I Hate My Generation, YEAH!
Disco music from the 1970's, as well as something my father said to me a long time ago which for some reason I remembered tonight, got me thinking.
See, as a buddy and I drove home from a friends apartment tonight, we happened to be listening to Paul Oakenfold and his special brand of anthemic cheese, and it for some reason reminded me of something my Dad had said to me a few years back, when I was a disciple of Sasha and Digweed and anything Twilo-approved. He had said to me that he didn't get dane music, he didn't understand how the music that I told him was "dance" music was designed to make you, ya know, dance. He couldn't imagine himself dancing to it or even remotely considering it dance music.
And this for some reason led me to reason that my generation was the first generation to have music packaged specifically as dance music. Think about it-- back in the day, every song had to be "dance music" (i.e., something you could dance to, preferably slow with your lady friend), and it was called simply rock and roll. What about that often quoted line from that music choice show my parents used to watch growing up-- "It had a good beat, and I could dance to it." Those were your standard criteria for getting a song played, period. There wasn't a style of music played specifically for clubs, while other records you rocked alone in your basement-- it was just what it was, music.
Now, I don't know why this matters, something so completely arbitrary-- the first generation to define a certain type of music as "dance," as if to eliminate the possibility of dancing to any other form of music-- but for some reason I began to think about this, mull it over in my mind.
Until an ad came on the radio, advertising the top one hundred disco songs from the 1970's.
And then I realized that my generation didn't even have that, the copyright on music specifically designated as music to dance to. The 70's had disco, and if you want to talk only about the more recent style of anthemic type club dance music, the late 80's have that on lock, too (at least in the UK). And that's when I realized:
The reason my generation is so seemingly bored and disaffected by anything and everything is that everything has already been done, and there is nothing new or original to excite or interest us. What the Sex Pistols predicted has literally come to pass, and that nothing is shocking. We've seen it all before, and someone else had already done it-- and probably done it better. There are no uncharted territories left to explore, no new thoughts to conjure up-- seemingly everything there is to be done has already been done, leaving nothing to really excite my generation. Hell, my generation is the one that managed to make even punk rock boring and irrelevant-- something which would have seemed impossible at one point in time.
Hollywood is seemingly only interested in producing remakes of older movies or spawning sequels to the few actually interesting ideas (and several of the not so interesting or inspired ones to boot). Most of the hot "new" bands in music are simply recreating and recrafting what has come before them (Take two newer bands I happen to love, Interpol and Bloc Party. What they're doing is essentially no different than what Gang of Four or Joy Division/New Order, among others, did before them). It's why we no longer have iconic figures like Marilyn Monroe or Joe DiMaggio, but would rather build up a Lindsay Lohan or a Britney Spears, only to tear them down six months later when we've become bored, as always. (Kill your idols indeed-- how very punk rock!)
Sometimes, this lack of interest can manifest itself in odd ways. Take, for example, the response of my generation to 9/11. Beneath the shock and the horror and the anger, there is a desire to have 9/11 be the validating moment of our generation, to have this cataclismic event stand as a defining, life and world altering event (and in some instances, it has). I can't tell you how many times I've discussed 9/11 with people of my own age, and at some point the comment of "Well, we have our own JFK now" comes up.
Think about that comparison for a moment. After JFK, the world really did seem to shift, especially for the youth of this country. After JFK's assassination, Vietnam blows up, and becomes the cultural force of the time. You've got the civil rights movemetn, you've got the rise of grassroots political activism, young people coming together to affect change and force the agenda, and on and on and on. All of these notions are extremely romantic and idealistic, and I think at some level, a large portion of my generation yearns to still believe that those things are possible. And so, to some extent, the response to 9/11 has been a hope that this, this event, will mobilize our generation much the same way our parents were when they were our ages.
(And in a completely different sort of way, 9/11 may have the same kind of impact. Immediately after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Washington, you've got the full scope of the Bush Doctrine, raw and unleashed. I saw an article somewhere on the internet recently where it was suggested that the Bush Administration may go down in history as the authors of the decline of the American century, and I don't think that's too far from the truth. But instead of inspiring the younger generations to become idealistic hippie dreamers and believe (somewhat misguidedly) in the ability to force change, 9/11 has driven my generation to simply throw up our hands and go "We're so fucked.")
But hell, I guess at least now when someone like our parents tries to bring up the JFK assassination and how momentous it was, this generation can sit back and stifle a yawn. We can simply mumble "We got that, too" and go back to being jaded and bored and disaffected.
