Article in Sunday NY times
Panurge
</ARTE JOHNSON> I'd like to cross-post this reply to alt.gothic, so for
their sake, here's the link again:
www.nytimes.com/2002/05/05/arts/music/05REYN.html?ex=1021658681&ei=1&en=79c69fcea3d137f3
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sez SIMON REYNOLDS:
...the retro styles of the 1960's and 70's
had been strip-mined to the point of exhaustion.
Sez _MOI_:
Not the '70s; though the ultimate rock bogeyman, progressive rock, is back
as well, no one in the mainstream media dare pay any attention. I'm also
not seeing very many feather-and-wing long hair on young dudes, either
(alas). (Strangely enough, I'm seeing lots of guys wearing circa-1970
clothes with VERY out-of-period Andrew "Dice" Clay-style quasi-pomps or
Morrissey-style quasi-crewcuts, which go back at least 10 years further.
Whether they know it's out of period or not I really have no idea.)
My basic point is that there really hasn't been much of a "celebration" or
revival of what the '70s were _really_ about. Go back to the old
newsreels. Watch _Dazed_And_Confused_. Listen to _Close_To_The_Edge_ and
remind yourself you're listening to a TOP 10 ALBUM.
Anyway, pop cult revivals tend to arrive punctually
after roughly 20 years...
This should be enough to set off people's Skewed Perspective Detectors.
This self-fulfilling piece of conventional wisdom first appeared, oh,
about 20 years ago. When "new wave" first came along (and I mean Elvis
Costello and the Knack, not Gary Numan), the music they were using as the
basis for their styles wasn't even quite 15 years old (though it seemed as
if eons had passed, the rate of change had been so great).
_American_Graffiti_, which asked, "Where were you in '62?" (I was nowhere,
BTW), was released in '73. (OTOH, that film didn't actually get people
dressing '50s as a daily matter.)
For the people fueling the trend, the artifice of 80's
pop culture seems
refreshing at a time when the "keep it real"
ethos...dominates the mainstream.
Well, the underlying point for me is that "authenticity" isn't about any
specific external gesture. It's about doing what's in your heart to do.
Amazingly, people seem to have forgotten something that ought to be
obvious. If you're doing what you really like, you're authentic.
Larry Tee, who founded Berliniamsburg and is its
resident D.J., said of the
revival, "It's happening now because all the formats of
popular music are so
abused that people are revolting."
True. But they're not only revolting by way of '80s revivalism. More on
that later.
Is it any wonder that "That 70's Show"
of the late 90's has begotten "That 80's Show" in 2002?
I understand that "That '70s Show" is still doing better in the ratings, though.
This suggests that the glossy pop from the early days
of MTV is gradually
displacing 60's Motown and 70's disco from their
privileged places in
popular memory...[.]
'70s disco never really had that place. Early-'70s classic rock does,
though, and people of all ages still listen to it in a way that doesn't
seem to be true of '60s Motown.
Nothing captures and communicates a sense of period
better than the clothes
and pop music associated with it. Other art forms,
meanwhile, don't seem to
succumb to these bouts of nostalgia.
Interesting. OTOH, TV does seem susceptible, especially advertising and videos.
Then there is the 80's of glammed-up "hair
metal," as resurrected by performers like Andrew W. K.,...
I notice not even Andrew W.K. dares to revive the _look_.
"With 1980's retro, we have reached the point of
second-order recycling,"
said Andrew Ross, a cultural critic.... "It's the
equivalent, God forbid,
of double quotation marks."
STOP THE QUOTATION-MARK INSANITY!!
Really, this is an important point for me. People used to figure that
once everything was mined a second time, we'd _have_ to come up with
something truly new. *Oh, well*.
One point I have to concede: '80s indie rock and new wave are as much
"counterfactual"--the results of a game of musical "what-if"--as "retro".
But you can do that with anything, really. What's important is that
people recognize a certain reactionary spirit in what they're doing
here--something I've always doubted.
What most people find alluring about the 80's, though,...
can be summed up by the oxymoronic term "retro-futurist."
A culture where almost everything is retro and nothing looks to the future
(and where the ultimate retro-trend, the Neo-Squaring of America--harking
back all the way to the early '60s, the '50s, and even the '40s--shows no
signs of abating) has no business calling anything "retro-futurist."
_Thirties_ futurism is "retro-futurist."
"Neo-Square" culture, whether used "ironically" or in earnest, seeks to
deny the possibility that a fundamentally new esthetic could emerge. What
Reynolds doesn't note is that the "futurist" esthetic of the '80s has
strong roots in the '70s. As far as its actual history is concerned, it
reaches back to the late '50s; I remember seeing a photo of a
molded-plastic chair designed by Eero Saarinen that would've fit on the
set of "That '70s Show", or maybe an office lounge in 1973. (And of
course, Saarinen designed the St. Louis Arch in 1948, 18 years before it
was actually built. Now _that's_ looking forward. Too bad Saarinen
didn't live to see it go up.)
...[T]oday's electro groups...evoke a period when
electronic music seemed alien
and forbiddingly novel. They are making machine-music
and proud of it.
The _sound_, maybe. But if you really want "alien and forbiddingly
novel", you need to get yourself a piece of early-to-mid-'70s Tangerine
Dream. More to the point, surely today's technology can be used to make
_new_ "alien and forbiddingly novel" music?
The modern electro scene's hollow-inside pose is
filtered through a healthy amount of
irony and camp humor,though.
What, like the original one wasn't?? ;-P
This sensibility derides the authentic and
wholesome
while exalting the synthetic and artificial,...[.]
"Does the idea never come to people that I could be 'artificial' by
nature?" --Maurice Ravel
"Electro has no real sense of
rules, and thus there is a lot of excitement,
innovation and creativity."
If it had "no real sense of rules", it wouldn't be recognizable as a
style! ...Well, that's a bit harsh. A style is marked by a preponderance
of elements and a certain relationship between them, not a determination
that any given thing must always or must never be there. Still, there's
going to be a certain outlook that determines what fits a genre and what
doesn't (not that that should ever stop anyone, of course).
Electro is a return to what clubs were like before
house music and Ecstasy hit
the scene, a rewind to a time when the goal was to
stand out from the crowd.
"Learn from the past; don't necessarily _use_ it." --Jean-Louis Gassée
I hope that it doesn't take a "rewind" to be reminded of some important
values lost along the way. Unfortunately, since the emergence of punk and
new wave, it seems to be standard operating procedure.
Electro is already on the verge of taking over as the
next big thing in dance
music.
Hmpf. So much for two-step!
But what are its prospects of becoming chart-topping
pop like the
music of the synth-pop artists Human League and Depeche
Mode?
Another SPDetector alert. I wasn't aware that Depeche Mode topped the Hot
100 very often.
One thing people forget about the '80s is that, like the '70s, there
really wasn't a dominant musical style. This is a Very Good Thing.
New-wave and indie-rock, though, certainly dominated the sensibilities of
reasonably serious people making movies and TV shows for a youth-oriented
audience. I can't think of one '80s movie that had a predominantly
hard-rock or metal soundtrack that wasn't fundamentally crass.
For that to happen, the 80's revival must escape the
irony-clad
embrace of hipsterland and resonate more widely.
Good luck. The '80s stuff was all about "irony" to begin with, unlike the
'70s stuff. Take the "irony" out of the '80s paradigm and there's
practically nothing left.
[T]he grunge groups...were seen as a refreshing return
to reality
after the frivolous hair metal of groups like Poison.
This ignores the fact that the audiences for those genres aren't really
the same--and neither were the grunge-meisters really from the same scene
as Dinosaur Jr. As for the hair metal audience, they still would've
bought good hair metal (if you accept that that's not an oxymoron) if
they'd only had it offered to them. But I guess record label execs
figured they could be rich _and_cool_ for the same price it would take
just to be rich.
Oh, and just as a counterexample to the '91 recession, the '75 recession
didn't seem to do a thing to musical tastes, at least in the U.S; in fact,
that's right when Kiss and Aerosmith made it big (though they'd each made
a few records already). And the Great Depression nurtured a massive
appetite for escapism.
Most importantly, it ignores one basic idea: Ultimately, music is not
*about*; music *is*. What drives music can't justify it; music has to
stand or fall on its own merits, as a matter of the craft and sensitivity
of the musician.
Nowadays, hipsters are able to rifle through a vast
archive of pop culture,...
The resulting vogues...are not so much signs of the
times as floating signifiers:
sounds and images that circulate in an autonomous zone
of cool
that may be only tenuously related to "the real world."
The *least cool rock musician in the whole wide world*, '70s
progressive-rock keyboardist Rick Wakeman, recently put it fairly simply:
*It's not necessarily about "generations" anymore*. Dividing people by
generations keeps apart some people who might find common cause otherwise
with respect to more fundamental things. You could almost say it's at
(well, at least near) the heart of the (wait for it) postmodern condition.
My dream is a little like the hair-metal dream: Take the '80s (and '90s,
for that matter) and use those elements and ideas to _enrich_, not
supplant, the '70s _rawk_ paradigm (yes, I used the word "paradigm". I
beg the Party's mercy and will write a self-criticism), creating a
powerful language with a large, widespread vocabulary from which to draw.
This will make more personal styles (in both senses of the phrase)
possible. Otherwise, I fear we're doomed to keep playing hopscotch with
the frying-pan and the fire--ever forsaking new problems for old ones (or
vice versa) instead of actually solving any of them.
OK. So what does this mean for the Goth scene? Anything at all?
Reynolds never mentions Goths or New Romantics anywhere in his report.
