Before reading, I recommend reading into this interesting speech. It's from a celebration of the anniversary of the Internet a few years ago. It's more about pop culture and being a teen before the Internet was around. Highly fascinating, and sort of links in with what I started rambling about. If you don't want to read much then just skip ahead and read my rant, it's enough writing as it is.

 

 

 

First I would like to thank Grace Coopmans for dragging me out of my comfort zone and asking me to take part in this celebration. And it is a celebration, because despite any downsides to having the internet in our lives today, I think we would all agree that we are glad to have the internet, and that our lives have all been considerably enriched by the internet. I know I can say that for myself.

 

It has been suggested to me, that I tell you all, before we get started, in an effort at full disclosure, that I do not go on Facebook, nor do I have a Myspace page. And I do not Twitter.

I thought you ought to know that.

 

So… I don’t Twitter, BUT I LOVE pop culture. Music, the arts, literature… and generally prefer it to what I call real life, the stuff that CNN talks about, (politics, the economy, business…)

And always have. I always reach for the Entertainment section of the newspaper… That’s where my pocket money goes, and it always has.

 

I have twenty minutes to share with you some observations and opinions – they mostly relate to pop and popular music culture. The internet sometimes but not always.

 

I am working on a book at the moment, it’s a biography of a graphic artist who has created some of my favourite album covers, so I have been thinking a lot about this particular aspect of music delivery, this ‘manifesto of association’ that the artist delivers, and has done pretty much since Elvis in the mid 1950’s, alongside the music.

 

The packaging.

 

I’m talking about the photographs of the artist that the artist wants you to see, and the graphic iconography that the artist wants you to see, and maybe look at as you listen to the music. The logo of the band; what that says about who the band think they are or want to be, or what they want you to think they are. Is there a sensitivity, or a sense of irony, or humour, a sense of political awareness that the artist has and wants to present to us, that perhaps the song alone does not fully communicate?…

 

A video is a great way of expressing that, and broadening the artist’s presentation, as is a website, or for me what is most important, THE ALBUM COVER.

 

For me, and for a lot of music artists, the music is just the beginning. It is the most important component, the songs and the quality of the recordings, but beyond that there is a visual language, about which the artist has most likely been thinking long and hard for many years (for example the Guns & Roses tattoo logo, the Rolling Stones lips logo- which Andy Warhol got credit for but actually was done by a London art-student named John Pasche who I think got paid around $100..)

and that visual material, together with the music creates what I call the MANIFESTO. And quite often, it’s the visual material that attracts the attention and engages the imagination of you and me, the potential audience for the artist, before we have heard a note of the music.

 

Before I ever heard a note of music by The Clash I claimed them as my new favourite band, because of the way they hand-painted their clothes using Jackson Pollock paint splatters and stenciled numbers and letters, and they created this iconography, this mythology around themselves, and also from seeing fragments of lyrics quoted in the music press, so before they ever came and played in my hometown or made a record, I was fascinated by them as a band, and considered myself a fan.

 

Their first record actually came as quite a disappointment, and it took about eighteen months for them to make a recording that leapt up off the record player and grabbed you by the throat. That song was called ‘Complete Control’ by the way, and it was a snarling assault of the record company that they had signed to the previous year: CBS, which is now Sony. The Clash had a long and fruitful relationship with CBS/SONY in fact, but it was good for their manifesto to be seen having a public war with their US based multi-national record label who, we presumed, had tied them up and threatened their families with death if they did not sign a lifetime contract…

 

ask the audience:

 

How many of you have got music off the internet in the last four weeks? How many of you paid for it? How many of you got something for free? How many of you who bought music downloaded artwork? Anyone print up the artwork so you have it as a stand-alone piece of work? Anyone print up copies of the lyrics or just read the lyrics on your computer?

 

So getting asked to speak here today has caused me to think a lot about how the internet is changing the way we absorb music, and the artists who create the music, and how we appreciate them, and think about them.

 

I’d like to talk about the experiences I have had, beginning with when I was a teenager, because it is teenagers, I believe who have the greatest need for pop culture, which is a culture they can call their own, and then use it as something to define themselves as separate from their parent’s generation, and their parent’s ideas, especially their parent’s ideas about what is cool and what is good… which means it is usually the culture of NOW, THIS MINUTE, that they are most attracted to.

