Is Jurica Pađen an artist?

Bryan Rogers87 said:maybe the real issue here is that you’re blurring the lines between "art" and "taste," using your own personal definition of "quality" as the benchmark... which honestly feels a bit silly and even a little childish

Think about it—is every single taste out there considered top-tier? Are there really no bad takes on this planet? I’m pretty sure that was his point, if I’m reading him right.

And if we don't use his standard, whose should we use? Yours? Sure, art is subjective; it isn't a hard science like physics. But would you really dare to criticize Bach, or suggest we put Bach on the exact same level as Brena? If you go after those icons, someone is always going to jump back at you saying, "Well, it's all about your personal sense of quality," or "You're just confusing art with personal preference."

😉

Chris Myers said:Pointless question.

Neither one of those two counts as a rock artist.

Who actually said they were rock artists? Total non-issue.

Henry Campbell5 said:But you bring up Imagine all the time. Or is it someone else... 🤔

It’s someone else. I can't stand that song.

I'm not really sure what the point of a thread title like this is—or even the question itself—but here we go: Is Jurica Pađen actually an artist, or just a decent guitarist? I guess it depends on how you look at it.🤔
Look, if you actually dig his music, then you listen to him and appreciate it—if you don't, you just steer clear. It’s really that simple, I guess.

Like I said before, I really dig his vocals and the songwriting—it just works for me. After catching his show at HNK Rijeka, I ended up picking up the original album Collection for myself.
So, there's this compilation from Sony Music—part of that Original Album Collection series—where they've basically bundled up five of Aerodrom's albums together. I guess it's one of those sets.
The liner notes for this release were penned by S. škarice. Here’s what they had to say:

Honestly, based on what I heard in those /demo/ tracks—stuff like *Kad misli mi vrludaju* and *Kraj tebe u tami*—it really would have been enough to get those studio doors swung wide open at a major label like Sony Music. And I’m not just talking about a quick single release, either—I mean a full LP, maybe even an exclusive contract. I guess.
These legends of the discography—despite everything they’ve been through—have actually aged pretty gracefully over these last 40 years.
Maybe they didn't quite scale the peak of the rock pyramid like their contemporaries in Prljav Kazalište or Paran Valjak—I mean, those guys were on a whole different level, I guess—but they’re right there alongside them, woven into the very foundation of the genre, and they aren't going anywhere.

I haven't actually sat down to listen through the CDs yet—I've been a bit preoccupied, I guess—but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that there are some nice surprises waiting for me in there. 🙂

Anthony Carter5 said:It’s pretty straightforward—some things I respect, and some things I just can't stand.

I have a certain respect for John Lennon, I guess, even if I feel like he sortally dropped the ball during his solo career. Don't get me wrong—he definitely has some decent tracks in there—but it’s almost like he just lost his edge or something. Maybe he just ran out of steam.

Looking at his solo career, Lennon definitely had some edge—some pretty intense, raw stuff that hits different. For instance, you've got tracks like I'm Losing you, I don't Wanna faca IT NY City zatim, Nobody Told me, Cold Turkey, and New York City... just some heavier vibes in there.
It’s on the same album where they have those softer tracks—I guess. Imagine I guess there isn't much to say yet—just waiting around, I suppose. Yoko Ono...and it also features a pretty intense version of Gimme som Truth.

Gimme som Truth
I'm Losing you
I don't wanna face it.
New York City

Then there’s this one song—it sounds pretty laid-back on the surface, I guess—but... The Luck of The Irish...but with some pretty intense lyrics where Lennon—
He sings about how the Britons are violating Ireland, leading right into those final lines:
Why The Hell ara The English There anyway?
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The
While those bastards go about committing genocide... yeah, exactly. Genocide.

Anyway—I guess if you look back at it, Lennon was with Yoko Ono around 1972 and put out that album *Sometime in New York*, which was basically just one long series of commentary on all the political chaos happening at the time.
The reviews totally trashed the album, which is a shame—but honestly, there’s some brilliant stuff tucked away in there, like what we were just talking about, or... well, maybe. Woman is The Nigger of The World—that's the line. It’s the kind of place where chauvinism and the whole idea of women being subservient just aren't tolerated—I guess that's the standard now.
Woman is The Nigger of The World

Just a little bit about how "soft" Lennon was.🍿

Jose Edwards16 said:When you look at his solo run, Lennon actually had some pretty gritty, heavy stuff. For example: I'm Losing you, I don't Wanna faca IT NY City, Nobody Told me, Cold Turkey, New York City...
On the exact same record where you get the softer vibes of Imagine and Yoko Ono, you’ve also got the punchy, aggressive Gimme som Truth.