Could the scene benefit by association with, say, the new electro bands?
Is the scene too far removed in its sensibilities now for that to
happen?
Oh--one kinda naive question: When Reynolds refers to "electro", is he
referring to EBM or something else? (I'm guessing something else--I've
never heard of any of the acts he mentions.)
--
"In art, it must always be as it is in Spring." --Arnold Schoenberg
Jetrock Fuckblast
"Panurge" <jbl...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jblanks-0705...@user-38lc48j.dialup.mindspring.com...
> OK. So what does this mean for the Goth scene? Anything at all?
> Reynolds never mentions Goths or New Romantics anywhere in his report.
> Could the scene benefit by association with, say, the new electro bands?
> Is the scene too far removed in its sensibilities now for that to
> happen?
>
Essentially, the goth scene needs to get fed up with its current state and
ready to accept the new. As any DJ at a goth club can tell you, getting
goths to accept new music can be a lot like bashing one's head into a brick
wall. But as clubs continue to empty and club operators get more desperate
(speaking from experience here) they'll keep trying new stuff until people
start poking their heads in the door again.
In many ways EBM needs to die off before this can happen--the handful of
kids still going to clubs want to hear it, and they need to be... DONE AWAY
WITH. RADICALLY.
oops. sorry.
anyhow, what is needed is a new wave of bands more interested in traditional
goth themes and imagery, but with some new take on things. Each successive
generation of gloomy bands had a new skew to add--the next wave arrives when
someone is able to successfully modify their sound to avoid being a mere
repetition of the past, while still being a reflection (through a weird new
lens) of it. In this way, I think the current wave of indie rock & electro
could be beneficial, because the music is more based on actual musicians
(who play instruments) instead of the 90's focus on one guy programming MIDI
keyboards in his living room. That change meant that being an actual "goth
band" (one that played instruments) became a discouraging experience--why
bother learning to play instruments and arranging a band when people would
rather hear the results of one guy programming his computer? Admittedly,
some of those guys programmed their computers pretty well, but something was
lost along the way, I think...
> Oh--one kinda naive question: When Reynolds refers to "electro", is he
> referring to EBM or something else? (I'm guessing something else--I've
> never heard of any of the acts he mentions.)
>
"electro" refers more to the current wave of pseudo new wave bands
characterized by an aesthetic very close to late 70's/early 80's skinny-tie
new wave, typically featuring live drummers, guitars, and keyboards played
by a musician rather than programmed via MIDI. I'm afraid I don't know many
examples other than ones in my local area, which others probably wouldn't
recognize. Since they aren't that popular, they are in much the same place
as indie rockers of the middle 80's--they are unknown outside the
underground, because the mainstream is only interested in pushing accessible
mainstream bands, and isn't desperate enough to start combing the
underground yet--and unlike 1990, they blame the current downturn in record
sales on digital copying rather than admit that people are getting sick of
derivative crap.
Personally, I'm trying to push my own species of what I'd call an 80's
revival--my own project is heavily influenced by the 80's indie rock bands
referred to with the disturbing moniker "pigfuck" by the few people who
listened to them--stuff like Killdozer and Big Black, as well as other 80's
indie like the Butthole Surfers. I'm personally aiming for a sound that is
loud and brutal and aggressive, without being as stupidly macho as nu-metal
(or even old-metal) and trying to avoid the wankiness of new-progressive (or
old-progressive) sounds. I suppose it's not all that gothic (though we have
been tagged with the "gothic" moniker, since most of our performers wear
black, and some wear fetish/vinyl apparel on stage) but it's what turns my
lightbulbs.
erithromycin
>Panurge
>>OK. So what does this mean for the Goth scene? Anything at all?
>>Reynolds never mentions Goths or New Romantics anywhere in his report.
>>Could the scene benefit by association with, say, the new electro bands?
>>Is the scene too far removed in its sensibilities now for that to
>>happen?
>Essentially, the goth scene needs to get fed up with its current state and
>ready to accept the new. As any DJ at a goth club can tell you, getting
>goths to accept new music can be a lot like bashing one's head into a brick
>wall. But as clubs continue to empty and club operators get more desperate
>(speaking from experience here) they'll keep trying new stuff until people
>start poking their heads in the door again.
I want new music. Or, rather, I want to hear stuff I haven't heard before.
There are tunes out there that are thirty years old that should get played
to every goth worth their salt. Instead we get VNV Nation, who, while
lovely, can't find taxi numbers.
>In many ways EBM needs to die off before this can happen--the handful of
>kids still going to clubs want to hear it, and they need to be... DONE AWAY
>WITH. RADICALLY.
You might want to rephrase that. Well, maybe not. Our 'clubs' are getting an
infusion of the young, and they're being catered to. Fuck 'em. I don't go to
clubs so the ones who've tagged along can have fun. I go to hear stuff. New
stuff, if I'm lucky, or good old stuff, if I can manage it. Instead I'm
subjected to the Chemical Brothers, who, admittedly, I like, but Tom and Ed
are about as goth as a bacon sandwich. Goths can like bacon sandwiches, but
it takes a little effort to call a bacon sandwich inherently goth. I don't
have a problem with bacon sandwiches in clubs, but sometimes I want
something a bit more sophisticated.
>oops. sorry.
Erm, I think I just got lost in metaphor.
>anyhow, what is needed is a new wave of bands more interested in
traditional
>goth themes and imagery, but with some new take on things.
Or we could Thieve Like Magpies Who Bathe In Crude Oil and adopt anything
and everything that's a) good, and b) a bit dark. There's enough out there.
Hell, there's also the bizarre Endless Electro Eighties (tm) which gives us
stuff like Fischerspooner's 'Emerge' and Laptop. That stuff is, at times,
New Romantic As Fuck, an' I likes it.
>Each successive
>generation of gloomy bands had a new skew to add--the next wave arrives
when
>someone is able to successfully modify their sound to avoid being a mere
>repetition of the past, while still being a reflection (through a weird new
>lens) of it.
Gah! I don't want people's sounds to get modified like that. That's just,
you know, bad. I think. I'd rather music evolved. Goth's dead, folks. It
left the first time you heard some kid ask who this 'Soft Cell' who covered
that Brian Warner track were, and nobody in the club told them. You know.
The same thing that happened to three-guitar one-drummer pop when The
Beatles became the band Paul McCartney was in before 'Wings'.
>In this way, I think the current wave of indie rock & electro
>could be beneficial, because the music is more based on actual musicians
>(who play instruments) instead of the 90's focus on one guy programming
MIDI
>keyboards in his living room.
Amen. There's goodness out there, but it's not being searched out, at least
as I've seen. I know that there's a price to be paid for experimentation,
and I know that people like some stuff, and don't like others, but fuck it.
I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
>That change meant that being an actual "goth
>band" (one that played instruments) became a discouraging experience--why
>bother learning to play instruments and arranging a band when people would
>rather hear the results of one guy programming his computer? Admittedly,
>some of those guys programmed their computers pretty well, but something
was
>lost along the way, I think...
What about the cult of the DJ? I mean, it's all well and good being
post-modern, but if you're smiling while you're at it you're a cunt. There
are guys, and girls, whose taste in music I follow, because they're good at
rooting out stuff I might not otherwise have found. Why not benefit us all,
and those artists too. We shouldn't all have to dig in bargain bins for
forgotten classics in this day and age, should we? That's what those fees
are for, no?
>>Oh--one kinda naive question: When Reynolds refers to "electro", is he
>>referring to EBM or something else? (I'm guessing something else--I've
>>never heard of any of the acts he mentions.)
>"electro" refers more to the current wave of pseudo new wave bands
>characterized by an aesthetic very close to late 70's/early 80's skinny-tie
>new wave, typically featuring live drummers, guitars, and keyboards played
>by a musician rather than programmed via MIDI.
I'd have said it's closer to what Disco grew up to be. You know, Trance,
Dance, Jungle, Big Beat, and all that. The live drummers thing's a bit new,
well, mid-nineties. A lot of comes from European club culture, mixed with a
good whack of Detroit and NY and Chicago. A lot of it's one guy, with some
friends.
>I'm afraid I don't know many examples other than ones in my local area,
which others >probably wouldn't
>recognize. Since they aren't that popular, they are in much the same place
>as indie rockers of the middle 80's--they are unknown outside the
>underground, because the mainstream is only interested in pushing
accessible
>mainstream bands, and isn't desperate enough to start combing the
>underground yet
The record industry was born desperate, and can't learn. It'll push anything
too much to get what money's in it, then blame something else when it all
falls down.
>--and unlike 1990, they blame the current downturn in record
>sales on digital copying rather than admit that people are getting sick of
>derivative crap.
Hey, that's what I said.
>Personally, I'm trying to push my own species of what I'd call an 80's
>revival--my own project is heavily influenced by the 80's indie rock bands
>referred to with the disturbing moniker "pigfuck" by the few people who
>listened to them--stuff like Killdozer and Big Black, as well as other 80's
>indie like the Butthole Surfers. I'm personally aiming for a sound that is
>loud and brutal and aggressive, without being as stupidly macho as nu-metal
>(or even old-metal)
\m/
Not all old-metal was machismo with guitars.
>and trying to avoid the wankiness of new-progressive (or
>old-progressive) sounds. I suppose it's not all that gothic (though we have
>been tagged with the "gothic" moniker, since most of our performers wear
>black, and some wear fetish/vinyl apparel on stage) but it's what turns my
>lightbulbs.
I thought that it was nuns that turned lightbulbs.
BOLD ASSERTION
The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
Verse, Chorus, Loud Bit, Quiet Bit, etc.