 

Teenage lives are filled with the most drama of any of us, you know, what with first love and wanting to die if he doesn’t love me etc.. It’s real operatic stuff, and that horrible peer pressure going on… cliquishness… and these lives desperately require a soundtrack.

 

I hated being a teenager, until I discovered just how powerful the world of popular music was. And it helped me find an identity, and define myself. Not just the notes and beats, but the icons and the haircuts and the clothes and the liner notes… so music saved me, in a way, or at least, it gave me a sense of direction, of how life could be.

 

I became a teenager in 1972.

 

Something that I often think about is this: In 1972 I was listening to music that almost exclusively had been made in 1972, with maybe some music from 1971. But that was it, with few exceptions.

 

Something the internet has most definitely done is that it has brought more music from more places and more eras, into the hearts and minds of us all, but young people in particular – which is great.

 

Most students I know have an extremely broad appreciation of music, far broader than I did. Obviously ‘classic’ rock, is very popular, but so too are all sorts of vintage and world music. My stepson who is at NYU was telling me he is currently into Cole Porter, and music from the 1920’s, and swing music, from the 40s…

 

And the availability and accessibility of music on the internet today is truly incredible. And I applaud anything that can inspire interest or curiosity in anyone. But this also means that those of us who before would have been looking towards the current culture for inspiration are now often to be found, like my stepson, in various backwaters of older music.

 

And this relative lack of need for current culture, which I would define as innovative culture can cause, has caused, is causing, maybe… the innovative culture to slow down. Much as an assembly line in Detroit slows down and lay offs have to be made when the demand for a new model recedes.

 

And another thing, the speed and growth of recent technology, which has been so heralded, and so much fuss has been made of, has actually served to disguise just how little real growth is taking place at the artistic level. Of course this is only my opinion.

 

Do you guys know Roxy Music? In September of 1972 Roxy Music appeared on ‘prime time’ TV in the UK. Their first national TV exposure was a three minute appearance performing their first ‘single’, and the way they looked and sounded stunned me and a generation of me’s… But we had no video recorders, and of course there was no YouTube. There was no way whatsoever I could watch that appearance again, however badly I wanted to, and the power of that restriction was enormous. And the only way I could get close to that experience was to own the song.

 

I lived in the suburbs, so I had to ride my bike for miles before I could find a store that sold music, let alone one that had the record in stock. It was a small trial of manhood, and an adventure. And to get access to that one song this is what had to be done. But once I had it I could play it whenever I chose. I could engage in the fantasy of that particular thing. I owned it. I could hold it.

 

I had to go on a quest of sorts to get it, but my need was such that I did it. Now is that because of the quality of the art, or my desperate need?

 

But the point is, the power of that single television appearance created such pressure, such magnetism, that I got sucked in. And I had to respond, as I know now, that previous generations had responded to Elvis Presley on Ed Sullivan, or The Beatles a few years later, or Jimi Hendrix years after that.

 

And I believe that there is immense power in restriction, and holding back – as in the limitations there were in the medium of that time.

 

When artists today are asked to Twitter their every thought, their every action, or to record on video their every breath, their every performance, I believe they are diluting their creative powers, their creative potency, and the durability of their work. And in the long run, I believe they are also diluting the magical power and the magnetic attraction that they can or will ever have over their audience.

 

I wonder If I’d had unlimited access to that first Roxy Music TV appearance, if I’d had unlimited access to knowledge of their personal quirks, to the knowledge of what they liked for breakfast… If I had been able to access film footage of every performance, every rehearsal, every interview they gave that year, around the world, then I believe that bubble of my obsession would have burst a long, long time ago, and I would have ceased being a fan years ago.

 

I’m still buying copies of Roxy Music’s first album. Import copies on premium vinyl, Anniversary CD copies, Japanese imports in paper sleeves, iTunes downloads when I’m on the road and need a fix.

 

Such was the power of that initial strike.

 

Music companies take note!

 

As a teenager my world was pretty small. I lived in a house on a suburban housing estate. My room was about 10’ x 12’, with a view of several neighbours’ gardens, and I could look directly through the windows of several other houses without leaving my room. My record collection was small. When I was 13 I think I had about 20 singles, and maybe 6 albums. Maybe I owned a hundred songs.. but I knew them all quite intimately.

 

At the age of 13 I started going to see live music. That was scary! Into the city at night after school. Smell of drugs for the first time, sweat and the threat of violence. Seats being smashed, a lot of pushing and shoving. I often wanted to leave before the end. But it was an exciting world to get inside, and it fueled a passion inside me that I hadn’t got from my academic studies or sports.

