I was born and raised in lower Manhattan. I remember during the
seventies and eighties that every few years there was an emphasis on
a different kind of music. There was always a big rock scene in New
York just as there was always a big jazz scene. There was always a
healthy scene of contemporary music coming out of a classical
tradition, too. While it's true that all this music was going on at
the same time, there usually seemed to be a different focus every few
years on one particular genre of music (as opposed to another).
For example, at the start of the seventies there was a tremendous
period of excitement on the jazz scene with a different concert
happening almost every night over at Sam River's basement studio on
Bond Street. A few years later, there was a focus on contemporary
music coming out of a classical tradition with Philip Glass playing
every week to select audiences at his rehearsal loft in Soho,
culminating with the final version of "Music in 12 Parts" and
"Einstein on the Beach". Then the punk thing happened. Everyone had
been bored to death with rock up to that point, having been saturated
with it by the end of the sixties. It had become so, well, TECHNICAL!
But when Patti Smith started playing in a band, a lot of people
living in downtown Manhattan figured if Patti could do it, maybe they
could do it, too. There was an incredible amount of good energy in
that area at the end of the seventies and start of the eighties,
which started to fizzle out (the focal point of energy) after groups
like Sonic Youth and Swans peaked 'round about 1983, which was also
about the time when the AKAI S-900 sampler was first marketed and
radio station WBLS starting playing a lot of rap over the air. Rap
and the promise of the sampler made for a new musical focus. It was
an exciting time.
So the question I'm asking is where's the energy now? While people in
all genres of music are continuing to do great work (I'm really not
attacking anyone here, promise!), it seems that the most interesting
new forms to recently evolve have been coming out of dance music (of
all things!), at least as far as new formal permutations occurring
within a given musical context is concerned. I was exhilarated when I
first heard the"house" music from Detroit in 1988. My friend Vivian
Dick (the filmmaker) played it for me. I was really into rap at the
time, and when Vivian played this house music at a New Year's Eve
party I was having at my place in Paris, I asked her to turn it off.
I didn't like the sound sources, which seemed to consist of
unbelievably cheap electronics and drum machines, it just sounded too
primitive to my ears. Vivian told me to shut up and give it a chance,
which I did and I ended up liking it. A lot. After that I was back in
New York and tried to get this house music from the record stores,
but by hat time the people in the rap world (which by then had become
big business and big money) had appropriated the term "house", so all
I could find was rap music "disguised" as house. I didn't like it as
much as the Detroit stuff.
What I liked about "real" house music was that it was instrumental
music with no bloody voice going over the top of it all the time the
way rap does. I've always been an instrumental composer myself (as
opposed to writing songs), so naturally I was intrigued by the
voiceless Detroit house music.
Anyway, after the rap people hijacked the term "house", I think the
energy might have shifted over to Europe (the UK, Belgium, Germany,
and even France!). I've been living in Paris for the past few years.
We have these two great radio stations here called Radio FG and Radio
Nova. All I know is that at the start of the nineties, I started
hearing this amazing instrumental electronic music over the airwaves
which eventually turned into the genres called techno, ambient music,
jungle, drum & bass and more! It's so amazing what I'm hearing on
the radio, these composers are pouring their hearts out, it's the
most exciting music I've heard in years. The prediction made by
Pierre Boulez in the 1950s that the future would see the masses
making and appreciating advanced forms of electronic music has now
been fulfilled (although perhaps not in quite the way he expected...
roll over, Monsieur Boulez!)
So does this mean that Rock is dead and techno (and its many
sub-genres) rules?
Nah. Rock isn't dead, it just grew up. Now it knows how classical
music feels!
Rhys Chatham
Paris, France
1 January 1997
This essay is interactive in the sense that if you agree or disagree
or feel strongly one way or the other about anything I've said, I'd
like to hear what you have to say on the subject. Please click on
Rhys.Chatham to let me know
what you think, because I'd really like to know!