The primary unit of The Rest Of The World's Popular Music is the Hook.
You know, the bit that keeps you listening.
This is because the US Record Industry milked Disco until it died in the
mainstream.
That's just my theory.
--
erith - "it's all just bleep bleep bleep bleep bleep"
Tiny Human Ferret
>
<snips>
> "electro" refers more to the current wave of pseudo new wave bands
> characterized by an aesthetic very close to late 70's/early 80's skinny-tie
> new wave, typically featuring live drummers, guitars, and keyboards played
> by a musician rather than programmed via MIDI.
I would just about go down on the devil's wife to hear such a band doing
some 21st-century angst-and-loathing lyrics atop some artfully orchestrated
nicey-nice music that goes sodden with evil once the singer's done moping,
with soaring leads that have some blessed sense on when to stop noodling and
when to start with the rip-and-shred. Think of a cross between King
Crimson's "Court of the Crimson King", Led Zeppelin (don't shoot me okay?)
"Kashmir", or for that matter "D'yer Maker" or even "Stairway to Heaven", or
some truly sad shit like the Rolling Stone's "Angie", all of that crossed
with the sort of energy one got out of The Fixx in "One Thing Leads to
Another". Or hell, cross Elvis Costello with, say... the GoGos, and does the
offspring with lots of crappy acid, a touch of bathtub crank, shake until
foamy and then break against the nearest wall of repressive Political
Correctness, whatever comes smoking from the rubble is probably what I want
to hear. Outrageous transcultural rhythms, interplanetary funk, psychotic
visionary lyrics celebrating the intolerable from the inside of the
oppressor, with the last verse the spew of remorse through a shredded
throat. Give me music that breeds rage and felony or artful suicide, none of
this "let's all poke holes in ourselves and OD on X" shit, okay?
The one thing I really hate the fuck out of the oontz-oontz stuff is that
it's essentially "Disco with better production values and more modern
equipment". Why do I like The Cure so much? Because they have a fucking
great guitar player as well as a mopey vocalist. See also my review of Hate
Machine or Hate Factory or whoever the hell they were. Energy, tightness,
LIVE MUSICIANS ON LIVE INSTRUMENTS.
I've about had it with MIDI crap, unless and until they can take it to the
level achieved 30 years ago by Walter/Wendy Carlos and, oh, Kraftwerk a bit
later.
It's just about time, I'm likening post-Industrial oontz-oontz to the disco
doldrums of the late 1970s, I'm desperately waiting for the New Punk Rock. I
can't die until I've heard it, so fucking hurry up already.
--
Be kind to your neighbors, even though they be transgenic chimerae.
Whom thou'st vex'd waxeth wroth: Meow. <-----> http://earthops.net/klaatu/
The Raphrat
> Jetrock Fuckblast
> >Panurge
i have points and contributions,
but first...
> >In many ways EBM needs to die off before this can happen--the handful of
> >kids still going to clubs want to hear it, and they need to be... DONE AWAY
> >WITH. RADICALLY.
>
> You might want to rephrase that. Well, maybe not. Our 'clubs' are getting an
> infusion of the young, and they're being catered to. Fuck 'em. I don't go to
> clubs so the ones who've tagged along can have fun. I go to hear stuff. New
> stuff, if I'm lucky, or good old stuff, if I can manage it. Instead I'm
> subjected to the Chemical Brothers, who, admittedly, I like, but Tom and Ed
> are about as goth as a bacon sandwich. Goths can like bacon sandwiches, but
> it takes a little effort to call a bacon sandwich inherently goth. I don't
> have a problem with bacon sandwiches in clubs, but sometimes I want
> something a bit more sophisticated.
>
> >oops. sorry.
>
> Erm, I think I just got lost in metaphor.
okay, that totally r00led my night.
=D
> >Each successive
> >generation of gloomy bands had a new skew to add--the next wave arrives
> when
> >someone is able to successfully modify their sound to avoid being a mere
> >repetition of the past, while still being a reflection (through a weird new
> >lens) of it.
has there really been any of that though?
the past 15 years can pretty much be summed
up as "Sisters -> StepSisters -> Switchblade
Symphony&Guitar Industrial -> EBM&Synthpop"
notice how there's really only 2 band
names that stand out.
> Gah! I don't want people's sounds to get modified like that. That's just,
> you know, bad. I think. I'd rather music evolved. Goth's dead, folks. It
> left the first time you heard some kid ask who this 'Soft Cell' who covered
> that Brian Warner track were, and nobody in the club told them. You know.
> The same thing that happened to three-guitar one-drummer pop when The
> Beatles became the band Paul McCartney was in before 'Wings'.
there are no white-trash ravers.
however, white trash still wants to dance.
or at least wants to try to.
wow, i'm a dick.
> >In this way, I think the current wave of indie rock & electro
> >could be beneficial, because the music is more based on actual musicians
> >(who play instruments) instead of the 90's focus on one guy programming
> MIDI
> >keyboards in his living room.
>
> Amen. There's goodness out there, but it's not being searched out, at least
> as I've seen. I know that there's a price to be paid for experimentation,
> and I know that people like some stuff, and don't like others, but fuck it.
> I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
> drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
for the past three years i've been
raving about The Faint. they are without
a doubt the most inventive and GOTHEST
band around these days. they take classic
post-punk song structures and ram new-wave
synthpop instrumentation into it like a
square peg into a round hole. utterly
fucking brilliant, emotional, and political
to boot.
but no one wanted to give them the time
of day because they're considered indie rock.
now they're on the mainstream radar
thanks to No Doubt. too bad.
yinz all missed your chance.
at least batty has the fucking balls to
spin them at the goth clubs. few others do.
THEY are what the future of goth could
be. but they won't be, because we only
love our own - and then only until others
like them.
subcultures are so fucking stupid.
> BOLD ASSERTION
>
> The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
> Verse, Chorus, Loud Bit, Quiet Bit, etc.
> The primary unit of The Rest Of The World's Popular Music is the Hook.
> You know, the bit that keeps you listening.
> This is because the US Record Industry milked Disco until it died in the
> mainstream.
>
> That's just my theory.
well, that certainly would explain
why the british charts have always been
more fun than the US. they still can spot
a good pop song.
and in all honesty,
the only thing better than a good
pop song is a
...
you know, i can't seem to think of
anything better than a good pop song.
- Raphrat
grasping for "witty" and failing...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Jetrock Fuckblast
"Tiny Human Ferret" <ixnayamsp...@earthops.net> wrote in message
news:3CD866EE...@earthops.net...
> I would just about go down on the devil's wife to hear such a band doing
> some 21st-century angst-and-loathing lyrics atop some artfully
orchestrated
> nicey-nice music that goes sodden with evil once the singer's done moping,
> with soaring leads that have some blessed sense on when to stop noodling
and
> when to start with the rip-and-shred. Think of a cross between King
> Crimson's "Court of the Crimson King", Led Zeppelin (don't shoot me okay?)
> "Kashmir", or for that matter "D'yer Maker" or even "Stairway to Heaven",
or
> some truly sad shit like the Rolling Stone's "Angie", all of that crossed
> with the sort of energy one got out of The Fixx in "One Thing Leads to
> Another". Or hell, cross Elvis Costello with, say... the GoGos, and does
the
> offspring with lots of crappy acid, a touch of bathtub crank, shake until
> foamy and then break against the nearest wall of repressive Political
> Correctness, whatever comes smoking from the rubble is probably what I
want
> to hear. Outrageous transcultural rhythms, interplanetary funk, psychotic
> visionary lyrics celebrating the intolerable from the inside of the
> oppressor, with the last verse the spew of remorse through a shredded
> throat. Give me music that breeds rage and felony or artful suicide, none
of
> this "let's all poke holes in ourselves and OD on X" shit, okay?
>
i'm liking it. and i'm trying to find it and play it. i'd perform it but
i'm not a good enough musician. I can hack out some pretty good
pseudoo-metallic jokey angst with heavy guitars and squadrons of folks
banging on metal bits, though.
> The one thing I really hate the fuck out of the oontz-oontz stuff is that
> it's essentially "Disco with better production values and more modern
> equipment". Why do I like The Cure so much? Because they have a fucking
> great guitar player as well as a mopey vocalist. See also my review of
Hate
> Machine or Hate Factory or whoever the hell they were. Energy, tightness,
> LIVE MUSICIANS ON LIVE INSTRUMENTS.
>
indeedy. gotta love those people who actually know how to play things.
> I've about had it with MIDI crap, unless and until they can take it to the
> level achieved 30 years ago by Walter/Wendy Carlos and, oh, Kraftwerk a
bit
> later.
>
the main difference is that early 70's electronic folks were people playing
keyboards and trying to sound machine-like, and modern MIDI based stuff is
machines trying to sound like people playing keyboards. there's a
difference.
MIDI and electronic music have nearly unlimited potential. but it is almost
all wasted because those who make it, for the most part, conform strictly to
very limiting sets of rules. because it's easy. like playing the same 4/4
beat and three guitar chords forever. but without knowing how to play a
chord on a guitar or keep a steady beat.
>
> It's just about time, I'm likening post-Industrial oontz-oontz to the
disco
> doldrums of the late 1970s, I'm desperately waiting for the New Punk Rock.
I
> can't die until I've heard it, so fucking hurry up already.
>
it's hurrying. give it a year or three.
erithromycin
>erithromycin wrote:
>>Jetrock Fuckblast
>>>Panurge
[snip 'bacon sandwiches']
>okay, that totally r00led my night.
Glad to be of service. Though I'm still really hungry.