 

That passion inspired me towards a career in the creative arts. And after one year at an Arts Foundation Course, I moved away from the visual arts towards a career in music. I had no idea that I would be successful. No idea whatsoever that thirty years later I would still be able to get paid to play bass and dance around in public, and to write songs with people I admire or call friends.

 

I have been able to perform in front of audiences around the world, and have a career beyond my wildest dreams. Ride the zeitgeist maybe, for a while… And the rules have changed, no doubt. The rules come at you like meteorites, you have to duck and dive, fast, and follow in the wake of a big one if you can. Know the rules, so you can break them. (That’s a good one).

 

And I have produced music that has been at different times made available on CASSETTE TAPE, DIGITAL AUDIO TAPE, COMPACT DISC, 7” VINYL, 12” VINYL THAT PLAYs AT 33 RPM, 12” VINYL THAT PLAYS AT 45 RPM, DVDS, MP3S, WAV-FILES.

 

And I think it is a big mistake for an artist to get hung up on technology. I’m not obsessed with analog sound for instance, or for what is the latest thing.. I don’t spend hours in the studio chasing the perfect bass sound. For me it’s about ideas, yes, and craft, and the eternal something that is the link in the chain between all music of all time. Energy and inspiration will keep you afloat and enable you to ride out these changes.

 

Musical artists, by definition, write and create recordings, usually writing their own material, making recordings and producing said material, (that’s a bit of legalese..) then taking it to the stage for a presentation of the work to their audience. This is pretty much what all musical artists do, and that’s what defines them.

 

Some artists live to perform and struggle to make new recordings. Some are only comfortable in the studio, and venture out to tour reluctantly. I think the most functional model today covers both grounds. Prince, Radiohead, and Madonna, to name three, have been able to mirror recordings of artistic merit with live performances that have raised the bar of what can be done. I’m sure there is someone out there doing it tonight. I wish I knew who. Any suggestions?

 

I’m even less concerned with the way we listen to music today, I listen to music in the car, as we all do, I listen to music at home. I have two homes, one’s an old house, so I listen to vinyl and that analog experience, when I am there. Here in LA I have a fancy Swedish CD player that reproduces the sound of CDs quite beautifully, and it’s a good experience listening to music that way.

I don’t like being tied to my computer, if I can help it, although my iPod, and the way it interfaces with the library of music I have in my computer, is a miracle. Particularly when you travel as much as I do.

 

Let me tell you a story about MP3s and iTunes. God I hated MP3s and DID NOT want to bother with iTunes. I’m a vinyl junkie man, I’m into the real thing. Who wants to listen to those itty-bitty little downloads?

 

WELL… I was in New York for a month with the band. We were just about to release a new album and some bright spark had suggested doing a run of shows on Broadway, as a way of announcing to the world our latest masterpiece.

 

Great fun actually, it was.. I had just bought a book about 20th Century music called ‘The Rest is Noise’ by Alex Ross. Great book, if you see it, well worth reading…and right off, chapter one, there is some great scene where George Gershwin visits Alban Berg in Vienna, and Berg plays him some of his new stuff, that just blows Gershwin’s mind… and I’m thinking. “I don’t know this stuff… I gotta get it NOW!’ and I’m thinking… New York… New York, where’s good to buy CDs? That place has gone… so’s that place… and WAIT A MINUTE… so what do I do? Okay… I SURRENDER to iTunes.

 

Fill out the forms, give them my ID, credit card info., choose a password… and whaddayaknow… moments later, THE VERY Alban Berg pieces Gershwin heard that evening in Vienna…

 

By the time I had finished the book and it was time to leave New York, I must have bought almost a hundred albums or partial albums from iTunes, to enhance my reading, which I really don’t think I could have done without iTunes. So now I love iTunes..

 

These are just a few observations of mine. I realise, that I’ve not said that much about the internet. But this is the stuff that the subject brought up for me. I hope you got something of use from it, so thank you for inviting me here, and thank you for listening.

 

 

 

Right, so everything's boring. Well not everything, but from my perspective it kind of is, because I'm a young person and like the young people before me, all I really care about is pop culture and immersing myself in the world of music and fashion and books and TV shows and all that.