2 February 1997 - Here are some of the
responses I received from the above essay (all of the responses are
published here with the written permission of their authors, with the
exception of one which I suspect was only a form letter from the
company I received it from).
The first response I received was from Kyle Gann. I liked what he
said so much that I used it as the punch line of the final version of
the essay!
Subject: Death of Rock
Sent: 5/1/97 19:12
Received: 5/1/97 18:51
From: Kyle Gann, gann@bucknell.edu
To: chatham@pratique.fr
Rhys,
Rock isn't dead, it just grew up. Now it knows how classical
music
feels.
Kyle
****************************************************
From: russell@nntp.best.com (Jeff Harrington)
Newsgroups: rec.music.compose
Subject: Is Rock Dead?
Date: 1 Feb 1997 15:10:19 GMT
Rhys Chatham (chatham@pratique.fr) wrote:
: Is Rock Dead?
:
Rock was never truly alive. It was music for and by adolescents, and
it
therefore never truly had any life experience in it! Sure, it had
hormones, beats, ecstasy, but it was never alive. More like a
stillborn
thrill. Only something that has really come close to death is
alive.
Some Doors songs, maybe come close, a bit of Hendrix, some
triphouse,
maybe... a little, but it is not alive unless it is as sophisticated
and
as varied as life itself. That is, it covers not just the genitals
and the
heart, but the deepest emotions we all experience, (although most of
us
have no art to relate to in this sense that can talk about these
deepest
experiences because we're stuck with pop music and Star Wars).
Life is not something small like pop music. It can't be symbolized
nor
contained by something as mundane, as small-minded, something
spawned
purely by dreams of groupies and drug trips and cash money. Sometimes
it
comes close but that ain't nothin'. That's just a good day in the
studio.
Not a lifetime spent perfecting art which can come close to the
deepest
aspects of humanity.
> I'm a composer/musician who was born and raised in lower
Manhattan.
We know who you art... Mr. Art Rock.. ;-) I've got a few of your
records! You're one of the guys responsible for todays flood of
rock-inspired new music....
[snip]
: It's so touching what I'm hearing on the radio, they're pouring
their
: hearts out, it's the most exciting music I've heard in years.
The
: prediction made by Pierre Boulez in the 1950s that the future
would
: see the masses making and appreciating advanced forms of
electronic
: music has now been fulfilled (although perhaps not in quite the way
he
: expected... roll over, Monsieur Boulez!)
You exaggerate its importance. Sure, it'll all be sentimental
nostalgia
in 20 years and listened to a little, but again, it's not
sophisticated
enough in its emotional range to be - anything. It's a cheap rush and
I
love the stuff. Listen to it all day sometimes at work, but it's
ear
candy.
I don't believe that classical music, though, has a god damn chance
until
it can provide the same rush that great techno or a blazing Hendrix
solo
can. Who's going to listen to it? The sophisticate? She died 20
years
ago in a car crash on I90. Classical music has to evolve into
something
exciting and timely or its just dead. Ultimately, it'll be one or
two
composers who make the bridge the rest of the wanna be composers of
the
next century use. You, at least have participated in the (ahem)
bridge-building process! Don't go and pretend that the bricks of
the
bridge are important. Forget that. It's the humanity that'll
travel
across it that's important.
The only art that is ever imortant is the art
that has it all... all the sadness, all the trippy rushes, all the
anger
and fear. Rock/pop/techno don't got squat in that department. Just
one
sentiment after another. But hey, we're all getting so fuckin'
intimidated by our cool friends that we think that the crap they
listen to
is art! Ha.... we know better. We're just so god damn hungry for
something new and exciting we'll buy it for now and feel like a flake
next
year. We can do better! If you have to, just act like you know, bob
you
head... but don't buy it in any deep sense.
: So does this mean that Rock is dead and techno (and its many
: sub-genres) rules?