>>Amen. There's goodness out there, but it's not being searched out, at
least
>>as I've seen. I know that there's a price to be paid for experimentation,
>>and I know that people like some stuff, and don't like others, but fuck
it.
>>I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
>>drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
>for the past three years i've been
>raving about The Faint. they are without
>a doubt the most inventive and GOTHEST
>band around these days. they take classic
>post-punk song structures and ram new-wave
>synthpop instrumentation into it like a
>square peg into a round hole. utterly
>fucking brilliant, emotional, and political
>to boot.
I've heard 'em on Peel. They do rock out.
>but no one wanted to give them the time
>of day because they're considered indie rock.
Are We Not Vultures? 'Goth' was a word thrown over a straggly group of bands
that had fuck all in common apart from the fact that a bunch of people liked
'em in a certain way.
Ecoutez et Repetez:
I do not listen to it because it is goth. It is goth because I like to
listen to it.
BING![1]
>at least batty has the fucking balls to
>spin them at the goth clubs. few others do.
Amen. Though all credit to those with the cojones.
>THEY are what the future of goth could
>be. but they won't be, because we only
>love our own - and then only until others
>like them.
Well, fuck it. I quite like Black Rebel Motorcycle Club. I fucking love
Fischerspooner. You've noticed, I'm sure, how many people on a.g. rate
G!YBE. Let's do something about it.
>subcultures are so fucking stupid.
Yeah? Well people who wear clothes smell.
>>BOLD ASSERTION
>>The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
>>Verse, Chorus, Loud Bit, Quiet Bit, etc.
>>The primary unit of The Rest Of The World's Popular Music is the Hook.
>>You know, the bit that keeps you listening.
>>This is because the US Record Industry milked Disco until it died in the
>>mainstream.
>>That's just my theory.
>well, that certainly would explain
>why the british charts have always been
>more fun than the US. they still can spot
>a good pop song.
Though it's been getting more ballad heavy with American imports who have
the publicity machine to sell but not the songs. You may not have heard
interviews with acts like 5ive where they talk about wanting a ballad on the
album for The Cute One Who Might Be Gay But Still Gets Adored By
Preadolescents And Spinsters to show his vocal stylings on, but I have. Most
boyband albums are about 50/50 Ballad/Hook, and that's only because they're
the last vestige of Dress-Up Dolly-Pop left in the states, and most of them
have European producers.
>and in all honesty,
>the only thing better than a good
>pop song is a
>
>...
Bacon Sandwich!
>you know, i can't seem to think of
>anything better than a good pop song.
Bacon Sandwich!
> - Raphrat
> grasping for "witty" and failing...
erith-
[1] Please don't kill me. Or David, for that matter.
--
I'm going for a bacon sandwich.
Jetrock Fuckblast
"erithromycin" <erithr...@ananzi.co.za> wrote in message
news:dVXB8.1094$Ay2.1...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
> I want new music. Or, rather, I want to hear stuff I haven't heard before.
> There are tunes out there that are thirty years old that should get played
> to every goth worth their salt. Instead we get VNV Nation, who, while
> lovely, can't find taxi numbers.
a few clubs are getting desperate enough to try playing new music, and/or to
play old music that never got played in clubs much. I'm trying, with mixed
results--though, since my shift at the club is the hour before any paying
customers arrive, I haven't been able to get too much feedback yet. Next
month, when we change to split shifts, one early and one late, I'll see what
happens when I play Sleepytime Gorilla Museum during prime dancing hours...
>
> You might want to rephrase that. Well, maybe not. Our 'clubs' are getting
an
> infusion of the young, and they're being catered to. Fuck 'em.
yeh, but keep in mind that the kids are the ones gonna shove dirt in our
old-ass eyes in a few years. I prefer to brainwash the young with what I
consider good music, new or old.
>
> Or we could Thieve Like Magpies Who Bathe In Crude Oil and adopt anything
> and everything that's a) good, and b) a bit dark. There's enough out
there.
which is, essentially, the idea. the original wave of gothic bands thieved
from late 60's/early 70's rock bands into a new synthesis. the same can be
done again, with slightly different metaphors.
> Hell, there's also the bizarre Endless Electro Eighties (tm) which gives
us
> stuff like Fischerspooner's 'Emerge' and Laptop. That stuff is, at times,
> New Romantic As Fuck, an' I likes it.
>
> Gah! I don't want people's sounds to get modified like that. That's just,
> you know, bad. I think. I'd rather music evolved. Goth's dead, folks. It
> left the first time you heard some kid ask who this 'Soft Cell' who
covered
> that Brian Warner track were, and nobody in the club told them. You know.
> The same thing that happened to three-guitar one-drummer pop when The
> Beatles became the band Paul McCartney was in before 'Wings'.
>
or when some kid asked who was playing that cover of the Nine Inch Nails
song in the "Crow" soundtrack...
sounds get modified through the natural process of evolution. that's what
evolution is. not rehashing but redefining.
> Amen. There's goodness out there, but it's not being searched out, at
least
> as I've seen. I know that there's a price to be paid for experimentation,
> and I know that people like some stuff, and don't like others, but fuck
it.
> I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
> drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
a lot of people can't stand being challenged. they want to hear exactly the
same songs they heard last week. hearing new songs means they don't know
exactly when to swoop more slowly when they're taffy-pulling on the
dancefloor, so they don't bother dancing at all to new stuff. and an empty
dancefloor makes a club look dead no matter how many people are in it.
> What about the cult of the DJ? I mean, it's all well and good being
> post-modern, but if you're smiling while you're at it you're a cunt. There
> are guys, and girls, whose taste in music I follow, because they're good
at
> rooting out stuff I might not otherwise have found. Why not benefit us
all,
> and those artists too. We shouldn't all have to dig in bargain bins for
> forgotten classics in this day and age, should we? That's what those fees
> are for, no?
again, I'm trying. there's some neato stuff out there that I'm trying to
force on people, but because my club has a rep for being daring and
experimental, people stay away in droves. oh, well, there is the fact that
it was on a sunday night, but at least we're moving to saturday. then we'll
see who is willing to test their musical endurance...
>
> >"electro" refers more to the current wave of pseudo new wave bands
> >characterized by an aesthetic very close to late 70's/early 80's
skinny-tie
> >new wave, typically featuring live drummers, guitars, and keyboards
played
> >by a musician rather than programmed via MIDI.
>
> I'd have said it's closer to what Disco grew up to be. You know, Trance,
> Dance, Jungle, Big Beat, and all that. The live drummers thing's a bit
new,
> well, mid-nineties. A lot of comes from European club culture, mixed with
a
> good whack of Detroit and NY and Chicago. A lot of it's one guy, with some
> friends.
i think that mid-nineties to current is what the article was talking
about--though I didn't read the whole thing so I don't know. but I have seen
an awful lot of pseudo new-wave bands at indie-rock shows attended by other
grown-up punkers like myself, and apparently liking it quite a bit. i just
need to convince some of them to sit still while I put some eyeliner on 'em
and sit them in front of some goths and see what happens.
>
> Not all old-metal was machismo with guitars.
>
yeah, yeah, I know, but most people tend to assume that. I'm trying to plug
my own mode of metallic structure which is less machismo-oriented. there was
and is metal for geeks. i'm a geek.
> BOLD ASSERTION
>
> The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
> Verse, Chorus, Loud Bit, Quiet Bit, etc.
>
> The primary unit of The Rest Of The World's Popular Music is the Hook.
> You know, the bit that keeps you listening.
>
> This is because the US Record Industry milked Disco until it died in the
> mainstream.
>
> That's just my theory.
the existence of punk rock as an American phenomenon pokes rather large
holes in that theory, though, and plenty of non-American bands have made use
of the ballad form. As evidence of the first half of the last sentence, the
Stooges. As evidence of the second half, Led Zeppelin.
Edvamp
>Fischerspooner.
Really? I was curious how known they might be. They've been getting rotation
in local clubs since they're a local act and always get a good response. I
hear their live shows are interesting.
Ever and Always
Edvamp
If it weren't for my horse, I wouldn't have spent that year in college.
www.insidecx.com
Panurge
>"Panurge" <jbl...@mindspring.com> wrote...
>
>> OK. So what does this mean for the Goth scene?
>>
>Essentially, the goth scene needs to get fed up with its current state and
>ready to accept the new.
OK. But part of me is thinking, "Here we go again." What we ought to be
doing is making sure that every tradition is reaching its potential, not
branding Old And Tired everything that's not being marketed as The Very
Latest And Greatest.
>As any DJ at a goth club can tell you, getting
>goths to accept new music can be a lot like bashing one's head into a brick
>wall.
We're fairly open here in Atlanta. It's a fairly informal, friendly scene.
>anyhow, what is needed is a new wave of bands more interested in traditional
>goth themes and imagery, but with some new take on things.
I'm tryin', I'm tryin'! (I'm kinda hobbled by my prospective bandmates;
at least I can write music for them in the meantime.)
>Admittedly,
>some of those guys programmed their computers pretty well, but something was
>lost along the way, I think...
Why not have both? Why throw away anything just out of abstract principle?
>...unlike 1990, they blame the current downturn in record
>sales on digital copying rather than admit that people are getting sick of
>derivative crap.
I think people are sicker now than they were in '90. But thanks for the reply.
>I'm personally aiming for a sound that is
>loud and brutal and aggressive, without being as stupidly macho as nu-metal
>(or even old-metal)...
"Nu-metal" is no metal at all. It's more like punk with a heavy
hard-rock/metal influence. Specifically:
*If a majority of the members have short hair, it's not a metal band.* :-P
To be fair, I like the underlying groove. Problem is, that's all there is
to it. It's the end result of an overcompensating process that began in
the late '80s.
