Jason Hartley

What should be a humorous "theory," that extremely talented entertainers who show a marked decline in the quality of their output, or produce later output that alienates their earlier fans (Sting, Bob Dylan, Lou Reed) have actually become so talented that their output is too advanced for their "overt" fans, is taken way too seriously by the author. Even if the theory is true, who cares? No amount of "advancement" is going to get me to like Ten Summoner's Tales or Metal Machine Music.

This is a very fun book. It is not to be taken seriously. First book in a long time that literally had me laughing out loud every several sentences.

I suspect there are lots of others who could enjoy this book a lot more than I was capable of. I don't know nearly as much as I perhaps should about musicians and bands, and certainly not movie directors/producers and athletes. So there are a lot of references that went right over my head. But I love books and music and movies and sporting show more events, and I loved the Advanced Genius Theory about the people who create all of them.

Mostly I loved the Theory that lets us enjoy all of the iterations of all of these things, without having to take the art, artist, or ourselves so dadgum seriously. show less

Hysterical. I'm not sure if the author is pulling my leg or dead serious. Or both. It makes a lot of sense and I've been quoting it liberally.

Entertaining read, and Advancement Theory is an interesting take on the dynamic of what's happening when a musician puts out an album that disappoints the fanbase. Due to the criteria put forth, especially the one on longevity, the book mostly focused on artists who started before the 90s, which is pretty picked over territory.