: Nah. Rock isn't dead, it just grew up. Now it knows how
classical
: music feels!
Nah... I still get a little rush listening to some White Zombie from
time
to time... but it's just ear candy, inspiration - just today's
peasant
song to rip off.
Jeff Harrington [ "Art does not make peace...that is not its
business...]
jeff@parnasse.com [ Art is peace." --Robert Lowell]
http://www.parnasse.com/jeff.htm --------->>[[ My Music
]]<<--------------]
http://www.parnasse.com/vrml.shtml ------->>[[ My Worlds
]]<<-------------]
****************************************************
This response to Jeff Huntington was made by rhys on the rec.music.compose newsgroup:
My understanding of Jeff Harrington's thought provoking response to
the article I posted recently (Is Rock Dead?) is that rock isn't dead
because it was never alive in the first place!
Jeff goes on to make hierarchical distinctions between rock, techno,
pop and music coming out of a classical tradition...he is basically
saying that rock/pop/techno don't reach the lofty heights of music
coming out of a classical tradition, saying (forgive the out of
context quote, Jeff): " The only art that is ever important is the
art that has it all... all the sadness, all the trippy rushes, all
the anger and fear. Rock/pop/techno don't got squat in that
department. You exaggerate its importance. Sure, it'll all be
sentimental nostalgia in 20 years and listened to a little, but
again, it's not sophisticated enough in its emotional range to be -
anything."
But on the other hand, Jeff says that:
"I don't believe that classical music, though, has a god damn chance
until
it can provide the same rush that great techno or a blazing Hendrix
solo
can. Who's going to listen to it? "
I couldn't agree more!
I don't like to make hierarchical value judgments on the different
genres of music, though. I think amazing work has been done in all
fields. I don't know about you, Jeff, but songs or albums like
Batchain Puller - Captain Beefheart; the Idiot - Iggy Pop; I'm Gonna
Put a Spell on You - Screamin' Jay Hawkins - Marque Moon -
Television; certain Sonic Youth songs... I kinda feel that some of
them reach those heights that you were talking about. Also, you don't
mention jazz... how about Charlie Parker, Miles Davis, Max Roach,
John Coltrane, Carla Bley, Chet Baker, etc etc? I'll betcha a lot of
tunes from that field will hold their own for a long time to come as
well, being, as they are (to use your words) "as sophisticated
and
as varied as life itself. That is, it covers not just the genitals
and the
heart, but the deepest emotions we all experience".
I must say that I have to agree to a large extent with your statement
about techno music: "You exaggerate its (techno and its sub-genre)
importance. Sure, it'll all be sentimental nostalgia in 20 years and
listened to a little, but again, it's not sophisticated enough in its
emotional range to be - anything. It's a cheap rush and I love the
stuff. Listen to it all day sometimes at work, but it's ear
candy."
A lot of it really IS ear candy! But isn't what you're talking about
more the difference between truly transcending music as opposed to
music which does not succeed in transcending within a given musical
genre or context... rather than the context itself? What I mean is
that there is a LOT of bad music out there in ALL fields. Ha! That's
surely something we can all agree upon!
I've heard so much bad contemporary music coming out of a classical
context, it bores me to tears...same thing with music coming out of
rock, jazz, pop, and electronica...but one has to admit that there's
music that's way bloody good in all the genres, even in techno, Jeff!
Ya just gotta look for it.
>Classical music has to evolve into something
>exciting and timely or its just dead. Ultimately, it'll be one or
two
>composers who make the bridge the rest of the wanna be composers
of the
>next century use.