>and trying to avoid the wankiness of new-progressive (or
>old-progressive) sounds.
Well, wank is flashy and heroic, and Goth is not, so that's fair enough.
But most alt-culture denizens would do well to cultivate at least some
wank tolerance. Just rejecting all serious virtuosity out of hand is as
insensitive as shred guitarists are accused of being; you wind up sounding
like the Emperor in _Amadeus_ complaining about "too many notes." Too few
notes (and, yes, there is such a thing) are worse than too many, and most
alt-culture music is based on the premise that there's no such thing as
too few notes. (BTW, what would you consider "new-progressive"?)
Panurge
>I would just about go down on the devil's wife to hear such a band doing
>some 21st-century angst-and-loathing lyrics atop some artfully orchestrated
>nicey-nice music that goes sodden with evil once the singer's done moping,
>with soaring leads that have some blessed sense on when to stop noodling and
>when to start with the rip-and-shred. Think of a cross between King
>Crimson's "Court of the Crimson King",
What, not "Fracture"?? ;-)
>Led Zeppelin (don't shoot me okay?)...
Rock will not get its groove back until it becomes truly willing to
understand and appreciate the Seventies--and I mean the post-hippy-dippy
Seventies that gave us Led Zeppelin, prog, and arena-rock and all the
stuff that punk made officially Culturally Incorrect. I'll say it again:
If there's one thing that rock'n'roll is *not* about, it's *austerity*.
But, yeah, "Kashmir" would be a good reference point.
>...or for that matter "D'yer Maker"...
AAAAAAAHHH!
With all due respect... Despite the props that ought to go to Jimmy Page
for inventing (or at least anticipating) Modern Drum Production on that
tune, I've always hated it. (And I'm speaking as someone who remembers
hearing it on Top 40 AM radio.) Add to that the fact that NO ONE seems to
know how to pronounce it. (Took me well over a decade to figure it out
myself.)
>Give me music that breeds rage and felony or artful suicide, none of
>this "let's all poke holes in ourselves and OD on X" shit, okay?
If there's one thing I've realized, it's that if there's music I want to
hear, that's an indication that I need to be a musician.
>The one thing I really hate the fuck out of the oontz-oontz stuff is that
>it's essentially "Disco with better production values and more modern
>equipment".
Agreed. But that's not the only genre you could say that about. It
amazes me how people could think indie-rock was ever truly new in spirit
(if they did; I just figured it was all a big inside joke). It's all
about "counterfactuality" and appropriation of the sort the NYT article
was talking about.
>I've about had it with MIDI crap, unless and until they can take it to the
>level achieved 30 years ago by Walter/Wendy Carlos and, oh, Kraftwerk...
It's out there. Have you heard Frank Zappa's stuff from the last six
years of his life? He did it on a Synclavier, but what you can do there
you can do with MIDI by now.
Oh--and try a Google search for "Biffy The Elephant Shrew." (Hit "I'm
Feeling Lucky.") It's a decent example of "genius in the basement studio"
music.
Just to pull out another hopelessly unhip name, what Rush did with
integrating a guitar-rock band and over-the-top MIDI sequencing in the
mid-'80s is something I think isn't widely appreciated. (What was talked
about at the time is how it was costing them in terms of spontaneity.)
>I'm desperately waiting for the New Punk Rock. I
>can't die until I've heard it, so fucking hurry up already.
I'm waiting for the New Hippies and Longhair Rawkers, as in "ones who've
learned from the mistakes of the past, but not in a way that makes them
apologize for what they are."
Panurge
>Jetrock Fuckblast wrote:
>>Each successive
>>generation of gloomy bands had a new skew to add--the next wave arrives
>when
>>someone is able to successfully modify their sound to avoid being a mere
>>repetition of the past, while still being a reflection (through a weird new
>>lens) of it.
>
>Gah! I don't want people's sounds to get modified like that. That's just,
>you know, bad. I think. I'd rather music evolved.
What's the difference? That's just one kind of evolution.
>Goth's dead, folks.
What is this thing that POMO hipsters have with declaring everything
"dead" when things don't go the way they'd want them to go? And does
"dead" have to mean "permanently gone"? If it does, explain new-wave and
indie-rock.
It
>left the first time you heard some kid ask who this 'Soft Cell' who covered
>that Brian Warner track were, and nobody in the club told them. You know.
>The same thing that happened to three-guitar one-drummer pop when The
>Beatles became the band Paul McCartney was in before 'Wings'.
An urban legend, I suspect. In any event, other people's lack of
historical perspective isn't necessarily earth-shattering or indicative of
CULTURAL DEATH.
>I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
>drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
I never knew anyone who went to a club to be challenged. They go to meet
their friends, dance, and have a few.
>Not all old-metal was machismo with guitars.
What would the exceptions be? Would you call Sunset Strip glam-metal an
example of "machismo"?
(There are two kinds of people in the world: people who think hair bands
are *girly fag posers* and those who think hair bands are macho
Neanderthals. It's amazing that people can hold such exactly opposite
opinions of the same scene, and I think it says something really
interesting about our society and what it expects from Penis People.)
>The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
Naah. It's the Good Song. I've devoted my musical life to fighting the
tyranny of the Good Song, whether it's from Diane Warren or Bob Mould.
There should be Good Songs, but only a fraction of all good music is Good
Songs.
Panurge
>I'll see what
>happens when I play Sleepytime Gorilla Museum during prime dancing hours...
!!!
"SLEEEP...IIISS...WRROOOOOONNGGG!! *WRROOOOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGG*!!!"
We total dweebs on REC.MUSIC.PROGRESSIVE (well, those who don't just want
to hear third-generation rehashes of Genesis with less of what made them
interesting musically--though some of that stuff can be first-rate, too)
proudly claim SGM as one of our own.
If you're playing SGM, what about Porcupine Tree? Think an updated Floyd
with Nick Drake fronting (though an acquaintance of mine said he sounded
more like Edward KaSpel).
>the original wave of gothic bands thieved
>from late 60's/early 70's rock bands into a new synthesis.
Exactly which bands are you talking about here? I don't hear too much Zep
or Pink Floyd in "She's In Parties"; I do, though, hear some _earlier_
influences.
>the same can be done again, with slightly different metaphors.
Agreed. Maybe *everything* needs to be "recovered" and be available
before we can have our "real" future.
>i think that mid-nineties to current is what the article was talking
>about--though I didn't read the whole thing so I don't know. but I have seen
>an awful lot of pseudo new-wave bands at indie-rock shows attended by other
>grown-up punkers like myself, and apparently liking it quite a bit. i just
>need to convince some of them to sit still while I put some eyeliner on 'em
>and sit them in front of some goths and see what happens.
You know, isn't this the _second_ "new wave of new wave"?
"Elastica is Romeo Void. I'm sorry, they're the same band."
--Roger Manning (of Jellyfish)
Panurge
>for the past three years i've been
>raving about The Faint. they are without
>a doubt the most inventive and GOTHEST
>band around these days....
>now they're on the mainstream radar
>thanks to No Doubt. too bad.
>yinz all missed your chance.
The Faint are playing ATL soon, and the local Goth promoters are
seriously, well, promoting them as a possible Hope For The Old School's
Future. I liked what I heard pretty well. I don't know about
"brilliant", but it takes a lot to impress me.
>and in all honesty,
>the only thing better than a good
>pop song is a
concept album. <DUCK>
Jetrock Fuckblast
> "Jetrock Fuckblast" <jet...@emrl.com> wrote:
> >As any DJ at a goth club can tell you, getting
> >goths to accept new music can be a lot like bashing one's head into a
brick
> >wall.
>
> We're fairly open here in Atlanta. It's a fairly informal, friendly
scene.
>
Sacramento's fairly informal and friendly too. But nothing clears out the
dancefloor like an unfamiliar song.
> >Admittedly,
> >some of those guys programmed their computers pretty well, but something
was
> >lost along the way, I think...
>
> Why not have both? Why throw away anything just out of abstract
principle?
It just needs to get overplayed and sit and fester for a while, so
experimenters can play with it and break out of the rather restrictive and
arbitrary rules that saddle EBM and other contemporary electronic formats.
Electronic music is a wide-open continent but nobody is willing to leave the
main highways--which is a good reason to start blowing up overpasses.
> I think people are sicker now than they were in '90. But thanks for the
reply.
>
I dunno about that. I recall being continually horrified of popular music
back then. C&C Music Factory. Vanilla Ice. MC Hamster.
RICK ASTLEY.
it hurts just to think about it. of course, there was a weird and vibrant
underground then. Back then you could have an underground involving more
than 50 people without a hundred websites dedicated to it. One pet theory I
read a while back involved the idea that underground cultures, operating as
isolated from the mainstream as 80's indie rock was, are impossible in this
age--by the time more than a handful of people notice its existence, it can
get horribly overexposed thanks to the existence of this here Internet
thingy--just as the existence of the Internet destroyed much of the
tape-trading/photocopied zine culture of that period.
> "Nu-metal" is no metal at all. It's more like punk with a heavy
> hard-rock/metal influence. Specifically:
>
> *If a majority of the members have short hair, it's not a metal band.*
:-P
>
> To be fair, I like the underlying groove. Problem is, that's all there is
> to it. It's the end result of an overcompensating process that began in
> the late '80s.
>
I'll agree that it's nothing like "classic" 80's metal, which wasn't much
like 60/70's metal. And I've seen plenty of crappy nu-metal bands with long
hair. And the musical core of my own band is 3/4ths shaved-head and 1/4
short hair, but that's because the three of us with shaved heads have
premature baldness... though I don't really claim we're all that metal.
