with subjective answers. I've found new music, new food, new tourist sites all based on people's subjective recommendations here.

Now I am going to try out Beefheart while raging inside at people who shut down discourse about difficult to quantify issues by claiming they are unknowable, unmeasurable, and unanswerable. Perhaps some part of them thinks things are more romantic if they are shrouded in mystery. Personally, I like to fuck with the lights on.
posted by srboisvert at 4:31 PM on January 26, 2006

I decided to take a shower first, so I have one more thing:

am I the only person here who sees a question like, "why do I ?" and doesn't immediately think "durf, I don't know why you , hurf, flagged"? I see questions like this not as the poster asking to have his or her tastes explained, but asking for others to explain their's, hoping for explication that will provide the language to better articulate the poster's thoughts and feelings.

That's a specific need, though not much a time-sensitive one--certainly more interesting than the random "answer me this, science people!"-questions we answer left and right.
posted by hototogisu at 4:42 PM on January 26, 2006

hototogisu: Your apology is accepted.
posted by fixedgear at 5:49 PM on January 26, 2006

A more pressing question, to me, is why disillusioned is self-linking via a redirect to Pandora in his comment.

Huh. Does that strike anyone else as just a teensy bit sleazy?

Come on, disillusioned/Chris, what's up with that? Why are all your links redirected through an unrelated site at which you're an editor?
posted by mediareport at 7:11 PM on January 26, 2006

yankeefog, I can see how that intent could be gleaned, but the OP really did not do a good enough job of asking the question there.

I am genuinely puzzled by this claim. In describing the OP's intent, I was using his actual words. In his original question, metamonkey wrote (and this is a direct quote), "I'm interested in any kind of answer, for example music theory (though I am not a musican), word play, mood, vocal range etc." Were you seriously unable to glean from this that his intent was to get an answer that might discuss music theory, word play, mood, vocal range, etc?
posted by yankeefog at 4:13 AM on January 27, 2006

I'm happy for you. I could match you, page for page, with an analysis of why both bands suck.

And if what you were saying had any substance, presumably I'd respond to it, and perhaps we might work towards a common understanding that would be informative to readers.

I mean, what kind of response is that? If someone asked "What's the evidence for evolution?" and someone gave an educated, accurate response, I'm sure someone could match them, page for page, with an analysis of why evolution is wrong and creationism is right. Does that invalidate the question?

Other people here have already hit on why this was a bad deletion. It seems to come down to people who (incorrectly, in my opinion) read the question as "Why do I like Captain Beefheart?" versus those who read the question as "What are the merits of Captain Beefheart's music?" The latter question is obviously answerable. The former question is obviously not answerable, and so I'm confused as to why someone would choose that interpretation and ignore the second.
posted by ludwig_van at 12:32 PM on January 27, 2006

Why is the color yellow so good?


Really, I've got a half-dozen items of this color and it gives me chills thinking about what they do to me. How does it do it? I have a pretty good idea why I love my other favourite colors, but yellow seems anomalous and inexplicable to me. I'm interested in any kind of answer, for example art theory (though I am not an artist), Coldplay, mood, chromatic range etc.

Fixed.
posted by jenovus at 4:25 PM on January 27, 2006

Benzo8, I didn't intend to "attack" you -- but I certainly meant to tweak you a bit, because I thought you were rudely derailing the thread. If you really meant "there is no answer" as a viable reply rather than an attempt to shut down further conversation, then you could have said so more respectfully.

Perhaps you don't see how off-putting what you wrote was. Your blanket statement that "Someone with 'a deep understanding of music in general' is going to be someone who understands why this question has no answer at best, and is fruitless at worst" has proved false, given the number of musicians and serious music lovers who have made a thoughtful case otherwise. Obviously, there's room for disagreement -- which should have been hashed out here, and not in the thread itself.

I regret that I wrote what I did, because a bit of irritated poking was not worth contributing to getting the thread killed. I still think that was a bad call, but at least now I can see a bit better why reasonable people might disagree.
posted by melissa may at 10:12 PM on January 27, 2006

Looks like its about time to wrap this up.

Thanks for the great answers to my question StickyCarpet and Sleepy Pete.

Hototogisu, I'd be very interested in your article, I've added an email address in my profile.

I hope that MetaMonkey bothers to listen to the music he likes enough until he finally realises himself why he actually likes its.

Benzo8, I hope so too, I really do.

I'm pretty new here and guess I unintentionally rubbed salt into some folks' old AskMe wounds. I think I understand now why the question was misinterpreted, however willfully, and shall endevour to compose my AskMe questions more carefully and with due diligence, to avoid similar upsets in future.

I shall continue my research into the Captain's unique awesomeness regardless, and perhaps one fine day I will have something approaching an answer, from which I will construct a post worthy of Metafilter.

I can't resist giving the Captain the final word on the matter, so here is an except from Tropical Hot Dog Night,

Like two flamingoes in a fruit fight
I don’t wanna know ‘bout wrong or right
I don’t want to know
- I’m anywhere tonight

Tropical Hot Dog Night
Like two flamingoes in a fruit fight
Like steppin’ out of a triangle
Into striped light
Striped light, striped light
Tropical Hot Dog Night
- Everything’s wrong, at the same time it’s right

The truth has no patterns for me tonight
I’m playing this music so the young girls will come out
To meet the monster tonight
Meet the monster tonight
posted by MetaMonkey at 1:34 AM on January 28, 2006