There was an interesting article in the January '97 issue of The Wire
Magazine by Ben Watson of an Iannis Xenakis biography that just came
out. Of all that generation, I find Xenakis to be one of the most
open-minded. I like a lot of his music, I became a fan after I heard
"Occident/Orient". Anyway, here's the quote from the Wire: "Post-war
classical composition is a fraught business enthralled to the
retrospective elevation of Bach, Beethoven to the heights of "genius"
mystification. Modern composers tend to be individualistic,
competitive and megalomaniac (hey, sounds like me!!!) Ironically,
Xenakis' lack of interest in alternative methods of realizing music
(free improvisation , which he calls "a fashion, like jazz", studio
multi-tracking, jazz collectivity, pop intervention) fixes iginal
question had more to do with energy focus rather than emotive and
intellectual hierarchy between the various musical genres. As I said
earlier, I'm amazed by all the new stuff happening within ambient,
jungle, techno, new electronica, drum and bass, etc and was saying
the most interesting music being made today is happening within its
borders, but maybe I'm wrong. I received an e-mail from Andrew Russ,
who said (in part) in response to the "Is Rock Dead" article:
"But then i realized there are many such scenes that sort of
operate in parallel and don't get heard of because they don't
even care about radio airplay. There's a hardcore punk community
in eastern Pennsylvania that i know about because i sometimes
see their fanzines and flyers. I think that a lot of these
people are also into ska, though i haven't heard any of this
stuff.
Even stranger, on cable there's a christian punk rock
video show. There are still death metal heads out there, there
are
people into hearts of space(TM), etc. etc. And the people in each
scene are probably thinking that that is where _the_ creative
activity is going on. And that area may well be creative, it at
least has the interest of the people in them..."
Which I guess says it all...
All the best,
Rhys
_______________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 17:20
Received: 1/2/97 18:43
From: SNOTHANSON, SNOTHANSON@prodigy.net
To: Rhys Chatham, chatham@pratique.fr
I agree that there seems to be a lack of innovation on the music
scene today. In my search for new sounds, I find myself going back
in
time. I'm now becoming interested in (get this) Burl Ives. It's
just
become to much trouble to follow every little tweak of the rock
scene,
when there is a wealth of fun stuff in the bargin bins at my local
used
record shops. Are you finding yourself doing this as well?
Scott
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 23:21
Received: 2/2/97 0:24
From: Jonathan Miller, jemill@mindspring.com
To: Rhys Chatham, chatham@pratique.fr
On Sat, 01 Feb 1997 02:51:23 +0100, you wrote:
>Is Rock Dead?
>
You are the same Rhys Chatham who wrote for masses of electirc
guitars? Heard one of your pieces at BAM back in the early 80s.
Think
it was on a program with Reich and others. Impressive sound!!
Overtones were banging around creating some bizarre imoressions.
Do you think that techno is so different from "Rock"? I think it
depends on the distance or perspective you have when making the
comparison. Coming in from the "classical" perspective, the two
styles share alot and in my mind, are different ways of
expressing
similar, rhythmcentric musical ideas. The sounds of synths and
computers are somewaht colder than a beautiful bent note on a
guitar
but the propulsive thrust of this techno can be compared to alot
of
African based music. Coming from a "rock" perspective all fine
stylistic details make the two styles seem quite different.
Just a thought - what do you think?
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 5:21
Received: 1/2/97 10:39
From: Matthew H. Fields, fields@eecs.umich.edu
To: chatham@pratique.fr
Oh, no, if rock has met the fate of classical music, that means
10000
out-of-work over-talented rock musicians for every 100
out-of-work
over-talented classical composers for every 10 employed rock
musicians
of varying talents for every 1 employed classical composer, who
might
be great or might have kissed butt to get where they are. What does
that
leave for fighting back? Mahler-scale symphonies to put everybody
back
to work? (I wish, sometimes...)
Keep in work, Rhys, and be a beacon to us out-of-workers!
Matt
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 7:52
Received: 1/2/97 10:39
From: Andrew Russ, endwar@phys.psu.edu
To: chatham@pratique.fr
Where is it happening now? Dunno precisely.
There is noise, which isn't exactly within a tradition, unless
you
count "Metal Machine Music" as a ttradition. Some of that is
great.
I've been listening a lot to Aube lately. Merzbow is good.
