Help me understand Billy Eilish

Submitted by kestrelkev24 t3_ydm06b in Music

OK I know this is come off as a millennial I guess not always understanding younger artists now (because sadly we are starting to reach that age) but I'm always open to listening to new music. Heck I think some songs are actually pretty good nowadays. But one artist I've never understood is Billy Eilish. The reason I don't understand her is how minimal her music is. And I feel that there were artists like Lorde before her who had a similar sound and minimalism and went on to achieve pretty good album sales. So what makes Billy Eilish stand out? Because of how young she is? Even so she's not the primary person behind her tracks. In a world that has turned so plastic (whether it be architectural, cars, companies cheapening out everything and making products so bare bones basic) should we have more impactful music now rather than what the drone sound i hear in her now? I'm sorry if i come off as judegy.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

DevinBelow t1_itt04wl wrote

You don't have to like everything, and more than that, you don't need to announce to the world everything you don't like. There is no point having people convince you to like music you don't enjoy. There is plenty of music out there. Spread the word about the music you do like.

9

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt0oem wrote

I don't but it's nice to hear the other side of the coin. Hence why I put this down as a discussion. We shouldn't feel like we can't understand something, state it from our point of view, and listen to how others feel.

−1

DevinBelow t1_itt2ao9 wrote

I just feel like beginning with the premise of "defend this thing you like" is the wrong to approach any conversation about art of any kind. People don't have to justify liking what they like. And you don't have to "get it". That's the great thing about music. You find something out there that works for you and that's an incredible thing. No part of it ever needs to be understood by someone else.

8

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt2o5t wrote

But I should pursue getting it. It's obviously something people are passionate about. So if I can share even a glimpse of that passion, them I want to. Because otherwise we just close others out purely based on music tastes.

0

Poopin_the_turd t1_itt3omy wrote

What are you talking about? No you shouldn't if you don't get it move on and simply don't judge others based on musical tastes.

2

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt3tx8 wrote

Judging would be simply not asking. Would be saying "I don't get it keep it away." Thats truly judging

−1

Poopin_the_turd t1_itt42ox wrote

You don't have to do that though. If you don't get it don't listen and if someone is listening cool just put up with it. I think something is getting lost in translation here.

2

DevinBelow t1_itt3ksk wrote

Why then single out this one artist? It seems like you're specifically calling out this one particular artist, not asking for people to broadly expand your mind about music and their passion for it.

Why do you need to share this passion for this one particular artist, who you seem to not enjoy?

Sorry..I'm not trying to call you out in particular. It just feels like a common thread format on this subreddit is often "I don't like this", "I don't understand why people like this", "How do people actually like this" and I just always wonder; why not post about things you like instead?

That's all. I'm sure you will get some actual responses you're looking for in here. Sorry mine likely isn't one of them.

1

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt41ry wrote

Except I'm genuinely asking. Like for me there's a difference between saying "I hate this artist and don't get them at all" and I'm not into this artist but I want to understand another's perspective about them. Like what do I not see that others do? What passions tie them to that artist.

0

FarmboyJustice t1_itt4adq wrote

I understand what you're saying. You can't help but feel that you're missing something, because so many others like her and talk about how unique she is.

If you are genuinely interested in figuring this out, sit down and listen to her first album, all the way through, without doing anything else at the same time. Sometimes the reason you don't "get" music is you are not really hearing it that well. Your mood and thoughts at the time have a huge effect.

Personally I find her songs kind of boring, but ten years from now I might go back and listen and suddenly go "Wow, I get it now." That happens to people all the time, tastes change, and it's ok.

1

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt62t7 wrote

That's true. Mood when listening or going in without expectation can often play a huge role.

1

FearTheOldBlood1 t1_itszv4c wrote

Listen to her sing the theme from No Time To Die

I wasn't a fan until I heard that song, and it mesmerized me.

3

ted_cruzs_micr0pen15 t1_itt41kg wrote

Older millennial, Billy is great… she has that cagey angst, rises to her adversity, and delivers a message of positivity and self growth to her young fans. Not to mention the girl is smarter than hell. Just cause she collaborates with her brother doesn’t take away from her talent. Hearing her live will give you goosebumps, her voice is angelic. My girlfriend and I really vibe on her music.