Gimme som Truth
I'm Losing you
I don't Wanna faca IT NY City
New York City

Then there's this track that sounds mellow on the surface—The Luck of The Irish—but the lyrics are brutal. Lennon
is basically shouting about how the British are ravaging Ireland, ending it with lines like:
Why The Hell ara The English There anyway
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The

Anyway, back in '72, Lennon and Yoko Ono dropped 'Sometime in New York,' which was loaded with political commentary.
Critics absolutely tore that album apart, but buried in there are gems like what I mentioned before or Woman is The Nigger of The World, where he calls out chauvinism and how women are treated:
Woman is The Nigger of The World

So yeah, that's enough about the "soft" Lennon.🍿

Man... you're really out here arguing with someone who thinks Lennon was just some one-hit wonder who coasted off 🙂Imagine and that if it weren't for Yoko Ono—who they claim gave him his entire platform—nobody would even know his name today. 🙂

Kenneth Lee79 said:Tell me, is every single taste considered top-tier? Are there no cowards left on this planet? If I understood correctly, I think that’s what he was getting at.

And if we aren't using his metric, whose should we be using? Yours? Sure, art is subjective; it isn't a hard science. But let's play devil's advocate: should we insult Johann Sebastian Bach, or perhaps put Bach on the same level as someone like Brena? If you take that stance, someone will inevitably snap back and say, "Your own concept of quality is the only metric," or "You're confusing art with mere preference."

😉

What's going on, Ševa? Talking to yourself again?

Anthony Carter5 said:It's someone else, I just don't care for that song.

It’s a shame that’s his only solo track... 🥳

Let's be honest here—Lennon was a hundred times more intense as a solo artist than he ever was with the Beatles. The fluff is gone; all that's left are heavy hitters. And don't even get me started on his political engagement.

Bryan Rogers87 said:Ah... you're also arguing with someone who thinks Lennon was just a one-hit wonder who only became famous because of Imagine 🙂 and that without Yoko Ono, whom he rode the coattails of to achieve fame, nobody alive today would have even heard of him. 🙂

Perhaps there might be some truth to that argument as well.

At the end of the ballad, I think most—well, probably the majority of—rock musicians eventually get "softer" over the years, mostly just because they aren't the same people at 40 that they were at 20. I know that isn't some kind of rule, but even I find myself appreciating those mellow tracks more as I get older—stuff that used to bore me back in the day simply because it lacked that raw edge.

Kenneth Lee79 said:So tell me, is every single taste considered top-tier? Are there no losers on this planet? I’m thinking that’s what he meant, if I’m following his logic.

And if we aren't using his yardstick, whose should we use? Yours? Sure, art is subjective—it's not some hard science. But come on, are we really going to insult Johann Sebastian Bach, or try to put him on the same level as someone like Brena? If you go after that, someone's just gonna hit you with, "Well, your standard is your own definition of quality," or "You're confusing art with personal taste."

😉

It belongs to nobody; there’s no such thing as an objective scale. And honestly, saying someone's work is "insulting" is one of the dumbest things you can do. What does that even mean? In my book, any act of creating music is art. Period. Because to create or perform anything—no matter how it sounds—you have to put in the work. You need to know something about music, you have to know how to play, compose, arrange, sing, dance, you name it. Now, whether that finished product turns out to be good, bad, a hit, a flop, a masterpiece (for some), or total garbage (for others)—that's a completely different ballgame.

That first part is art; the second part is taste.

That's why I say it's a fundamental mistake when people equate "art" only with what they personally like or value, while dismissing everything else as non-art.

Why wouldn't Brena and her music be considered art, just like Bach's? Pop/folk music hits every single definition of musical art just as much as Bach or Mozart music does.

How does folk music not fit into this simplified definition? 🙂 Brena has all those elements, and so do Bach and Mozart.

Music is art expressed through sung and/or played tones, various sounds, noises, and the silence between them.