I like the Hafler Trio, too, though maybe they are sort of a
continuation of industrial more than loud noise. You can read
more on alt.noise I think Thurston Moore is into some of that
stuff. You can read about it in Bananafish magazine, too.
To some extent, i think the "louder, denser" shool is fading
out in favor of a more self-consciously avant-garde style.
Seems like lots of people are into Cage and Stockhausen as
influences.
And Krautrock. Krautrock revivalists in some form or another
are showing up in the form of bands like Stereolab or Tortoise
(i've heard them compared to Can), Gastr del Sol.
I never really followed "house", except that i do know that
Psychic TV (of all people) also appropriated the style ca. 1988
and did a few fake compilations and stuff.
Incidentally, you should consider crossposting the message to
some other groups. then again, you may just get everyone's
personal biases, such as i have put in this message.
andrew
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 2/2/97 9:33
Received: 2/2/97 10:44
From: Andrew Russ, endwar@phys.psu.edu
To: chatham@pratique.fr
>
>Hi Andrew,
>
>thanks for your response, would you mind if I post it on my web
page?
>
Sure. It was sort of an off the cuff post, in that i later
started thinking and wondering what happened to "copyright
violation"
as art, a la Negativland, John Oswald, and the Evolution Control
Committee,
and Oval (though i haven't heard the latter yet). That's another
promising area, which runs a lot through cassette networks that
i'm
not really a part of.
But then i realized there are many such scenes that sort of
operate in parallel and don't get heard of because they don't
even care about radio airplay. There's a hardcore punk community
in eastern Pennsylvania that i know about because i sometimes
see their fanzines and flyers. I think that a lot of these
people are also into ska, though i haven't heard any of this
stuff.
Even stranger, on cable there's a christian punk rock
video show. There are still death metal heads out there, there
are
people into hearts of space(TM), etc. etc. And the people in each
scene are probably thinking that that is where _the_ creative
activity is going on. And that area may well be creative, it at
least has the interest of the people in them, but there are also
lots of other areas with other people. Not enough people to
make an obvious scene in our area dominated by one kind of music.
Rather these networks are dispersed and interacting through the
mail and increasingly through computers.
As for me personally, i'm too busy catching up with what
i already know -- this week i bought older CDs by Husker Du,
Th' Faith Healers, Elvis Costello, Henry Cowell, and Stockhausen
(an LP, actually), before that it was an order of noise
by Aube, Phill Niblock, The Haters, and Jliat, plus David Hykes,
Cath Carroll, The Marine Girls, and Robyn Hitchcock. It's
getting too hard to listen to "everything". It's even
gotten hard to know what "everything" is. I just have to
figure out what to restrict myself to.
andrew
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 22:41
Received: 2/2/97 0:24
From: Joe Celli, CelliOO5@aol.com
To: chatham@pratique.fr
thanks very much for your response - you bring up some very
provacative
ideas, questions, etc. may we make a suggestion? if you visit our web
site
you will see that there is a forum for this type of discussion with
some very
informed people visiting - i think you could add and get some
interesting
discussion going - how about visiting it and joining in?
http://www.hear.com/o.o./
go to the NEWS page and then the FORUM.
best to you,
O. O. DISCS, INC.
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 22:45
Received: 2/2/97 0:24
From: Matthew H. Fields, fields@eecs.umich.edu
To: chatham@pratique.fr
Another new fashion that came and went is crooning in a style
that sounds to me like Islamic liturgy (e.g. Boys 2 Men).
Usually romantic or erotic lyrics, heavy technology, choral
harmony
sometimes faked with synths under heavily ornamented "passionate"
solo voice...
When it hit, it surely was new...
But I think you answered your own question. The best new trend
is just on the verge of being discovered. The energy that
requires
continual novelty for regrowth is just that. And the novelty
is always there, hiding somewhere--and as soon as it's
discovered,
it's not novel any more, but something else is waiting to be
discovered.
