To expound just a moment further, the concept of pop as being 'disposable' carries some interesting paradoxes. I suspect most of us have much stronger memories of or reactions to hearing a well-loved pop tune than we do many supposedly more 'ambitious' attempts at making great rock music. When a high-concept piece really works and hits on all levels, of course, the impact can be powerful. But when 'artists' who feel they must try to 'say' something with every song lack the ability or insight (or both) to bring it all together in a memorable and cohesive way, the result often embarrases more than does a fun toss-off.
Another aspect worth reflecting on is that artists reknowned for their emotionally 'heavier' work, starting with The Beatles and Dylan and going foward, almost always base their best tunes within a pop-conscious musical setting. In contrast, music that tries hard to be meaningful but discards the creative roots of the pop song structure is often forgotten in short order. A big part of the secret of the success of artists who are widely perceived as being 'complex', from Costello to U2 to Springsteen to Gabriel, is that they all knew how to base their best work in a pop-derived context (and when they have seemingly lost that ability, their listenability has suffered). Compare examples like those to artists who seem to try to make their music as heavy as their pretensions, but lose the essential pop thread - I think you will realize they are not nearly as important to people in the long run.
Another seeming contradiction to the 'throwaway' notion can be found in examples taken from music that actually was 'intended' to be disposable in a sense. Does anybody really think that Chuck Berry was doing anything other than trying to win the kids' money when he tossed off his classic material about cars and girls which became bedrock? He listened to jazz, C&W, and vocal standards music himself. Or look at The Ramones - almost every song an anthem in the best (non-strained, non-self-important) sense, yet all of them based on about four simple major and minor chords and delivered in an intentionally but deceptively artless fashion. 'Disposability' was an embedded part of the aesthetic, but the tunes are stone classics which have, and will, stand the test of time a hell of a lot better than a thousand more allegedly-'meaningful' bodies of work.
One of the greatest capacities of rock & roll as an art form is its ability to celebrate, in an emotionally-moving way, life's inanities and base impulses. What other kind of art form could one turn to in order to get the feeling you do from hearing "Louie, Louie" or "Wild Thing"? This is what rock excells at, and what is not-coincidentally all too often forgotten and frowned upon today, leading to 'pop' that truly *will* be proven disposable in the test of time.
