|
Unsung Forum » "How Selling Out Saved Indie Rock" |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
Kid Calamity 9045 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 15:25
|
||
|
Yeah, but... There's selling... and then there's selling out. The first requires less creative compromise. The second means a bigger house in which to feel unfulfilled.
|
|||
billding68 1016 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 15:40
|
||
|
Kid Calamity wrote: Yeah, but... There's selling... and then there's selling out. The first requires less creative compromise. The second means a bigger house in which to feel unfulfilled. I don't know selling is selling regardless of your intentions or motives the outcome is the same.
|
|||
|
Moon Cat 9577 posts |
Edited Nov 18, 2013, 15:45
Nov 18, 2013, 15:44
|
||
|
Kid Calamity wrote: We need a new punk. Well, the old ones were flogging butter and car insurance last time I looked. I don't think you'd realistically get a new 'punk' or any similar such sense of revolution in popular music any more, certainly not with such a distinctive impact. I guess acid-house and the subsequent take-off of dance culture and its various sub=genres was the last time such a thing happened in the UK, being a confluence of the music, an aesthetic, a community and so on. And, of course, the accompanying drugs! This is not to say that revolutionary stuff doesn't happen but that it happens in a more subtle, diffuse form reflecting the changes in how music is consumed and created. Things are probably spread too thin for any one such thing to have a massive cultural impact these days. I mean, the latest thing to cause 'outrage' in some quarters is stuff like Miley's wobbling arse and the perceived outrage has little to do with the music itself and more the presentation of it which, in a way, has been going on since Elvis wiggled his hips on telly. In fact, you could say that if any 'revolution' has occured it IS in the way things are consumed and created rather than a particular music itself. The fact that many on this forum make and release a wide range of music themselves is probably testimony to a revolution of sorts except there is no conscious unity of a revolutionary 'sense' - it's a subtle, outward rippling effect of available and evolving technologies and again, modes of consumption. Plus, I also think that even if something DID come along and cause a bit of a stir, so to speak, any potential cultural impact would, in all likelihood. be somewhat diluted because of the tendency of our modern, accelerated culture to co-opt and homogenise things with alarming rapidity. Movements reduced to blips!
|
|||
|
billding68 1016 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 16:06
|
||
|
Moon Cat wrote: Kid Calamity wrote: We need a new punk. Well, the old ones were flogging butter and car insurance last time I looked. I don't think you'd realistically get a new 'punk' or any similar such sense of revolution in popular music any more, certainly not with such a distinctive impact. I guess acid-house and the subsequent take-off of dance culture and its various sub=genres was the last time such a thing happened in the UK, being a confluence of the music, an aesthetic, a community and so on. And, of course, the accompanying drugs! This is not to say that revolutionary stuff doesn't happen but that it happens in a more subtle, diffuse form reflecting the changes in how music is consumed and created. Things are probably spread too thin for any one such thing to have a massive cultural impact these days. I mean, the latest thing to cause 'outrage' in some quarters is stuff like Miley's wobbling arse and the perceived outrage has little to do with the music itself and more the presentation of it which, in a way, has been going on since Elvis wiggled his hips on telly. In fact, you could say that if any 'revolution' has occured it IS in the way things are consumed and created rather than a particular music itself. The fact that many on this forum make and release a wide range of music themselves is probably testimony to a revolution of sorts except there is no conscious unity of a revolutionary 'sense' - it's a subtle, outward rippling effect of available and evolving technologies and again, modes of consumption. Plus, I also think that even if something DID come along and cause a bit of a stir, so to speak, any potential cultural impact would, in all likelihood. be somewhat diluted because of the tendency of our modern, accelerated culture to co-opt and homogenise things with alarming rapidity. Movements reduced to blips! I don't think revolution and innovation are dead just dormant for the moment it may take a generation or two of this spoon fed crap we're being fed before people tire of it and move on to something more raw/real we just may not be around for it.
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9045 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 16:10
|
||
|
Yeah, I do agree. Of course I do. My closing line there was... sorta ironic, really. As soon as we had the new wave of '76 reaching the mainstream, media organisations wanted a slice, thereby infiltrating and diluting it. And those kinda people now rule the airwaves and the outlets. I've noticed how the more recent series of 'Later...' has acts that have clearly been 'placed' there. An old art college mate of mine, from back in the late 70s - early 80s complained that music wasn't as good as when we were students. I argued that it was, but then stopped short. after all how would he actually know, whether that was the case? He no longer went looking, like he used to. Very few people I'm friendly with, of my age group are still hungry for the thrill of the equivalent of stumbling into a tiny club to find an unknown band called The Cure playing something... well, fuckin' weird, but, sorta brilliant as well. They stay in discovering new music on TV.
|
|||
Hunter T Wolfe 1709 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 16:12
|
||
|
Moon Cat wrote: Kid Calamity wrote: We need a new punk. Well, the old ones were flogging butter and car insurance last time I looked. I don't think you'd realistically get a new 'punk' or any similar such sense of revolution in popular music any more, certainly not with such a distinctive impact. I guess acid-house and the subsequent take-off of dance culture and its various sub=genres was the last time such a thing happened in the UK, being a confluence of the music, an aesthetic, a community and so on. And, of course, the accompanying drugs! Agreed, unfortunately. Britpop is generally regarded as the moment that indie music went wrong, but there was an idealism to that moment as well as naked careerism; a sense that to make a difference you had to compete with pop music and get in the charts, rather than just being 30 people moshing to Silverfish down at the Bull and Gate. So at the time it was tremendously exciting to see Pulp doing Common People on Top of the Pops, or the Manic Street Preachers getting to number one with If You Tolerate This, Then Your Children Will Be Next. But they're about the last examples I can think of where it felt like 'our' bands were breaking through into 'their' turf and saying something critical and important about class and society and stuff. All that is what has always excited me about pop music almost as much as the actual music. A few years earlier the Stone Roses and Happy Mondays on top of the pops felt important too- those bands were implicitly political and subversive, through their attitude, their clothes, their drugs as much as their tunes. Also, the Roses, the Mondays, Jarvis, the Manics etc were all fired up by punk; they were still in some way continuing the punk ethos. Even Blur and Oasis, too, to an extent. It was the bands that grew up listening to them that really seemed to break the chain. When Franz Ferdinand, the Libertines, the Kaiser Chiefs etc came along they arguably had some good songs, but their success meant nothing. They were devoid of sub-cultural content or context. And no Top of the Pops or anything like that anymore now either. You don't watch Later with Jools with your dad complaining that you can't tell the boys from the girls anymore, do you?
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9045 posts |
Edited Nov 18, 2013, 16:40
Nov 18, 2013, 16:17
|
||
Ah, sod it. I've deleted what I wrote here, as it came out wrong. LOL!
|
|||
|
Moon Cat 9577 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 17:15
|
||
|
Kid Calamity wrote: Ah, sod it. I've deleted what I wrote here, as it came out wrong. LOL! Sell out! 8^)
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9045 posts |
Edited Nov 18, 2013, 19:47
Nov 18, 2013, 17:34
|
||
|
Ha ha ha!! I'm not writing my thoughts here, until I see the fackin' money!
|
|||
|
Kid Calamity 9045 posts |
Nov 18, 2013, 17:34
|
||
...and even then, they'll be what you want me to write, rather than something that might put my fans off.
|
| Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| Unsung Forum Index | |
