I was talking with someone today and realized I did something I do quite often that might be a trait that gets me into trouble: I boldly state my preference for (or against) something.
In this case, it was being tired of classic rock from a lifetime of overexposure. I think I offended the person, but saved it by clarifying that I’m mostly tired that there is a play list of seemingly 100-songs that have been in continual rotation for 50 years.
Anyway, it occurs to me that I’m just stating my preferences and I personally thing that’s fine and normal, but that people get personally offended if you don’t like what they like; which makes no sense to me. It’s like if you don’t like bland food, I’m not going to get offended because I can’t handle anything hotter than black pepper. It doesn’t ultimately mean anything significant.
Thoughts, ideas, suggestions?
Why is not liking something any more of a conversation stopper than liking something? I mean, if they don’t like classic rock, they can talk about how they don’t like classic rock, just as if they liked Charles Aznavour, we could talk about we like Charles Aznavour.
Like I have a story about getting SO sick of listening to classic rock at work and the same damn songs over and over again, that I went on Limewire or whatever it was and downloaded EVERY version of Bohemian Rhapsody I could find. I found a heavy metal version, I found an Australian Outback version, I found (of course) a bluegrass version, and (my favorite), a celtic version (Hibernian Rhapsody by De Dannan–go listen to it! It’s amazing)!
I burnt them all onto a CD and casually popped it into the boom box that played the FM classic rock radio station all day. It started with the original Queen song so nobody suspected anything was amiss. Eventually, probably by the second cover version, people got upset (because they are boring as fuck) and so they went back to the radio.
Guess what the next song we had to listen to was.
I see a little siloheutto of a man!