(Note: I could be completely talking out of my ass here. Feel free to let me know what you think in the comment section. Props to anyone who caught the Cracker drop in the title.)
See, as a buddy and I drove home from a friends apartment tonight, we happened to be listening to Paul Oakenfold and his special brand of anthemic cheese, and it for some reason reminded me of something my Dad had said to me a few years back, when I was a disciple of Sasha and Digweed and anything Twilo-approved. He had said to me that he didn't get dane music, he didn't understand how the music that I told him was "dance" music was designed to make you, ya know, dance. He couldn't imagine himself dancing to it or even remotely considering it dance music.
And this for some reason led me to reason that my generation was the first generation to have music packaged specifically as dance music. Think about it-- back in the day, every song had to be "dance music" (i.e., something you could dance to, preferably slow with your lady friend), and it was called simply rock and roll. What about that often quoted line from that music choice show my parents used to watch growing up-- "It had a good beat, and I could dance to it." Those were your standard criteria for getting a song played, period. There wasn't a style of music played specifically for clubs, while other records you rocked alone in your basement-- it was just what it was, music.
Now, I don't know why this matters, something so completely arbitrary-- the first generation to define a certain type of music as "dance," as if to eliminate the possibility of dancing to any other form of music-- but for some reason I began to think about this, mull it over in my mind.
Until an ad came on the radio, advertising the top one hundred disco songs from the 1970's.
And then I realized that my generation didn't even have that, the copyright on music specifically designated as music to dance to. The 70's had disco, and if you want to talk only about the more recent style of anthemic type club dance music, the late 80's have that on lock, too (at least in the UK). And that's when I realized:
The reason my generation is so seemingly bored and disaffected by anything and everything is that everything has already been done, and there is nothing new or original to excite or interest us. What the Sex Pistols predicted has literally come to pass, and that nothing is shocking. We've seen it all before, and someone else had already done it-- and probably done it better. There are no uncharted territories left to explore, no new thoughts to conjure up-- seemingly everything there is to be done has already been done, leaving nothing to really excite my generation. Hell, my generation is the one that managed to make even punk rock boring and irrelevant-- something which would have seemed impossible at one point in time.
Hollywood is seemingly only interested in producing remakes of older movies or spawning sequels to the few actually interesting ideas (and several of the not so interesting or inspired ones to boot). Most of the hot "new" bands in music are simply recreating and recrafting what has come before them (Take two newer bands I happen to love, Interpol and Bloc Party. What they're doing is essentially no different than what Gang of Four or Joy Division/New Order, among others, did before them). It's why we no longer have iconic figures like Marilyn Monroe or Joe DiMaggio, but would rather build up a Lindsay Lohan or a Britney Spears, only to tear them down six months later when we've become bored, as always. (Kill your idols indeed-- how very punk rock!)
Sometimes, this lack of interest can manifest itself in odd ways. Take, for example, the response of my generation to 9/11. Beneath the shock and the horror and the anger, there is a desire to have 9/11 be the validating moment of our generation, to have this cataclismic event stand as a defining, life and world altering event (and in some instances, it has). I can't tell you how many times I've discussed 9/11 with people of my own age, and at some point the comment of "Well, we have our own JFK now" comes up.
Think about that comparison for a moment. After JFK, the world really did seem to shift, especially for the youth of this country. After JFK's assassination, Vietnam blows up, and becomes the cultural force of the time. You've got the civil rights movemetn, you've got the rise of grassroots political activism, young people coming together to affect change and force the agenda, and on and on and on. All of these notions are extremely romantic and idealistic, and I think at some level, a large portion of my generation yearns to still believe that those things are possible. And so, to some extent, the response to 9/11 has been a hope that this, this event, will mobilize our generation much the same way our parents were when they were our ages.
(And in a completely different sort of way, 9/11 may have the same kind of impact. Immediately after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Washington, you've got the full scope of the Bush Doctrine, raw and unleashed. I saw an article somewhere on the internet recently where it was suggested that the Bush Administration may go down in history as the authors of the decline of the American century, and I don't think that's too far from the truth. But instead of inspiring the younger generations to become idealistic hippie dreamers and believe (somewhat misguidedly) in the ability to force change, 9/11 has driven my generation to simply throw up our hands and go "We're so fucked.")
But hell, I guess at least now when someone like our parents tries to bring up the JFK assassination and how momentous it was, this generation can sit back and stifle a yawn. We can simply mumble "We got that, too" and go back to being jaded and bored and disaffected.