I mean, clothing is just another commodity, but that doesn't mean everyone has the same taste when it comes to getting dressed 🙂

Charles Ramos4 said:Look, clothing is just another commodity, sure, but that doesn't mean everyone actually has the sense to dress themselves right. 🙂

Yeah, true, but even if you're rocking cheap, basic stuff, you can still put together a killer outfit if you know what you're doing.

Bryan Rogers87 said:Yeah, but you can definitely put together a great outfit even with cheap and simple pieces of clothing

I agree—though I guess my post wasn't really directed at you 😉

In other words, you could even turn old rags into high fashion 😁

Charles Ramos4 said:I'm with you there, even if my point wasn't actually aimed at you. 😉

I get it, just adding some more context here.

Bryan Rogers87 said:There’s no such thing as an objective yardstick. And honestly, calling someone's work "offensive" is probably one of the most foolish things you can do. What does that even mean? In my view, any act of making music is art. To create or perform music—no matter what genre it is—you have to put in the work. You need musical knowledge, you have to know how to play, compose, arrange, sing, dance... you name it. That's the baseline. Now, a completely different story is whether what was created ends up being good or bad, a hit or a flop, a masterpiece to some or total trash to others.

That first part is art, but the second part is just taste.

That’s why I think it’s a mistake from the get-go when people equate "art" solely with what they personally enjoy or appreciate, while dismissing anything else as non-art.

Why wouldn't Brena and her music be considered art, just like Johann Sebastian Bach? Pop music hits every single definition of musical art, just like Bach or Mozart music does.

How can pop music fall outside this simplified definition? 🙂 Brena has all those elements, and so do Bach and Mozart.

Music is an art form expressed through sung and/or played tones, various sounds, noises, and the silence between them.

Look, if every taste were equally high-quality, would that mean we could say every person is equally intelligent? Of course not; that's impossible.

Secondly, regarding your point that everything is art: sure, within art there are different levels of quality, but there is also the argument that for something to even qualify as art, it must possess a certain level of inherent quality from the start. It doesn't really matter which group you belong to.

But let's talk about this idea of art being subjective—where something is "trash" to one person and "quality" to another. Can we apply that same logic to churches and cathedrals? For instance, I don't find those buildings to be art; to me, they're total junk. If art is truly subjective, why should I be forced to accept someone else's declaration that something is "wow"?

And then I shouldn't have to hear, "Oh, it's because you don't understand the complexity of this architecture," because I can easily fire back with, "Well, maybe you don't understand the complexity of the music I'm advocating for compared to that other stuff."

So where does that leave us?

If everything in art is subjective, regardless of what kind of art it is, then I insist we apply that same standard to cathedrals and churches too, please!

You really need to learn how to read with actual comprehension instead of assuming I said things I never even touched upon. 🙂 Where did I ever claim that every single taste is equally high-quality? No. I said everyone has their own preference, but none of those individual tastes serve as some universal yardstick for quality. Besides—let’s actually define what we’re even arguing about when we use the word "quality" in the first place.

Just because you don't see cathedrals as art (regardless of your subjective vibe), doesn't mean they aren't. And yeah, trashy pop can be considered art too.

Whether or not you personally consider cathedrals to be art is completely irrelevant to the rest of the universe.

It’s like saying: "The US lost the World Cup final, but in my mind, they're the champions." Your statement doesn't turn that event into a fact. You're just taking something that isn't a reality and defining it as one inside your own head, but that doesn't magically change the outcome. It’s still just a fantasy.

Jose Edwards16 said:I honestly don't get the point of this thread or even the question itself—like, is Jurica Pađen an artist or a good guitarist?🤔
Look, if you dig his music, then you listen to him and show some respect—if you don't, just move on. Simple as that.

Like I said before, I’m really digging his vocals and the songwriting. After catching his show at HNK Rijeka, I ended up picking up the original album Collection for myself.
It's that compilation from Sony Music in the Original Album Collection series—it packs five different Aerodrom albums into one set.
S. škarice wrote the liner notes for this release. Here’s what he had to say:

I haven't actually sat down to listen to the CDs yet, but I'm holding out hope that there are some pleasant surprises waiting for me. 🙂

When you look at Lennon's solo career, he definitely wasn't all sunshine and rainbows; he had some seriously gritty, heavy tracks. Take "I'm Losing you," "I Don't Wanna Face It," "Nobody Told me," "Cold Turkey," or "New York City," for example. He could get pretty intense.
It's on the same album where they have "Laganice." Imagine i Yoko OnoIt also features a pretty intense version of Gimme some Truth.

