Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PaulEdwardWagemann

Rockism: Good or Bad?

Recommended Posts

Exactly, Diggs: good point, well-made.

The bit I wasn't sure about was about seeing his wife as a hole. I've not had the pleasure of seeing Kevin's wife (in this, or any other light) but I'm sure she must have other strings to her bow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But seriously folks...I think what Kevin might also have been alluding to there is that both perspectives- the one that appreciates the car/group/album/wife whilst aware of the flaw and the one that admires the car/group/album/wife as they see them(i.e. without the former's gift of "insight")- are arguably equally valid.

Talk about making mountains out of mole-hills...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

then you haven't ever heard this Lennon classic:

Lyrics for: Give Peace A Chance

All we are saying is give peace a chance

All we are saying is give peace a chance

I'll have to confess that these were the only lyrics I knew RJ. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well , putting it another way , but in the same vein; Say I bought a brand new car that I just loved and was certain that others would too ; eventually that inevitable scratch or nick afflicts it , and really , only I can see it . Now , everyone still says that this is a great car ( looking at the whole and uncritically ) , but I , knowing it's defect , see it as a great car - with a flaw that only I can notice .

Who is looking at the car properly ? The people who admire it as they see it , or the one who looks perhaps too intimately at the same thing and is somewhat repulsed ? It's like noticing a mole on your wife that isn't particularly attractive ; or are you are broad -minded enough to see her as a whole ?

This whole idea sucksism , imo .

Kevin, I didn't realise before that you are brilliant. :bow:

I apologise if I haven't shown the proper respect for your Genius. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rockism: Good or Bad?
Or Immaterial?

The reason Rockism came into being in the first place is that in the early 1970s people needed a way to seperate "Rock" from "Pop". There was a time that Rock was so huge that the two were almost interchangable--this being sometime around the mid 60's. But as Rock and Pop began to go their own seperate ways some people had a hard time understanding this ...

... this now seems to be one of the tennants of Rockism--that the artists should be concerned with the music, not the Pop Industry bullshit that puts them in the public eye.

That seems a bit patronizing. I think most "people" (and I include myself in that group) can, without help, discern a difference between The Rolling Stones (whom I assume have produced some 'legitimate' Rock music) and, let's say, The New Kids On The Block (for lack of a more dramatic contrast coming to mind immediately).

If we are talking about music for sale, consider this:

Corporate interests will always try to reiterate the sucesses. If a sizable population purchases recordings by Elvis or The Beatles or Nirvana, record companies will want to give us something in some way similar to Elvis or The Beatles or Nirvana. The outcome is definitely hit and miss (Fabian or the British Invasion, Grunge videos, etc.)

Artists of all varieties who put their works in the marketplace are willing to make reasonable compromises to reach a wider audience. There's nothing wrong with that (It's why book publishers have editors).

Just think of how music has evolved since the time of Little Richard and Buddy HOlly. If Music is going to continue to evolve there needs to be some reflection, there needs to be some honing os skills, there needs to be a consciousness of Rock culture, Rock history, Rock society.
Evolution is a result of adaptation and mutation. Music (and Rock music) is open to be influenced by new technology (The electric guitar and keyboards were innovations with a profound effect on modern music). Roots Rock & Roll can and will stand alongside and along with Fusion, Hip-Hop, Electronica, and even (heresy!) Country Rock.

‘Posers’ and ‘posing’ are established elements in the ‘Rock culture’. If most Rock stars were true to their stage personas around the clock, intelligent people would run the other way instead of seeking their autographs. Showmanship is not a crime. Entertainment ought to be part of the product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin, I'm serious ! We got a new car 2 years ago, and you described my emotions to a T. I got this tiny little scratch on it, which you had to stand in a certain light to see, but it nearly drove me mad. That was the mole of all moles.

You are the Guru of Incisivism. What are metaphors phor ?