Punk is in a quandry. Pop punk became mainstream a long time ago, hardcore
sort of slid sideways into nu-metal but really hasn't changed all that much
since Minor Threat broke up. There are still some unpopular punk subsets
that still have potential for glory, though.
> >and trying to avoid the wankiness of new-progressive (or
> >old-progressive) sounds.
>
> Well, wank is flashy and heroic, and Goth is not, so that's fair enough.
> But most alt-culture denizens would do well to cultivate at least some
> wank tolerance. Just rejecting all serious virtuosity out of hand is as
> insensitive as shred guitarists are accused of being; you wind up sounding
> like the Emperor in _Amadeus_ complaining about "too many notes." Too few
> notes (and, yes, there is such a thing) are worse than too many, and most
> alt-culture music is based on the premise that there's no such thing as
> too few notes. (BTW, what would you consider "new-progressive"?)
>
I don't reject virtuosity out of hand--I just reject virtuosity for its own
sake. Valuing virtuosity too much results in crap like Yngwie Malmsteen's
Rising Shorts, or Joe Satriani. Admittedly, I don't care much for a lot of
"back to basics, stripped-down, no-bullshit rock & roll" either--which
typically just sounds like a Ramones cover band. I prefer a middle road
between amateurish three-chord and obsessive fretboard stylings.
Jetrock Fuckblast
> >I'll see what
> >happens when I play Sleepytime Gorilla Museum during prime dancing
hours...
>
> !!!
>
> "SLEEEP...IIISS...WRROOOOOONNGGG!! *WRROOOOOOOOOOONNNNNGGGG*!!!"
>
> We total dweebs on REC.MUSIC.PROGRESSIVE (well, those who don't just want
> to hear third-generation rehashes of Genesis with less of what made them
> interesting musically--though some of that stuff can be first-rate, too)
> proudly claim SGM as one of our own.
>
Noisefest, and a friend turned me on to SGM last year. I finally got to see
them a while back. I threw a loaf.
> If you're playing SGM, what about Porcupine Tree? Think an updated Floyd
> with Nick Drake fronting (though an acquaintance of mine said he sounded
> more like Edward KaSpel).
>
that in itself has potential. haven't heard of it, but mebbe I go lookin'.
> >the original wave of gothic bands thieved
> >from late 60's/early 70's rock bands into a new synthesis.
>
> Exactly which bands are you talking about here? I don't hear too much Zep
> or Pink Floyd in "She's In Parties"; I do, though, hear some _earlier_
> influences.
>
The holy trinity: Stooges (Iggy Pop), Velvet Underground (Lou Reed), Bowie.
Crazy World of Arthur Brown.
The glam stuff, which is more early 70's, of course. T. Rex and such.
The Doors. (Mick Mercer backs me up on this one, so nyah.)
> >the same can be done again, with slightly different metaphors.
>
> Agreed. Maybe *everything* needs to be "recovered" and be available
> before we can have our "real" future.
>
> >i think that mid-nineties to current is what the article was talking
> >about--though I didn't read the whole thing so I don't know. but I have
seen
> >an awful lot of pseudo new-wave bands at indie-rock shows attended by
other
> >grown-up punkers like myself, and apparently liking it quite a bit. i
just
> >need to convince some of them to sit still while I put some eyeliner on
'em
> >and sit them in front of some goths and see what happens.
>
> You know, isn't this the _second_ "new wave of new wave"?
>
> "Elastica is Romeo Void. I'm sorry, they're the same band."
> --Roger Manning (of Jellyfish)
>
my favorite pet theory is the 14 year cycle of musical reappearance--you can
sit down and chart it out, it's scary. Musical styles have 14 year cycles of
popularity, overexposure, decay, moribundity, and rebirth--I kiped it of an
article in MAXIMUMROCKNROLL back in 1989, and it's downright uncanny. In
brief:
Peak years for various musical formats:
Punk: 1977, 1991
Electronic/Industrial: 1975, 1989
Gothic: 1979, 1993
you can chart out 14 year cycles of peak years for country and folk and
rockabilly and any other musical format. Maybe it is a bit of projection but
it's remarkably accurate in my experience. By my calculations I think there
will be some very very interesting industrial bands in the next year or two.
lorelei
> >I fucking love
> >Fischerspooner.
>
> Really? I was curious how known they might be. They've been getting rotation
> in local clubs since they're a local act and always get a good response. I
> hear their live shows are interesting.
They get played on "charts" radio stations here in Germany, but last
time I checked their lp wasn't even released domestically in the US
(their home country!)
Electro and "neo-Welle" 80's inspired stuff is indeed huge here. I
highly recommend the double-cd comp "Future 80's" on the Electric
Kingdom label which includes the likes of Fischerspooner, Miss Kittin,
Tok Tok, Chicks on Speed, etc. Quite poppy stuff but genuinely
enjoyable, even for those as keen on eternal darkness, pain and misery
as me.
lorelei
Panurge
>"Panurge" <jbl...@mindspring.com> wrote...
>> "Jetrock Fuckblast" <jet...@emrl.com> wrote:
>
>> >Admittedly,
>> >some of those guys programmed their computers pretty well, but something
>> >was lost along the way, I think...
>>
>> Why not have both? Why throw away anything just out of abstract
>principle?
>
>It just needs to get overplayed and sit and fester for a while, so
>experimenters can play with it and break out of the rather restrictive and
>arbitrary rules that saddle EBM and other contemporary electronic formats.
I think the underlying question is, "Why do things get played out in the
first place?" The answer (to me) is that they stagnate. So for me,
getting a style to stop stagnating is a better solution that declaring it
off-limits. I mean, I think I've come up with an innovative formulation
that would bring hair-metal back from the dead (at least artistically),
but I can't raise a band because people aren't prepared to play hair-metal
because all they can think of is the lame '80s stuff. Looks like a studio
project. (Maybe I can do the Gorillaz thing with it and have a cast of
characters instead of a band.) :-P
>I recall being continually horrified of popular music
>back then. C&C Music Factory. Vanilla Ice. MC Hamster.
>
>RICK ASTLEY.
Fair enough. I just wasn't thinking in those terms--I was thinking in
terms of rock _per_se_.
>it hurts just to think about it. of course, there was a weird and vibrant
>underground then. Back then you could have an underground involving more
>than 50 people without a hundred websites dedicated to it. One pet theory I
>read a while back involved the idea that underground cultures, operating as
>isolated from the mainstream as 80's indie rock was, are impossible in this
>age--by the time more than a handful of people notice its existence, it can
>get horribly overexposed thanks to the existence of this here Internet
>thingy--just as the existence of the Internet destroyed much of the
>tape-trading/photocopied zine culture of that period.
I never thought of the '80s "indie-rock" scene as being all that isolated;
it was (and still is) the bread-and-butter of college radio, AFAI can
tell. But I wonder about your theory. I see plenty of "underground"
stuff that that won't happen to. I mentioned Porcupine Tree
elsewhere--the Internet has helped them somewhat, but they're in no danger
of being overexposed as far as the general audience is concerned.
>Punk is in a quandry. Pop punk became mainstream a long time ago, hardcore
>sort of slid sideways into nu-metal but really hasn't changed all that much
>since Minor Threat broke up. There are still some unpopular punk subsets
>that still have potential for glory, though.
Through all these years of checking out the discourse on the subject, I
notice the idea of punk as such is *fucking inviolable*. Maybe that's the
problem??
>I don't reject virtuosity out of hand--I just reject virtuosity for its own
>sake. Valuing virtuosity too much results in crap like Yngwie Malmsteen's
>Rising Shorts, or Joe Satriani.
Who themselves would be offended by such a charge. Eye of the beholder, etc.
Panurge
>"Panurge" <jbl...@mindspring.com> wrote...
>I've shared the stage with Moe! Staiano multiple times as part of the
>Noisefest, and a friend turned me on to SGM last year. I finally got to see
>them a while back. I threw a loaf.
<chuckle>
>> >the original wave of gothic bands thieved
>> >from late 60's/early 70's rock bands into a new synthesis.
>>
>> Exactly which bands are you talking about here?
>>
>The holy trinity: Stooges (Iggy Pop), Velvet Underground (Lou Reed), Bowie.
>Crazy World of Arthur Brown.
OK. Sounds right. It's just not the first thing I think of when I hear
the phrase "late 60's/early 70's rock". Still, I wonder. Like other "new
wave", what I hear first is British Invasion music and mid-'60s California
garage rock.
>The glam stuff, which is more early 70's, of course. T. Rex and such.
OK.
>The Doors. (Mick Mercer backs me up on this one, so nyah.)
Oh--I understand perfectly. Besides, the Doors were simply the last
mid-'60s California garage rock band.
One problem--I _can't_stand_ that stuff for the most part. (Well,
_New_York_ was pretty cool in its own way.) Not only does this make me
TOTALLY UNHIP, I'm not even worthy of joining the discourse, because
EVERYBODY KNOWS that this is INARGUABLY GREAT STUFF. It's exactly what
the punks complained about in the first place WRT Zep/Floyd/etc. I'm also
automatically tagged as a conservative, too, which (considering the raw
material of most alt-culture music) really irks me.
>my favorite pet theory is the 14 year cycle of musical reappearance--you can
>sit down and chart it out, it's scary.
I've heard about that. It hasn't come around to me yet. :-P
Edvamp
>time I checked their lp wasn't even released domestically in the US
>(their home country!)