 

And before you call me out, I am aware that there are other teenagers out there who aren't as privileged as I am and care more about their basic rights and getting some food to eat. And I do care about other things, like my family and friends and my job. But I'm still really passionate about being a part of what, growing up, I thought being a teenager would be: finding some sort of club or subculture to call yours and to have people in it to call friends. And having music and movies and clothes and that truly feel like yours and your friends, and nobody else's. And if you don't fit in with anything that's going on, you'd start your own thing. Start your own culture.

 

I'm just getting fed up with the fact that everything about pop culture is about looking backward. Music from the 90s pretty much sounds the same as music now, compare it to the transition from 70s to 80s, 80s to 90s etc. Surely it's not possible to just run out of ideas for musical innovation after a handful of decades?

 

The fashion is all just finding things that your parents or grandparents wore and recycling it. It's not edgy, rebellious, or anti-mainstream at all because everyone just buys a thin, cheap, horrible synthetic version of some 80s fashion item from stores like Forever 21 and everyone looks cheap and shitty and the same. I went to Coachella a few weeks ago and I can't tell you how basic and entry-level all the girls look there, it was unbelievable, you literally couldn't tell one person apart from another, they all looked the same.

 

I'm sure that the average kid wore embarassingly cheap and shit clothes 20 or 30 years ago so that's not much of a point but at least there were different things that people were into and they were (for the most part) creating original things. Grunge people might not have invented dirty hair or flannel shirts, but it was a new thing. Trekkies and mods were new things. Fucking juggalos and weeaboos were/are new things.

 

Going back to what I thought a teenager would be, I thought there would be all sorts of rivalries and antagonism in high schools. In my school there is none, because there are virtually no cliques or subcultures or anything like that. And I guess that's very nice because there isn't some kid who feels like shit for dressing a certain way. But isn't that how the real world's gonna be? Shouldn't you go through the hell of high school to learn to stick up for yourself and what you identify with? Why the fuck are so many people dressing exactly the same?

 

I guess you can call it hipster, but I don't really think that exists anymore because it exploded so much that it's nothing anymore. It's not even a thing anymore. Basically everyone dresses 'hipster'. You could call out anything as 'hipster'. The kid in some band shirt from 40 years ago is hipster. The kid in some band shirt from a modern band is hipster. The person who follows trends is hipster, and the person who leads is hipster, and the person who doesn't want to be a hipster at all is the biggest hipster of all.

 

So that's the vast vast majority of my school, the rest I guess could be lovingly labeled as swag fag, not sure if this is what the hiphop movement has evolved into or if it's just a subdivision of the hipster movement but its shit all the same

There are very small pockets of other things like emo and "scene" but it's really just the last bit of life from a movement that is starting to curl up and die isn't it

 

Is it shallow to place such a high value on dressing a certain way and listening to a certain kind of music and all that, and putting pressure on teens to identify with some primal cult where you have to fit in? Is this the end of all these youth subcultures? Or will they eventually adapt and thrive again?

 

I'm sorry for such a long read btw :bigcry:

I voted me, obv.

I don't understand the poll, I thought Brent was Satan already :sad:

Your problem is on your emphasis on being different, whilst also being the same - you want something completely new, within which to start a new scene and all the lameness that comes with that. You should be more welcoming to things from the past, but concentrate on other aspects than the fashion for a start. Also, broaden your music listening. There's a load of stuff out there. So many genres you will not have come across yet. Just because they have already taken place it does not mean that they are without merit. And if they have been recycled then they may well have been recycled in a way more consistent with the environment of these times.

 

Look into things deeper, the meaning, the etymology, the motivations. Search deeper than simply the popular stuff. Check out the ideas buzzing around. Decide if you agree with them. Understand why other people did feel that way if you don't agree with them. Generate a context for as much as you can before writing it off.

 

Look into other arts. Once you are working on a level higher than 'that sounds nice, that looks nice' and looking at art as a product of the times and a social expression then you will find it far more fruitful and less throwaway. Combine the arts with philosophy and ideas, embrace the literature, basically research the fuck out of something that appeals to you and actually understand it.

 

If you are looking at things in this more detailed way then there is so much stuff out there to interest you, and it stretches so far back in time. From the ancient times to the modern day. Just don't restrict yourself to fashion and contemporary pop music, because that would be a tragedy.