It's a never-ending ride!
--
Matt Fields URL:http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields
****************************************************
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Sent: 1/2/97 22:45
Received: 2/2/97 0:24
From: Matthew H. Fields, fields@eecs.umich.edu
To: chatham@pratique.fr
Another new fashion that came and went is crooning in a style
that sounds to me like Islamic liturgy (e.g. Boys 2 Men).
Usually romantic or erotic lyrics, heavy technology, choral
harmony
sometimes faked with synths under heavily ornamented "passionate"
solo voice...
When it hit, it surely was new...
But I think you answered your own question. The best new trend
is just on the verge of being discovered. The energy that
requires
continual novelty for regrowth is just that. And the novelty
is always there, hiding somewhere--and as soon as it's
discovered,
it's not novel any more, but something else is waiting to be
discovered.
It's a never-ending ride!
--
Matt Fields URL:http://www-personal.umich.edu/~fields
****************************************************
Subject: rockin'
Sent: 3/2/97 17:16
Received: 3/2/97 21:47
From: Andy Perseponko, andyp@cdnow.com
To: chatham@pratique.fr
Hello,
very strange to see yr name on the sonic youth newsgroup, havne't
been here
too long, so maybe you are a regular and i never noticed. anyway,
just
reading that sonic youth book (confusion is next) and you are all
over the
place, neat to see you are still interested. while i agree that a lot
of
good stuff is happening fromt the dance world, as far as "rock" goes,
dead
c. from new zealand are still taking the quitar to new levels, as
are
fuzzhead from kent, ohio who shape a lot of their influences into a
very
neat sound, esp on their sun ra tribute lp. loren mazzacane conner is
still
playing the spaced out over extended blues and quite good at that.
well,
hope all is well, if yr not familiar with this stuff check it out, if
you
are let me know what you think. take care andyp
****************************************************
From - Mon Feb 3 21:42:33 1997
From: tagutcow@nr.infi.net (Robert Caponi)
Newsgroups: rec.music.compose
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Date: 3 Feb 1997 05:29:49 GMT
Organization: Excessive, overbearing, and compulsive
In article <smv0386-0102971951110001@132.162.221.103>,
"Manu"
<smv0386@oberlin.edu> wrote:
> Techno itself is fascinating as a style and structure of music
and as a
> social phenomenon. For me personally, jungle and dub are new
worlds of
> possibility. It's also non-corporate right now, for the most
part. The
Maybe I'm just not hearing the right stuff, but this whole jungle
thing,
IMO, is really trumped up. I'm even hearing people reevaluating pop
musics
past in terms of its eventual fruition as jungle music. I'm not
getting
too excited because I've already learned that there's no genre of
music
whos defining characteristics include consistent quality. These guys
have
it all over, say, ca. 1988 Skinny Puppy in terms of hipness, but I'd
be
suprised if a single one of them creates stuff as complex and pretty
so
many techno-generations later. I've also come to believe that the
technologies for manipulating pure sound will ever fully be exploited
in
pop music, nor will pure sound ever be considered substantial
musical
material in its own right (Japanese noise music is evidently
quite
popular, but still not quite what I have in mind.) I think I prefer
more
mainstream dance music, myself. And even at that, John Cougar
Melencamp
has more soul than the whole lot of them :)
> Just as composers in the seventies and eighties wrote a lot of
great music
> that straddled the lines of rock and classical, I think that
composers today
> are going to incorporate techno, hip-hop and its instruments
(mainly the
> turntable) into serious music. Jim O' Rourke and others have
already
> started this.