Hardly surprising. A local band called Dystopia One told me they sold more CDs
online in Maine then they did in New York where they live. Scary.
erithromycin
> >I fucking love
> >Fischerspooner.
>
> Really? I was curious how known they might be.
Rotation on Radio 1 here in the UK. I bought their album earlier this week,
which has been rebranded and rereleased. #1, for the not knowing.
>They've been getting rotation
>in local clubs since they're a local act and always get a good response. I
>hear their live shows are interesting.
I'm told the same. 'Emerge' looks like it might be a monster hit if it gets
released in the right places. It appeals.
erithromycin
>erith!
>>I want new music. Or, rather, I want to hear stuff I haven't heard before.
>a few clubs are getting desperate enough to try playing new music, and/or
to
>play old music that never got played in clubs much. I'm trying, with mixed
>results--though, since my shift at the club is the hour before any paying
>customers arrive, I haven't been able to get too much feedback yet. Next
>month, when we change to split shifts, one early and one late, I'll see
what
>happens when I play Sleepytime Gorilla Museum during prime dancing hours...
Heh. Well, you do that. I'd be intrigued.
>>You might want to rephrase that. Well, maybe not. Our 'clubs' are getting
>>an infusion of the young, and they're being catered to. Fuck 'em.
>yeh, but keep in mind that the kids are the ones gonna shove dirt in our
>old-ass eyes in a few years. I prefer to brainwash the young with what I
>consider good music, new or old.
Fuck the young. What you daid.
>>Or we could Thieve Like Magpies Who Bathe In Crude Oil and adopt anything
>>and everything that's a) good, and b) a bit dark. There's enough out
>>there.
>which is, essentially, the idea. the original wave of gothic bands thieved
>from late 60's/early 70's rock bands into a new synthesis. the same can be
>done again, with slightly different metaphors.
Well, sort of. Don't thieve their stuff, and make versions of it. Just
thieve their stuff. Don't be an artist, run a chopshop. Respray something
goth!
>>I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
>>drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
>a lot of people can't stand being challenged.
Since when were we that 'lot of people'?
>they want to hear exactly the
>same songs they heard last week. hearing new songs means they don't know
>exactly when to swoop more slowly when they're taffy-pulling on the
>dancefloor, so they don't bother dancing at all to new stuff. and an empty
>dancefloor makes a club look dead no matter how many people are in it.
Fuck the dancefloor. I go to listen. Dancing's an extra. I'll _leave_ if I
don't like it. I won't just avoid the dancefloor.
>>BOLD ASSERTION
>>The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
>>Verse, Chorus, Loud Bit, Quiet Bit, etc.
>>The primary unit of The Rest Of The World's Popular Music is the Hook.
>>You know, the bit that keeps you listening.
>>This is because the US Record Industry milked Disco until it died in the
>>mainstream.
>>That's just my theory.
>the existence of punk rock as an American phenomenon pokes rather large
>holes in that theory, though,
Ahem. "American Popular Music". There are obvious exceptions, but look at
the Billboard charts. Rap's got hooks, at least some of it anyway. Puffy
makes rap that's ballads, I think. Or maybe 'Good Songs'. That's why he
should stick to marketing.
>and plenty of non-American bands have made use
>of the ballad form. As evidence of the first half of the last sentence, the
>Stooges. As evidence of the second half, Led Zeppelin.
I forgot to add the 'after disco' part.
--
erith - "we lose ten million skin scales a day" - newsround
erithromycin
>me
>>Jetrock Fuckblast wrote:
>>>someone is able to successfully modify their sound to avoid being a mere
>>>repetition of the past, while still being a reflection (through a weird
new
>>>lens) of it.
>>Gah! I don't want people's sounds to get modified like that. That's just,
>>you know, bad. I think. I'd rather music evolved.
>What's the difference? That's just one kind of evolution.
Well, yeah, but no, dude, no. I don't want to see the past reinterpreted.
That's not evolution, that's tailoring. Tailoring makes some damn fine
things, but it doesn't make anything NEW!
>>Goth's dead, folks.
>What is this thing that POMO hipsters have with declaring everything
>"dead" when things don't go the way they'd want them to go? And does
>"dead" have to mean "permanently gone"? If it does, explain new-wave and
>indie-rock.
Sorry. I forgot to be wearing my POMO hipster hat when I said that. It's,
um, all about the artists. From what I've read, 'Goth' was a label applied
to some bands that became an ever spiraling musical genre, intent on
pillaging itself. That's why so much sounds the same, like some seperate,
desperate, Galapagos pop, where the finches have top hats and synths. 'Dead'
doesn't mean gone, just, well, ill. I don't want to explane new-wave, and
indie-rock isn't a genre, it's a mechanism of finance. I know that last
parts untrue, by the way, but it isn't too.
>An urban legend, I suspect. In any event, other people's lack of
>historical perspective isn't necessarily earth-shattering or indicative of
>CULTURAL DEATH.
Alright, not 'Death'. Being useless.
>>I want to be challenged. Why the fuck else do I go to a club? I can get
>>drunk and dance to most of what gets played in the comfort of my own home.
>I never knew anyone who went to a club to be challenged.
Now you do. Hi!
>>Not all old-metal was machismo with guitars.
>What would the exceptions be? Would you call Sunset Strip glam-metal an
>example of "machismo"?
It was a bold assertion, that's flawed, like any discussion of music's going
to end up, because what we hear and like is different, and our perspectives
vary. Hi! I'm 21, and didn't listen to the radio until 1994. How 'bout you?
>(There are two kinds of people in the world: people who think hair bands
>are *girly fag posers* and those who think hair bands are macho
>Neanderthals.
I think they're shit, to be honest. Does that count? Either, and both.
Nothing splits that easy.
>It's amazing that people can hold such exactly opposite
>opinions of the same scene, and I think it says something really
>interesting about our society and what it expects from Penis People.)
Do you mean men or frontmen?
>>The primary unit of American Popular Music is the Ballad.
>Naah. It's the Good Song. I've devoted my musical life to fighting the
>tyranny of the Good Song, whether it's from Diane Warren or Bob Mould.
>There should be Good Songs, but only a fraction of all good music is Good
>Songs.
Maybe you're right. It's nothing but a BOLD ASSERTION. THey're usually
wrong, in places.
--
erith - "go!"
Panurge
>I don't want to see the past reinterpreted.
Most of what's been hip since about 1978 is "the past reinterpreted."
Elvis Costello is "the past reinterpreted." "Boys Don't Cry" is "the past
reinterpreted." R.E.M. is "the past reinterpreted." (And "the past" is
always 1965, for some reason.) And what new stuff that scene did bring
got fitted onto that 1965-through-a-funhouse-mirror esthetic.
>That's not evolution, that's tailoring. Tailoring makes some damn fine
>things, but it doesn't make anything NEW!
>From what I've read, 'Goth' was a label applied
>to some bands that became an ever spiraling musical genre, intent on
>pillaging itself.
Sounds right to me.
>I don't want to explane new-wave, and
>indie-rock isn't a genre, it's a mechanism of finance. I know that last
>part's untrue, by the way, but it isn't too.
How untrue could it be that you can think of a genre of music when you
hear the term?
>Hi! I'm 21, and didn't listen to the radio until 1994. How 'bout you?
Let's just say that from my perspective you've got a *lot* to catch up
with. ;-)
>Panurge!
>>(There are two kinds of people in the world: people who think hair bands
>>are *girly fag posers* and those who think hair bands are macho
>>Neanderthals.
>
>I think they're shit, to be honest. Does that count? Either, and both.
>Nothing splits that easy.
You'd think. But in this case, it seemed to. They could've been
something really good, but (like Goth) they seemed to think that just
employing all the genre conventions would automatically produce good
music.
BTW, why do _you_ think they were shit?
>>I think it says something really
>>interesting about our society and what it expects from Penis People.)
>
>Do you mean men or frontmen?
Men in general. Why Kevin James and Drew Carey are supposed to represent
the Typical Male in any year after 1963 totally bewilders me. I guess The
Old Men Who Still Run Everything like them.
A.K.
<erithr...@ananzi.co.za> wrote:
>>yeh, but keep in mind that the kids are the ones gonna shove dirt in our
>>old-ass eyes in a few years. I prefer to brainwash the young with what I
>>consider good music, new or old.
>
>Fuck the young. What you daid.
Well, of *course* we fuck the young too. It's a clever, plan see:
So, little girl, you're interested in goth music? Well it so happens
that I am a goth! Let me make you a mix tape (or if you really wanna
impress her: burn you a mix CD. Ooooh Aaaaah). Why don't you come up
to my room and I'll show you my CD collection, and my big boots.
(Detour: when I was a young goth girl I went home with this guy who
got me really drunk and by his bed there was a row of maybe 6 or 7
pairs of various different very pointy boots. It was a beautiful
moment, in its glorious seediness, and uber gothic cheeze)
Then you get the girl in your room and of course you put on some music
so that she can get an idea of what it's all about and choose what she
likes.
You start with somehing easy and relaxing like Dead Can Dance to win
her trust. Then using your mad bedroom DJ skillz you select a
progression of increasingly romantic and skanky songs (be sure to hit
Oingo Boingo's Little Girls along the way), culminating in the
undeniably and irresisteably sexy "I wanna get in your pants" (Cramps)
"Did I tell you I'm in a band?
yes, and I can do hand stands too.
...
Baby you got the clothes,
you got romance,
you got the boots,
so I just gotta ask,
can I get in your pants?"
And if you've done it right at that point neither of you will be
wearing any pants anyway.
So, as I was saying, brainwashing the young into good music and
fucking the young are actually very compatible goals.