 

You'll find you have more in common with those from the past than you realised, in many respects. The urge to look different won't impact you as much, more the urge to think and act differently will. And you'll find things you want to change in society for the best when you have the context of where we have come from and the depressing vices that motivate most people. Then that will become a far more important focus than fashion and pop music.

I'm sorry for such a long read btw :bigcry:

Don't be sorry, that was a very interesting read!

Or will they eventually adapt and thrive again?

I think this will happen, you just have to give them more time. You know, there is SO much around, so much invented already, so much cultures involved, it's hard to create something new (in terms of styles and group forming). One gets access to everything one wants to know, so maybe it's just too much to settle for one movement. Everything mixes together and out comes some weird multi-genre. There are not much new elements left to create something new like gothics/emos/punks/whatever back then.

 

Maybe a really striking movie in the future with certain elements that attract young people will make them create a new group, or a song that a lot of teens adapt to will make all of them dye their hair blue because that's the name of the song, I hope you know what I'm trying to say lol.

 

But I believe there will always be socially new or re-invented things, the internet just makes it a little more difficult.

I'll just thank the long posts, I haven't read them but I know a great deal of effort was put into them, so yes, well done.

I'll just thank the long posts, I haven't read them but I know a great deal of effort was put into them, so yes, well done.

 

Had i not done so already, I'd have voted for you, in thanks to your thanks.

thanks but no thanks then :p

So if I were to go around in a hoop skirt and powdered wig, would it be a bad or good thing?

It would just be a thing.

Ian, of course!

Every problem the Lounge has is traced back to Ian, I mean duh why would it be any different this time

EV

ERY

 

THING I TYPE WHY DONT I FOCUS WHAT I TYPE omg

 

bye

my friend once called me a hipster for wearing nike sneakers :thinking:

Read a Mother Fucking Book.

You wanna know what wasn't boring? That dancing milk carton.

Right, so everything's boring.

o?

Well not everything, but from my perspective it kind of is, because I'm a young person and like the young people before me, all I really care about is pop culture and immersing myself in the world of music and fashion and books and TV shows and all that.

If what you're consuming is boring, consume some new things. If by everything, you mean you. Stop being boring then. Do interesting things ya'dig?

But I'm still really passionate about being a part of what, growing up, I thought being a teenager would be: finding some sort of club or subculture to call yours and to have people in it to call friends. And having music and movies and clothes and that truly feel like yours and your friends, and nobody else's. And if you don't fit in with anything that's going on, you'd start your own thing. Start your own culture.

Stahp.

 

I'm just getting fed up with the fact that everything about pop culture is about looking backward. Music from the 90s pretty much sounds the same as music now, compare it to the transition from 70s to 80s, 80s to 90s etc. Surely it's not possible to just run out of ideas for musical innovation after a handful of decades?

You want good music? Then turn off the TV/Radio and go get it. There's more beautiful music at your fingertips than you could consume in your lifetime. If you're actually so cultured as to categorically dismiss every musician on the planet, then pick up a fuckin guitar. Pop music will always be pop music. If you expect the top 40 to change, find a new God.

 

The fashion is all just finding things that your parents or grandparents wore and recycling it. It's not edgy, rebellious, or anti-mainstream at all because everyone just buys a thin, cheap, horrible synthetic version of some 80s fashion item from stores like Forever 21 and everyone looks cheap and shitty and the same. I went to Coachella a few weeks ago and I can't tell you how basic and entry-level all the girls look there, it was unbelievable, you literally couldn't tell one person apart from another, they all looked the same.

 

I'm sure that the average kid wore embarassingly cheap and shit clothes 20 or 30 years ago so that's not much of a point but at least there were different things that people were into and they were (for the most part) creating original things. Grunge people might not have invented dirty hair or flannel shirts, but it was a new thing. Trekkies and mods were new things. Fucking juggalos and weeaboos were/are new things.

Fucking hell. Subcultures are not people. Fashion is not people. You're distressingly elitist about clothing. The fact that you would dismiss a person because of how little they pay for clothes is embarrassing. Wearing new hairstyles means fuck all for your value as a person.

 

Going back to what I thought a teenager would be, I thought there would be all sorts of rivalries and antagonism in high schools. In my school there is none, because there are virtually no cliques or subcultures or anything like that. And I guess that's very nice because there isn't some kid who feels like shit for dressing a certain way. But isn't that how the real world's gonna be? Shouldn't you go through the hell of high school to learn to stick up for yourself and what you identify with?

You watch too many movies, kid.