Gimme som Truth
I'm Losing you
I Don't Wanna Face It
New York City

Then there’s this one song that, on the surface, feels like a total breezy easy-listening track— The Luck of The Irish...but man, the lyrics get pretty intense where Lennon goes off.
He sings about how "the Brits are raping Ireland," ending with those final lines:
Why The Hell ara The English There anyway
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The
as They kill with god on their side blam IT All on The Kids The Ira as The
While those bastards are busy committing genocide! Aye! Aye! Genocide!

Anyway, back in '72, Lennon was with Yoko Ono and dropped that Sometime in New York album, which was basically just one giant collection of his takes on everything happening in politics at the time.
The critics absolutely trashed the album, but honestly, there are some brilliant tracks hidden in there, like the ones mentioned above or even... Woman is The Nigger of The World In which one condemns chauvinism and the subjugation of women?
Woman is The Nigger of The World

That’s all there is to Lennon's "soft" side.🍿

None of those tracks even come close to the level of A Day in the Life, Across The Universe, Strawberry Fields Forever, In My Life, or Tomorrow Never Knows...

Lennon definitely lost some of that songwriting magic once he went solo.

Anthony Carter5 said:None of those tracks even come close to the level of A Day in the Life, Across The Universe, Strawberry Fields Forever, In My Life, or Tomorrow Never Knows...

I guess Lennon definitely lost some of that songwriting spark during his solo career.

Or Don't Let Me Down.

Maybe the Lennon-McCartney partnership just had that specific kind of chemistry—and despite the partnership, there was always that underlying rivalry, too. Like how Strawberry Fields was basically Lennon's response to Paul's Penny Lane and stuff like that. Plus, we shouldn't overlook the contributions from George Harrison and Ringo Starr. (Ringo at the back again, I suppose!) 🙄

Bryan Rogers87 said:That’s why I think it’s a fundamental mistake when people equate art solely with whatever they personally like or appreciate, while dismissing anything else as "not art."

I mean, why wouldn't Brena and her music be considered art, just like Johann Sebastian Bach? Country music meets all the definitions of musical art, just like Bach's or Mozart music.

How does country music not fit into this simplified definition? 🙂 Brena has all those elements, just like Bach and Mozart.

Music is an art form expressed through sung and/or played tones, various sounds, noises, and the silence between them.

Anyway, I actually quite enjoy that kind of "country" art.
There's a local neighborhood near me where people are having a big party—and the speakers are blasting some seriously heavy country music...

Charles Ramos4 said:At the end of the day, I think most rock musicians tend to get "softer" over the years, mostly because they simply aren't the same people at 40 that they were at 20. I realize that isn't a perfect metric, but even I find myself appreciating those gentler tracks more as I age—the ones I used to find tedious precisely because they lacked that raw edge.

However, Lennon actually became more biting and provocative.🎉

Anthony Carter5 said:None of those songs even come close to the level of A Day in the Life, Across The Universe, Strawberry Fields Forever, In My Life, or Tomorrow Never Knows...

Lennon certainly lost some of that songwriting magic during his solo career.

They aren't in your top tier because you clearly haven't given them a fair listen.

The songs you listed are undeniably good, but when measured against Lennon's solo work, they just don't leave the same kind of lasting impression.

Jose Edwards16 said:Honestly, I actually find a weird kind of "art" in that trashy country music.
There’s this trailer park nearby having a massive blowout right now—and the speakers are just blasting pure, unadulterated country garbage...

Look, if you go by that logic—that art is just whatever you personally can't stand—then you're basically saying actual musical art exists simply because there's always going to be someone on this planet who hates it. It's a mathematical certainty. You could pick any genre, any niche, any category under the sun, and there will be some guy somewhere who thinks it's total noise. People hate rock, they hate jazz, they hate opera, they hate light operettas, they hate pop, they hate country, they hate metal, they hate hip-hop, they hate rap, they hate dance music, or whatever else you want to throw at it.

Neno Belan is a way better artist than Pađen.