(hm... maybe Under the Wires is sexier. "What kind of panties are you
wearing? And how long have you been wearing them?")
}..{
Agnieszka
"Masha, why do you always wear black?"
"Because I am in mourning for my life" -- Chekov
--------------------------------------------------------------------
webpage: http://electricelf.org :|: zine: http://ocotpusarmy.org
erithromycin
>me
>>I don't want to see the past reinterpreted.
>Most of what's been hip since about 1978 is "the past reinterpreted."
>Elvis Costello is "the past reinterpreted." "Boys Don't Cry" is "the past
>reinterpreted." R.E.M. is "the past reinterpreted." (And "the past" is
>always 1965, for some reason.) And what new stuff that scene did bring
>got fitted onto that 1965-through-a-funhouse-mirror esthetic.
Fuck hip. Actually, that's given me an idea. Ahem. Yeah. Fuck hip. I'm not
in this to be hip. I'm in it to find stuff I like. As for 1965, well, um,
one of my parents was alive. No, wait, both. I think. Yeah.
>>That's not evolution, that's tailoring. Tailoring makes some damn fine
>>things, but it doesn't make anything NEW!
Were you going to respond to this? Or did you? Colour me confused. [heh]
>>From what I've read, 'Goth' was a label applied
>>to some bands that became an ever spiraling musical genre, intent on
>>pillaging itself.
>Sounds right to me.
Sucks, no?
>>I don't want to explane new-wave, and
>>indie-rock isn't a genre, it's a mechanism of finance. I know that last
>>part's untrue, by the way, but it isn't too.
>How untrue could it be that you can think of a genre of music when you
>hear the term?
Well, actually, I think of a label applied to any amount of stuff. The
definition of indie-rock that I accept, fascist that I am, is stuff produced
on independent or quasi-independent labels. That it spawned a sound called
indie-rock is neither here nor there. I don't like labels, as there are too
many. Indie-rock splits lots, but then, I'm an indie-roleplayer, so I just
make things worse.
>>Hi! I'm 21, and didn't listen to the radio until 1994. How 'bout you?
>Let's just say that from my perspective you've got a *lot* to catch up
>with. ;-)
Perhaps. Perhaps not, however. I don't know. Remember those discussions
about age and maturity? I'm time displaced. I am a chrononaut. You get
shitty reception during time travel. The radio I listened to was firmly
post-playlist good-stuff thing, new/old/current[ish] by people who liked it.
6+ hours of education a night, every weeknight, more or less, for the last 8
years. I didn't go out until '98, after all.
>>Panurge!
>>>(There are two kinds of people in the world: people who think hair bands
>>>are *girly fag posers* and those who think hair bands are macho
>>>Neanderthals.
>>I think they're shit, to be honest. Does that count? Either, and both.
>>Nothing splits that easy.
>You'd think. But in this case, it seemed to. They could've been
>something really good, but (like Goth) they seemed to think that just
>employing all the genre conventions would automatically produce good
>music.
I'd agree with that.
>BTW, why do _you_ think they were shit?
Well, that bit where I agreed with you. I don't mind genre conventions, but
I like the tunes that a) set them, and b) define them. I also like pop, and
a lot of the stuff I've heard [and I won't deny the existence of possible
exceptions] doesn't meet my tastes. No hooks, just solos. Or overexposure. I
think I've heard 'Sweet Child Of Mine' at least 200 times, which is too many
for me. It was, like, a bit cool that first time, but then I wondered why it
was that long. I like my tunes compact, without padding, or if they are
going to waffle to waffle in ways that intrigue.
>>>I think it says something really
>>>interesting about our society and what it expects from Penis People.)
>>Do you mean men or frontmen?
>Men in general. Why Kevin James and Drew Carey are supposed to represent
>the Typical Male in any year after 1963 totally bewilders me. I guess The
>Old Men Who Still Run Everything like them.
Fuck the old men. Let's not turn this into a guy-bashing thread though eh?
Some of my best friends are technically male. As for 'typical', fuck that
shit. I don't look for stereotypes, I look for exceptions. Maybe that's why
so much hair metal pisses me off. It's all the same! What I said about disco
getting reapplied everywhere. The record industry didn't learn from applying
genre conventions all over the place, and it still hasn't learned. Look at
the clones man! They attack!
--
erith - yeah!
Panurge
>Panurge!
>>Most of what's been hip since about 1978 is "the past reinterpreted."
>>Elvis Costello is "the past reinterpreted." "Boys Don't Cry" is "the past
>>reinterpreted." R.E.M. is "the past reinterpreted." (And "the past" is
>>always 1965, for some reason.) And what new stuff that scene did bring
>>got fitted onto that 1965-through-a-funhouse-mirror esthetic.
>
>Fuck hip. Actually, that's given me an idea. Ahem. Yeah. Fuck hip. I'm not
>in this to be hip. I'm in it to find stuff I like. As for 1965, well, um,
>one of my parents was alive. No, wait, both. I think. Yeah.
>>>That's not evolution, that's tailoring. Tailoring makes some damn fine
>>>things, but it doesn't make anything NEW!
>
>Were you going to respond to this? Or did you? Colour me confused. [heh]
I did, but in the first comment above. I just forgot to snip it.
>I'm time displaced. I am a chrononaut. You get
>shitty reception during time travel. The radio I listened to was firmly
>post-playlist good-stuff thing, new/old/current[ish] by people who liked it.
>6+ hours of education a night, every weeknight, more or less, for the last 8
>years. I didn't go out until '98, after all.
Would you believe that I didn't, either? (Well, that's not entirely true,
but it might as well be for all I went out earlier. Back then, I just
didn't have the $ to spare--or the knowledge of what was going on. I've
always been in my own little world, where Happy The Man still matters.)
>I like my tunes compact, without padding, or if they are
>going to waffle to waffle in ways that intrigue.
I like to avoid padding, too. But the waffling is the thing for me. I
mean, getting there is half (most of?) the fun!
>>Why Kevin James and Drew Carey are supposed to represent
>>the Typical Male in any year after 1963 totally bewilders me. I guess The
>>Old Men Who Still Run Everything like them.
>
>Fuck the old men.
Oooooo... <scrunchy face>
>Let's not turn this into a guy-bashing thread though eh?
>Some of my best friends are technically male.
Fair enough. "Technically male"--well, *I'm* technically male; I have no
problem with that. Self-conscious neo-mookdom, OTOH...
>I don't look for stereotypes, I look for exceptions. Maybe that's why
>so much hair metal pisses me off. It's all the same!
Well, the exceptions didn't get heard by many people. In my more paranoid
moments, I get the idea that there was some sort of long-term scheme by
which that Beautiful Spandex Boy dispensation was set up to fail in a very
public and humiliating manner so that Real Guys <tm> could re-assert their
cultural hegemony. It's all James Hetfield's fault. :-P
>Look at the clones man! They attack!
The rate of change between '65 and '75 seems to have spoiled us. Things
didn't really change that quickly before then. This thing about a
revolution every five or ten years and utter stagnation in between tells
me something's seriously wrong with the way we put pop culture together
these days. It doesn't have to be like this.
erithromycin
>erith
>>I'm time displaced. I am a chrononaut. You get
>>shitty reception during time travel. The radio I listened to was firmly
>>post-playlist good-stuff thing, new/old/current[ish] by people who liked
it.
>>6+ hours of education a night, every weeknight, more or less, for the last
8
>>years. I didn't go out until '98, after all.
>Would you believe that I didn't, either? (Well, that's not entirely true,
>but it might as well be for all I went out earlier. Back then, I just
>didn't have the $ to spare--or the knowledge of what was going on. I've
>always been in my own little world, where Happy The Man still matters.)
That sounds like a scary place. I figure that if you're happy it doesn't
matter though, no?
>>I don't look for stereotypes, I look for exceptions. Maybe that's why
>>so much hair metal pisses me off. It's all the same!
>Well, the exceptions didn't get heard by many people. In my more paranoid
>moments, I get the idea that there was some sort of long-term scheme by
>which that Beautiful Spandex Boy dispensation was set up to fail in a very
>public and humiliating manner so that Real Guys <tm> could re-assert their
>cultural hegemony. It's all James Hetfield's fault. :-P
That is paranoid. On the other hand, it did give us nu-machismo.
>>Look at the clones man! They attack!
>The rate of change between '65 and '75 seems to have spoiled us. Things
>didn't really change that quickly before then. This thing about a
>revolution every five or ten years and utter stagnation in between tells
>me something's seriously wrong with the way we put pop culture together
>these days. It doesn't have to be like this.
Yes it does. Rate of change of culture increases with speed of communication
and transfer of 'cultural items'. For decades, music travelled as fast as
choirs and orchestras, and now you can get an ogg onto someone's machine in
size/bandwidth seconds. That's speed, hence cultural acceleration
accelerates. Welcome to the future.
By the way, apropos of nothing, what do you know about sorceror?
--
erith - speed!
Jeff Blanks
>Panurge!
>(...I've
>>always been in my own little world, where Happy The Man still matters.)
>
>That sounds like a scary place.
No, not at all. (Happy The Man is a band, BTW. Their style is both
borderline-twee on the one hand--well, more like what twee is trying for
unsuccessfully--and angular and complex on the other. A world where music
like that mattered wouldn't be scary at all, but it'd be hella
_different_.)
>I figure that if you're happy it doesn't
>matter though, no?
>By the way, apropos of nothing, what do you know about sorceror?
? I don't even know what an ogg is.
--
"Tradition is only valuable if it looks forward." --Christoph von Dohnányi