 

Why the fuck are so many people dressing exactly the same?

Is this a rhetorical question? To feel accepted.

 

I guess you can call it hipster, but I don't really think that exists anymore because it exploded so much that it's nothing anymore. It's not even a thing anymore. Basically everyone dresses 'hipster'. You could call out anything as 'hipster'. The kid in some band shirt from 40 years ago is hipster. The kid in some band shirt from a modern band is hipster. The person who follows trends is hipster, and the person who leads is hipster, and the person who doesn't want to be a hipster at all is the biggest hipster of all.

Obviously the term has become convoluted and divorced of all meaning nowadays. That doesn't mean that the negative traits that many associate with the term don't exist.

 

So that's the vast vast majority of my school, the rest I guess could be lovingly labeled as swag fag, not sure if this is what the hiphop movement has evolved into or if it's just a subdivision of the hipster movement but its shit all the same

There are very small pockets of other things like emo and "scene" but it's really just the last bit of life from a movement that is starting to curl up and die isn't it

These labels mean nothing to me.

 

Is it shallow to place such a high value on dressing a certain way and listening to a certain kind of music and all that, and putting pressure on teens to identify with some primal cult where you have to fit in? Is this the end of all these youth subcultures? Or will they eventually adapt and thrive again?

The MTV culture on which you seem to be reflecting is a disgusting stillborn myth. As you described, most who subscribe to these so-called subcultures are doing so inauthentically that they may find solidarity and a fashionable costume for their apathy, inadequacy, and inertia. You'll find no lasting virtue or happiness in an aesthetic lifestyle of conformity (even conforming to nonconformity), which is something disparate from genuine friendship and emotional support.

Most historic subcultures as the romanticized objects of nostalgia you describe very rarely existed as a substantive entity, they are only abstract amalgamations of vintage photos and music videos. There is no movement as a crowd, only imitation. The only people that create progress and beauty are independent visionaries who, while young, were able to see through the swarm of envious masses that ultimately tear them too to shreds before their bodies are cold.

 

The reason people keep reflecting on the past because they are allowed the privilege of distorting it into an absurd simulacrum of something that never was. Subcultures by rule cannot be innovative and present because there wouldn't be any crowd to disappear into. In any case, it's not 'this generation's' fault that you're bored. This is the most exciting time you could possibly live in, but it's not going to hop up and dance for you. Go do something pretty while you can.

Much more coherent than I managed. Great reply.

I gotta admit that I did skim-read through most of this thread, but from talking to Dee about this extensively once after reading that article I think the point being made has become a bit convoluted in trying to explain it, and the response seems to be looking at how to address the issue practically as if it's a life crisis. I don't know if Dee was looking to take action or actually do anything but I felt like it was just explaining a frustration of how things are now, from chatting to her and also skim-reading her post here.

 

I'm trying to remember exactly what I took from the article, things that stood out to me was how the speaker (John Taylor of Roxy Music) remembers with great fondness the first vinyls he got, the artwork, the fashion, the feel of holding it and excitement of hearing the actual music, and how he could identify with it in a way he couldn't with looking at people outside his window. Now, that's dead, and it's kind of sad, any child with a computer now has access to an unlimited world of music, and that's great in its own way of course, but it's not the same amount of appreciation waiting 1min for an album to download so you can play an mp3 file while you do other shit on the computer (I'm obviously not suggesting this is how every single person consumes music).

 

The speaker noted he had only heard and appreciated like 6 albums by the time he was an adult, so now having the opportunity to access any or every type of music is wonderful because if you can't find a lot to like you probably aren't trying hard enough (I know I don't). However there is something that's gotten lost, it's all just stuff on screens and on iPods, people don't maintain an identity with it and it doesn't encapsulate their lives quite like it used to, and that may not be important to you but you have to understand it's something that looks very exciting to some people. With all the diverse amount of music out there you are lucky to find people who listen to a lot of the same music as you, I rarely have discussions about music anymore because it's most likely that whoever I'm chatting to won't give a fuck about mine, and I probably won't care about theirs either. Whereas 30 years ago, you could see certain people walking down the street and instantly know if they like the Sex Pistols or Roxy Music. As I say this might be of no importance to you whatsoever (Hell I don't really care) but a subculture or scene that you can be a part of, for a teenager that looks so appealing.