3

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt4bvz wrote

I guess my question is you say cagey angst but her music comes off as a whisper than a bang. Like, for me when I think angst i think loud, booming, like genuinely angry..I guess my question is what kind of angst would you say she portrays?

1

ted_cruzs_micr0pen15 t1_itt4h0u wrote

Does it matter that our perceptions on a sound are different. You asked my opinion lol, why do I need to convince you why I’m right… it’s art, it’s not a pissing contest.

3

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt55h6 wrote

You don't have to. I'm not asking you to convince me but merely see things from your view. Understand what you see as angst.

0

ted_cruzs_micr0pen15 t1_itt5ijg wrote

Her lyrics are cagey, they’re clever… she talks a lot of anxiety and dread of social situations… hence angst.

The issue is you’re defining things improperly. Angsty =/= angry, it means a feeling of deep anxiety or dread, typically an unfocused one about the human condition or the state of the world in general.

Cagey angst pretty much sums her schtick up, that and the talent in her voice and songwriting.

2

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt5ou3 wrote

I understand! Like what the mind wants to say but the situation couldn't allow?

0

zizou00 t1_itt4b9v wrote

At the base level, her music is well-written, well-produced music, it's relatable and catchy. She sells her music as part of her "alternative" pop persona, her songs fit that same character and she's got an eye into what's popular with her target demographic. She's a good performer and she's got a strong style and image. She comes from a well-off background and has a strong financial and musical support network around her, which definitely helped catapult her into the music mainstream, but otherwise she's (and this is reductionary, but it's just to emphasise the point) another pop artist that's in the mainstream.

Does every artist need to be the sole creator in order to be appreciated? I personally don't think so. The Monkees were popular and famously didn't write their own music. Music is collaborative, and her brother worked on a lot of the music with her. She's also worked with other songwriters and producers, but it's still in an effort to produce a Billie Eilish song. A song for the artist. One that fits the persona, the style, the whole artist package she's presenting herself as.

Does an artist need to be unique in order to be appreciated? Again, I don't think so. It's hard to do - be truly unique - music is a derivative art form, and we all take something from somewhere. We all pull from inspiration, and pastiche has been a cornerstone of music for centuries.

I think what's key to realise is that you've set an expectation for an artist that Billie Eilish does not meet. An artist doesn't need to be a sole creator. An artist doesn't need to be unique. They don't need to be innovators in their field. If that were the case, we'd have maybe 2 or 3 artists per genre, and there'd be very little choice. That's the expectation you've set. And if that results in you not liking her music, that's fine. Everyone has things they like, and art is subjective. And because it is, any artist can come along and give it a go, putting their own spin on something done a million times before.

I think you're just bringing a bit of a doomer mindset to something that's just entertainment. Expecting it to be bigger than that, when it doesn't attempt to be is only going to leave you feeling disappointed in it. You've set an expectation that reality was never gonna meet.

2

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt4zmy wrote

I think I more so want artists to strive to be more of themselves and go further. I definitely get what you mean by a doomer mindset. But im certainly one to change my views on an artist in a heartbeat if they bring something to the table that I feel is more expansive... whatever that means haha Great example is Carly Jepsen who went from being a bubble gum pop kind of artist to making albums more rooted in her own mindset or thoughts that were deeper and came off as more genuine. But honestly I don't think Billy won't produce something that I will love. I think she will find something a little more expansive that I will be able to latch onto much as Halsey did for me as well.

1

zizou00 t1_itt67vv wrote

I mean, she's 20. Carly Rae Jepsen was 27 when she released Call Me Maybe in 2012. It's been a decade since then. Her life has changed considerably. Billie Eilish has only been around for a hot minute, she's likely still establishing what kind of artist she wants to be. She may change, she may not. She's got literally decades to figure it out.

Artists will work on what interests them. If they want to go more down that route, they will. If they don't, they won't. Again, it does feel like more of those self-established expectations that you set on your initial assessment of Billie Eilish.

Music is a present art form. It's not describing who an artist was or will be (though those topics can be broached in the art form). It's music created by them now, for now, as they are now. Sometimes it's fine to take things at face value. You don't have to enjoy everything, you don't have to relate to everything and you don't have to even get everything (I still don't really get Enya). Things get popular with some people because they just happened to get popular with them. It was the right thing at the right time for the right people. Like Heaven is a Half-Pipe by OPM.

