I enjoyed the article, especially the last part where he shows ‘Bachies’ criticizing quite irrationally other old musicians.

I completely agree on his idea that there is a disposition towards fandom in some people, who may show fandom towards different and unrelated topics, in contrast to people that are more reluctant to have fandom attitudes in general. This is in relation to people that have addictive predisposition, in opposition of the different substances/activities being the cause of addiction.

About the ‘high class’ or refined vs. ‘low class’ or unrefined fandom:

• First, I think that what is considered a ‘refined’ taste by some, can be considered ‘unrefined’ by some others. As an example, a classic music listener can be disdainful towards a progressive rock listener, who in turn can feel the same with a pop listener. Sometimes, it can be hard to draw a clear line.
• The different words used, fan vs. conoisseur, have clearly different tones. Fan comes from fanatic, a negative word, while conoisseur gives more the idea of an expert, a positive word. By itself, the world ‘fan’ doesn’t denote any kind of expertise in the loved subject. There is obviously an intention in the separation of fan vs. conoisseur.
• Following the previous point, the opposition between ‘high class/culture’ and ‘low class/culture’ in attitude, the reluctance of the ‘high class’ to be called fans, in my opinion stems from an older clash of civilization vs. the savage world. In this case, the ‘high classes’ (that want to be thought of ‘the cultured’) align themselves with the roles of civilizers, of the rationality, while putting the ideas they don’t like on the fringe of irrationality (fanatics). This reminded me of a famous Argentine book.