For me, at least, the jury's still out on the import of techno,
although I
will admit it's alot more exciting now as compared to the rather
staid
models used six or seven years ago (clever sample... abrasive
dotted
rhythm synth riff... sample repeated... bass drum... sample
again...
clicky noises, breakbeats, audience applause, synth riff again, etc.
etc.
etc.) However, hip-hop and rap are certainly cultural gifts not to
be
taken lightly... IMO, they will prove to be the most influential to
have
come from the USA in the last 25 years. There will be many
ingenuine
"post-moderny" attempts to mediate between art music and street
culture,
but there are people out there with a genuine knowledge and
appreciation
of the mediums' most exciting qualities who will be able to distill
them
into their art of any idiom.
Some people would be wont to tell you rap has a history extending
over
continents and several hundred years, but it seems to me, in spirit
at
least, more like something in its infancy than its maturity. It rings
alot
of the same bells alot of more rustic forms of expression do. Who
knows
where it will end up? One thing that insures rap won't burn itself
out is
its extreme conservativeness; innovations spread quickly but come
far, far
apart. So much time is spent giving tips of the hat to past masters
and
rehashing classic lines (come on, how many times must "you go on and
on
and you don't stop" be paid homage?) That the words tend more to
describe
the music itself more than a story and that heartfelt expressions
of
genuine emotion usually end up sounding kinda embarassing in the
medium
consitute yet another challenge; all mood must be condensed into
terse,
well-rounded phrases and disconcerting juxtapositions (eg that "Hail
Mary"
song they've been playing the hell out of on r&b radio that
continually
comes down to the "la--da da da--da da da-da-da" chorus amidst the
de
rigeur tales of gangsta life; blew me away the first time I heard
it.)
That's it- it's a whole other aesthetic. You certainly don't listen
to it
the same way you listen to more information-density based music, but
you
still have to *listen*; at least in order to get over the initial
hurdle
of appreciating a music whose values are very different from most
everything else we hear. I feel the percieved "aesthetic anarchy" of
the
use of the turntable as an instrument unfortunately eclipses a
technical
appreciation of rap skills in the minds of people with a passing
familiarity of the mediums. They appreciate it philosophically but,
in the
long run, can't appreciate it as music. But I agree with the poster
that
the aesthetic possibilities of the turntable are fair game. Why,
sparing
use of the "mute" button has already given pop music a whole new
lease on
white space.
I am fully aware that alot of people who listen to hiphop listen to
very
little else *but* hiphop (and I can understand why; the shit's
hypnotizing
in its consistency. It's the only thing I can use as "wallpaper
music" for
precisely that reason.) As well, I think it's important not to ignore
or
justify that which is tacky and dumb in these mediums. Yeah, I'm only
a
geeky white suburban kid; but I'm sure the kids on even the
meanest
streets of North Kakkalak recognize can LA gangsta posturing for
being
precisely that :) I guess my feeling is more intuitive than anything
else
that there's just something *there* in rap and hip-hop in terms
of
cultural worth that isn't in other pop musics. The most enduring
and
genuine crossovers will be the least self-concious, however, so it
all has
to start with inspiration and not contrivance. If your music tells of
how
all things are assimilated in your world, the assimilation need not
be
obvious nor need the 'world' take primacy over you.
Amazing how I can rant on about topics only marginally related to
composition. Perhaps part of the reason here is because I'm still
looking
for direction in music. Major identity issues.
--
T.W.I.D.N Ä http://www.infi.net/~tagutcow/
****************************************************
From - Mon Feb 3 21:43:00 1997
From: Bob Morris <bmorris@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: rec.music.compose
Subject: Re: Is Rock Dead?
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 1997 21:32:40 -0800
Xref: iway.fr rec.music.compose:40689
> which eventually turned into the genres called techno, ambient
music,
> jungle, drum & bass and more!
Genres which still haven't quite hit the mainstream yet. But they
undoubtably will, maybe in different form, maybe undiluted. Just
like
punk did.
> So does this mean that Rock is dead and techno (and its many
> sub-genres) rules?
Well, since techno morphs with everything it meets, there should be
even
more fascinating stuff happening. Plus it'll let other genres
morph
too, like the recent Afro-Celt CD.