Some might remember that hiiilarious “Books That Make You Dumb” chart from a few months back that collected data from Facebook and matched up different university’s favorite books to their SAT scores. If a school’s average SAT score was below 1150, The Book of Mormon and The Devil Wears Prada were big favorites, whereas on the higher end of the spectrum, 100 Years of Solitude and Freakonomics ruled. We remember being amused by it, and thankful that we had carefully omitted The Bell Jar from our Facebook profile so as not to skew our school’s numbers.
Well, the creator has produced a new chart, and this time it’s about music. The problem is, this one is a lot less funny and a lot more complicated–whereas lower SAT scores predictably produce students who read less compelling literature, the music chart reflects a less causal relationship between taste and “intelligence.” It’s alarming to think that one needs higher test scores in order to enjoy “better” music, as the chart would imply.
We think the problem is not about taste, but about socio-economic levels reflected in the SAT scores–the chart is titled “Music that Makes You Dumb,” but that is neither causally accurate nor that amusing. While it makes sense that over-privileged college kids like Guster and Ben Folds (word!) while everyone else likes T.I., there’s no reason that it can’t work the other way around. We know it’s not meant to be taken so seriously, but we’re pretty obsessed with the convergence of the highbrow and lowbrow–something that this chart seems to be denying. And that’s not cool.
Comments (3)
sounds like someones favorite band was on the "dumb" end of the list and it got taken a little too personal. I dont necessarily agree with this chart, but i definitely believe that musical taste and intelligence have a strong relationship, too bad no amount of research done by anyone, no matter how non-biased, will ever be accepted because it will just be viewed as biased by anyone who disagrees with their band being considered for "stupid" people.
I agree with nick, but at the same time, I think its a socioeconomic issue. If a child grows up in a tough neighborhood, they are more likely to be exposed to artists like lil wayne or T.I. than they are to Joe Satriani. They also tend to go to tougher schools, and its been shown that children from poverty tend to do worse in school. So in this sense, its more of the society that makes you dumb and then the corporations that stuff commercialized hip hop down one's throat type of list. I'm a hip hop head, but I don't listen to mainstream since I need stuff that is more political or thought-provoking like Eyedea & Abilities or Immortal Technique. We can all agree that Jonas Brothers stuff is not as complicated and intelligent as something by Beethoven or Steve Vai. I think music is a more touchy issue like the author of this article said. I'll admit, when I listen to techno, I'm not listening to a "smart" form of music, whereas when I listen to Immortal Technique or some sort of guitar, I'm listening to something that requires more thought.
It seems to me that more priveleged upper-middle class white kids have occasion to be exposed to the more "difficult," "inaccessible," "indie" music that happens to fall toward the higher end of the scale. I wonder why that might be. And I wonder why some people are such music elitists all of a sudden. SAT scores are a less useful for measuring "intelligence" than they are for measuring socio-economic stratification.
Besides, the SAT's have been on a scale of 2400 since 2006. I wonder if that affects the data trend at all.
I guess we'll never know (unless we have the luxury of free time in graduate school, as Mr. Griffith seems to).
Post a new comment