 

This is why you often hear the phrase "I was born in the wrong decade" and I actually used to detest that but now I'm getting it. Not much happens anymore that connects people to pop culture universally or even on any level, the Beatles and Elvis used to make news headlines for arriving at an airport, the Sex Pistols shocked everyone, and when you saw it happening you felt that it was a part of you, because you identified with them and it both separated and united you with other people.

 

The MTV culture on which you seem to be reflecting is a disgusting stillborn myth. As you described, most who subscribe to these so-called subcultures are doing so inauthentically that they may find solidarity and a fashionable costume for their apathy, inadequacy, and inertia. You'll find no lasting virtue or happiness in an aesthetic lifestyle of conformity (even conforming to nonconformity), which is something disparate from genuine friendship and emotional support.

Most historic subcultures as the romanticized objects of nostalgia you describe very rarely existed as a substantive entity, they are only abstract amalgamations of vintage photos and music videos. There is no movement as a crowd, only imitation. The only people that create progress and beauty are independent visionaries who, while young, were able to see through the swarm of envious masses that ultimately tear them too to shreds before their bodies are cold.

 

The reason people keep reflecting on the past because they are allowed the privilege of distorting it into an absurd simulacrum of something that never was. Subcultures by rule cannot be innovative and present because there wouldn't be any crowd to disappear into. In any case, it's not 'this generation's' fault that you're bored. This is the most exciting time you could possibly live in, but it's not going to hop up and dance for you. Go do something pretty while you can.

 

I like this, it's very well written, and I can't really leave what I've just written without addressing this, and I can't disagree with you, you may be right that maybe what I've just written in my last paragraph is my interpretation of romantic nostalgia that the older generations project onto us (for example the speakers words in the topic post) but then again, I don't really know, and neither do you. I don't think I could be convinced or convince otherwise that previous scenes and subcultures were really as exciting as they are portrayed, was there really something in the air? Did it actually affect anyones day to day lives? Or was it just something that they connected better with in comparison to now? I don't really know.

 

And again I can't fault the argument that you can view these scenes as simply aesthetics and pointlessly superficial, but that's also overly psychoanalytical and quite generalising (Though to be fair you did say this applies to most people and most subcultures) to feel that its a significant deterrent to valuable relationships between people. I don't see these subcultures or 'movements' as dangerous or poisonous, just a marker for a certain time and how people may have felt, even fashion is a part of that art and expression, and right now we don't have any markers.

 

Again, I don't think its a crisis or anything, but I can definitely understand why people would prefer that in their lives, and I don't think people need to be empty to feel like that.

Read a Mother Fucking Book.

 

this is for meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

im laughing so hard because i typed "you're are" omg i suck at english Bye

 

if it is for me then fuck you man i read books but in spanish kiss my ASS

I'm pretty sure it's a response to the thread, and in which case it'd be a wise suggestion.

But I don't get what it has to do with what Dee wrote, is he implying that she is stupid because he is so disgusted with her opinion? I'm not saying that she is right but I just dont understand. I'm ok with someone telling me I'm an idiot for my grammar than wanting to express my opinions... thats just being a complete dick.

It's not for me to say as I could be completely wrong but I was under the impression (especially given his other post, which i felt was valid) that he simply wanted her to concentrate on other things. Literature is a much more worthwhile thing to involve oneself in than 'trying' to be something. There is so much culture to embrace yourself in that is available to people. And this is down to ideas of thought, as well as music and fashion. It is through that that most culture is born. Understanding where you are, and therefore your similarities and differences with society around you and those from the past. It is there that art generally flows from, be it a reaction against what surrounds us or drawn from influences from the art you yourself consume.

 

Maybe I read more into it than I should. Basically i think he wanted her to consume something other than simple music and fashion and take a standpoint different than 'how can I be different'.

I think if he was going to attack your grammar he would have replied straight after you or quoted you and said something more than read a book. he might have said read an English book. But then he'd have been a dick.

 

I'm trying to remember exactly what I took from the article, things that stood out to me was how the speaker (John Taylor of Roxy Music) remembers with great fondness the first vinyls he got, the artwork, the fashion, the feel of holding it and excitement of hearing the actual music, and how he could identify with it in a way he couldn't with looking at people outside his window. Now, that's dead, and it's kind of sad, any child with a computer now has access to an unlimited world of music, and that's great in its own way of course, but it's not the same amount of appreciation waiting 1min for an album to download so you can play an mp3 file while you do other shit on the computer (I'm obviously not suggesting this is how every single person consumes music).