:)

I still think Paul Edward is taking the youknowwhat out of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only read a bit of this, but I do understand Kevin's point... What he is saying is that if one over-anal(emphasis on the 'anal')ises a piece of music and finds a flaw, the pleasure in that piece is diminished to a degree totally out of proportion to the flaw itself. The comparison with the wife and mole is spurious however, as that is nothing a bit of boiling water and a shovel would sort out...

If this is what Kevin is trying to illustrate through his metaphor, then I have to ask who says that being more informed about what goes into making a piece of music ONLY reveals the music's flaws? To go back to his car metaphor, it would seem to me the more you learn about the engineering and design and complexities that goes into making that car, the MORE you are going to marvel at it. Wouldn't you?

...I find some of your criticisms of The Sex Pistols (on the "Did the Sex Pistols Kill Punk?" thread) somewhat perplexing...

The Sex Pistols IMO had a minimal effect on Rock. I don't find their music innovative. The were great at attention-whoring which I think does not really contributed anything positive to Rock music...

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artists of all varieties who put their works in the marketplace are willing to make reasonable compromises to reach a wider audience. There's nothing wrong with that (It's why book publishers have editors).

‘Posers’ and ‘posing’ are established elements in the ‘Rock culture’. If most Rock stars were true to their stage personas around the clock, intelligent people would run the other way instead of seeking their autographs. Showmanship is not a crime. Entertainment ought to be part of the product.

I really have very little interest in posuers.

And I'm also not interested in musicians who have compromised their music in order to obtain pop success...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poseurs. Don't worry though, most intellectuals can't spell. :P

My youngest son once brought a note home from one of his Teachers with a lot of words misspelt. When I mentioned it to my son, he said "it's O.K. - he's our Maths Teacher".

Lighten up Paul. You seem like a nice guy. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sex Pistols IMO had a minimal effect on Rock. I don't find their music innovative. The were great at attention-whoring which I think does not really contributed anything positive to Rock music...

I honestly find it astounding that one can possibly read "England's Dreaming" and distil its content(600 pages worth!)down to the conclusion that the Sex Pistols were nothing but "attention-whores" and "posuers" (sic).

If "Rockism" is about adopting a more "critical eye" to our appreciation of music, then I would suggest that the fact that we have managed to read the same book yet reach such radically different interpretations of its content exposes an inherent flaw in the theory. It emphasises that, whatever the extent of our "critical analysis", there is no substitute for subjective experience. It is down to the individual to appraise the impact the music/art has upon him/her. Over-intellectualising the process can tend to spoil one's enjoyment of the more primal and spontaneous joys of music, demystify those moments of essential magic that the world of music throws up. For example: Say I experience Patti Smith as an utterly captivating performer. Pretentious, yes, but also compelling, bewitching, moving,stimulating on both an intellectual and more primal level...Is my appreciation of her performance enhanced , diminished or unchanged by the insight that her lyricism is to some great extent plagiarised from the works of the poet Rimbaud?

Every artist/performer has their own motives for their "existence" and behind every artistic/ "professional" decision they make. And, surprise! they may not always be up-front about what their motives are! After many years of irksome purist denial, I eventually concluded that when it comes to the creation of great music, artistic integrity is a bonus rather than a necessity...

I'm not necessarily arguing for an "anti-intellectual" approach; there are so many levels on which one enjoys different music for different occasions, for different reasons. We all experience music differently. Some like Throbbing Gristle, some like Smokey Robinson....It depends what you're looking for in your music at any given moment in time. If it sounds good, feels good, captivates you, awakens your senses/intellect, etc. then perhaps, more often than not, that's good enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For clarification, could you give some examples of artists that might be considered 'paragons' by Rockism criteria?

Just for fun, can you evaluate a few artists in terms of how you think they would be viewed by Rockist critics?

AC/DC

Alice Cooper

Beastie Boys

Foreigner

Grateful Dead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot must depend upon the taste and experience of the critic. From the list above I suspect the average pompous English critic would give credence only to AC/DC and Beastie Boys, the other three being examples of stadium rock at its most benign. I suspect one or two here may disagree...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...