Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2005 11:25 pm
I didn't complain about it. There were other people who didn't complain about it.Rone Rivendale wrote:Because songfights like the Vishnu one were 33% instrumentals and everyone complained about it. No one likes it and the point of a contest is do what it takes to win. JoS was an exception, not a rule.
I like well-done instrumentals within the context of songfight.
For some people, the point of a contest is to do what it takes to win. For others, the point of a contest is to show how good you are. For others still, the point is to have fun. There are many more reasons why people engage in contests.
Jim's entry was an exception to what? To some guideline that some people have imagined that says "Don't submit instrumentals for reason <i>x</i>"? When you find an exception, it means that the rule is invalid. One exception is all it takes. In my mind, it wasn't the first instrumental to convincingly suggest the title, but even if you feel that a song has to win in order for it to be taken seriously, where we stand now is that very few people who have heard Jim's song can say that instrumentals can't evoke the given title. Jim's did. So any group who subscribed to the suggestion, guideline, rule of thumb or community standard that considered instrumentals inappropriate now has to jump up and suck it.
Instrumentals are like children: Don't like them? Then don't make them. But don't tell people who think that they can make good ones that they shouldn't bother because most of the ones you know about are rotten. If Jim had followed that advice, he wouldn't have written the first winning instrumental that people will admit to voting for.