 

The speaker noted he had only heard and appreciated like 6 albums by the time he was an adult, so now having the opportunity to access any or every type of music is wonderful because if you can't find a lot to like you probably aren't trying hard enough (I know I don't).

 

However there is something that's gotten lost, it's all just stuff on screens and on iPods, people don't maintain an identity with it and it doesn't encapsulate their lives quite like it used to, and that may not be important to you but you have to understand it's something that looks very exciting to some people. With all the diverse amount of music out there you are lucky to find people who listen to a lot of the same music as you, I rarely have discussions about music anymore because it's most likely that whoever I'm chatting to won't give a fuck about mine, and I probably won't care about theirs either. Whereas 30 years ago, you could see certain people walking down the street and instantly know if they like the Sex Pistols or Roxy Music. As I say this might be of no importance to you whatsoever (Hell I don't really care) but a subculture or scene that you can be a part of, for a teenager that looks so appealing.

 

Among many people I know, music consumption has almost become a contest. They've heard everything and understand nothing. If someone slowly, slowly wades through the discography of some lesser known artist (or even an unpopular top 40 pop singer) who really speaks to them, whilst ignoring the heavy flow of flashy album covers, 'best new music' lists and the like, they can often feel like a pariah, like someone excluded for not keeping up with 7 different AMC or HBO series. The wide availability of media these days demands a new approach. Compared to the beatles era when the radio and music industries had an amazing ability to manipulate what everyone would listen to, society has inevitably become more and more stratified. Rock and roll becomes Hard rock/soft rock, become indie metal/folk/psychedelic etc. etc. ad infinitum.

 

Ergo, to become totally enshrouded in one culture implies the exclusion of the rest. It also means that the various groups continue to deteriorate in size until you're full of glee to meet 2 living humans who appreciate the same niche. An alternative is to become a ruthless consumer, checking off lists so as to know what most people at the party are talking about. I did this quite a lot with books growing up, and it took a poetry class to slow me down. I prefer vinyl now, not because I notice much sound difference, but because it too slows me down, and makes me face and interact with it.

I suppose the key today is moderation, and seeing music as an end in itself, and not only a means to certain social ends, particularly since, as you described music simply can't operate as the kind of generational glue that it perhaps did in the time of the sex pistols.

 

This is why you often hear the phrase "I was born in the wrong decade" and I actually used to detest that but now I'm getting it. Not much happens anymore that connects people to pop culture universally or even on any level, the Beatles and Elvis used to make news headlines for arriving at an airport, the Sex Pistols shocked everyone, and when you saw it happening you felt that it was a part of you, because you identified with them and it both separated and united you with other people.

On the flipside, people who say 'they were born in the wrong decade' are responding to a skewed and censored version of a past decade that was only significant for its own era because of its stark contrast to the cultural shape of the previous decade which they also neither relate to nor understand. People are intrigued by the sense of purpose and revolution that came with songs like 'God save the Queen', but these songs only exist because of the density of moral, authoritative oppression that was happening. Revolution is not the mark of a beautiful time. It only occurs when things are quite obviously fucked up. This is not to say that things aren't fucked up now, but it's much easier to live vicariously through a past revolutionary than to trudge through what means is necessary to combat oppression in a present where the chaos doesn't directly affect oneself, but is constantly elsewhere.

 

Flipping around tumblr, and seeing newspaper cuttings about Elvis, the Beatles and the like, it seems like they're hoping for a return to the shallowness of early childhood. Elvis was merely a celebrity, and within perspective, the clipping was from the modern equivalent of a tabloid hailing Justin Bieber's arrival. The idea of a simpler time is a myth. People suffered and died as much then as now, but the context within which we see these images are ours to play with like barbie dolls.

 

To be honest, I began this response sober, and I have now returned home quite drunk. I will be sure to finish this response more coherently, but I might as well post what I've written so far. You're right, I'm not in the best position to judge a time I did not participate in, and my somewhat emotional response did not give sufficient credit to the perfectly innocent ideas that drive the desire for societal unity and zeitgeist. But at the crux of it all is a realistic reflection on the fact that 30 years ago, the people who made up the various subcultures were no less stupid and shallow as today. Conformity to music genres and fashion was, if anything, more rampant in the past, and high school students then certainly possessed the same frustrating flaws as our peers who we wish were more inspired/interesting/less boring.