2

DeadEyeMetal t1_ittxfaw wrote

Age is no excuse, I'm 62.

Billie Eilish is great. Her music is varied and interesting. Better yet, she doesn't feel she has to pander to anyone's image expectations.

Like many things, it can take a while to appreciate her stuff if it's not what you're used to.

Don't fall into that stupid middle-aged mindset of "There's no good music anymore". There is always good music. Always has been and that's never changed. Pop is one area that has a ton of great, hooky stuff - especially when it comes to female vocalists.

2

DeadEyeMetal t1_ittxnx9 wrote

I know you already said you like some contemporary music. I'm afraid I kind of branched out in my comment and started ranting at all older people!

1

FarmboyJustice t1_itt328k wrote

I think part of her appeal is exactly the fact that she is not like the typical pop star. She was successful without being supermodel skinny or doing the whole pouty sexpot pop star routine, but also without the rebellious anti-ettablishment schtick. She seems like a real person you might meet, maybe working at a fast food joint, who just wants to make some fun music.

When she twerks it's as a joke, not because she thinks it's empowering.

Of course once she achieved stardom the machine immediately started working on maximizing revenue, but so far she seems to not have turned into a diva.

Personally I don't enjoy her music that much, but she definitely has a sound of her own.

1

sorengray t1_itt3dui wrote

She builds off of the sounds and momentum of Lorde and Lana Del Rey (who in turn build off the momentum of artists before them). Which has helped propel her even further than either. Her sound is both pop and very edgy. Sort of Goth pop. Perfect for moody tweens and even moody Gen Xers like myself.

Her first full album is the best IMO, but the new one has some magic on it.

Also, talent wise instead of having teams of song writers and producers and musicians (like Beyonce et al..), her albums are made by just her and her brother in their home studio. And that in and of itself deserves much respect.

1

MarcamGorfain t1_itt565i wrote

The next in a line of a certain pop culture archetype. Every archetype has swaths of artists to fill the public perception of itself. The pop princess, the soul daddy, the smooth crooner, the bad boy of blank genre, the diva, the list goes on.

The introspective edgy girl is just another torch that passes in the zeitgeist, like the rest. Sometimes it's obvious and without much change, sometimes it's a completely new take, but the soul is the same.

0

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt5k7t wrote

That's true. I guess it's the same flavor but now in a modern take now. I guess for myself i wish there was a little more depth to the music surrounding her. Like I'm not the one to say that EDM is trash and you need actual instruments to make a difference. But I guess for me her beats and accompiment just feels rather bland. But again that's subjective.

1

MarcamGorfain t1_ittdyb5 wrote

Exactly. And subjective opinions come together to inform the zeitgeist. It's okay to have an opinion, publicly under most conditions, as that's one of the best influencers to the zeitgeist and our environments. Sometimes we're personally in line with the zeitgeist, as we should be in many things, and sometimes we are not, and that's just something we have to accept when it happens, and doesn't mean anything necessarily bad unless you either let it mean something bad or intentionally weaponize it. It just feels so good to be in line with the zeitgeist, and notably bad when we're faced with being out of line, but that's just feelings, a personal policing by way of our own intuitions. Some choose to ignore that intuition, some of them challenge the public opinion, and fewer of them are successful at really making historical impact, because the zeitgeist is rarely wrong, but it's effect is absolute.

1

Competitive_Vast9832 t1_itt81s6 wrote

I personally can't stand her because she comes on like she's on enough downers to stun an ox. That sleepy, croaky cursive singing with all the vocal fry -- that's ridiculously repellant to me. For today's music I find the most fun in x-wave (synthwave, vaporwave, mallwave, etc.), and most of that stuff is free. Psytrance is golden too. The only thing remotely like her that I like (because it's funny) is Gayle "ABCDEFU" but once or twice every couple of months is plenty to hear that song.

0

kestrelkev24 OP t1_itt8dss wrote

Have you ever heard Numb Little Bug? Thats a pretty good song. Different artist though

1

Competitive_Vast9832 t1_ittc2ql wrote

Yeah there's way too much jazz twitter in that. You know that thing with the vibrato on the end of every line?

I like it when they sound bored, like say, Andain "Beautiful Thing." That one's ancient but it slams.

1