(Note: I could be completely talking out of my ass here. Feel free to let me know what you think in the comment section. Props to anyone who caught the Cracker drop in the title.)
posted by Black Charles at 2:23 AM
7 Comments:
Hey Dan,
Interesting perspective on how politics affects change in our musical culture. And to a degree I think you’re right, today we certainly don’t share the same affinity for our musical icons as we did thirty years or so ago.
On a similar note, I think that in due time, say in the next 5 years or so we will come to explore and integrate our current musical tastes with those of middle eastern cultures, in part because of our involvement in that part of the world, and in part due to the fact that it is fresh to our ears and in ways even more melodically pleasing (in the purest musical sense).
Let me know what you think.
Kisses,
M
i like the idea maya, u can see it cropping up in music, and while this is a trend and easily dismissable, it is notable. to dan i will say that there not being anything new is a facetious comment. obviously designed to incite discussion, so ill say this. in my opinion i think we are in a strange area as far as art, music and generation. In truth there is no name for either our generation or our art movement at this time. We have been called generation Y, next, the boomlets, and other bullshit things but we have no defining name, no truly unified cultural identity. The same is true of art. The last true art movement would be considered post-modernism, but im not sure if that is current movement or not. i dont know if there is any movement at this time. Don't get me wrong, post modern art is still being made, The Big Lebowski in the late nineties, Sin City at present are the two that come to mind. However, i can't think of a unified movement that has really taken the place of post-modernism. And i know u can't really identify a movement until after it happens, but still, there is no inkling. Anyway, just a few thoughts, adios.
I hear ya Matt. Maybe it’s a good thing that there isn’t currently a domintant or obvious “movement” in current art. The “artist” can really use this presumably open field to experiment and make some new and exciting pretty configurations of marks and sounds. The perspectivist tendency of post modernism seems to have had a far reaching effect on the Western culture’s notions of objectivity and the perplexing problem of the apparent disappearance of objective truth as recognized and transmitted (or at least attempted to be transmitted) in contemporary art. Of course if a movement is dedicated to expressing a philosophy, and say a post modernist wants to communicate the essential truth that there is no essential truth, then we might run into some problems. But, luckily art deals with more than mere philosophies and bare expressions of logical absurdities (or maybe some do)… The point here is that the common human experience of a unique and possibly vibrant subjectivity always figures into art in some way, and movies like The Big Lebowski and Sin City are pretty damn cool ways to temporarily experience a reality (albeit a fictitious one) where the world of appearance is emphasized and creatively engineered. (I’m thinking of The Dude’s dream sequences and the general anachronism that is The Dude in a well mixed and democratic recent depiction of L.A. plus about the whole visual tour de force of Sin City) To me, it seems that there is more of a movement (in current “legitimate” art) towards presenting the perception of doing-it-yourself (as opposed to just pumping out generic art mechanically in a corporate setting). There is more of a centralized role of the artist, maybe auteurism returning. (I’m thinking of what we call, for example, a Rodriguez or Tarantino film or even of The G-Unit style with its subdivisions into solo acts, Alper, forgive my vast ignorance in this area.) Currently, in most of the economically developed world, artists have tremendous access to vast catalogues of virtually endless past and present examples of what has passed or passes for art. Of course the human drive towards taxonomy still seems to be one of those “dissolved ever-present truths.” (See Wittgenstein and his “language games”) But doesn’t what really get classified as a piece of art in an artistic movement depend largely on the academic and social structures or institutions with the power to dub, promote, and preserve the philosophies and artifacts from these important cultural movements? Is it really, as previously mentioned, “the money”? When do independent (non-corporate or relatively non-commercialized) trends in art ascend to the status of movements? This is a great time for art and I can’t wait to see what emerges from the primordial chaos that is the present. The more eclectic the influences, the better the legitimately aspiring new or current artist. We’re boaters, it’s cool.
P.S. DMB has had some awesome Middle Eastern influenced tunes… “Minarets” and “The Last Stop” come to mind…
^*But, is it not, what really gets classified... instead of *But doesn't what really get...
On the Middle Eastern music tip, you've had that showing up in dance tunes for years now. Rosie and I used to joke about it when listening to dance compilations, we'd be like "I could really use some MIddle Eastern wailing right about now...oh, there it is!"
Also, it is starting to show up in hip hop now too (Fiddy's "Just A Lil Bit") and of course you have M.I.A.
Anywho, that's all I'll say for now, you said alot of shit that confused the fuck outta me Ev. I'll think about it later when I have more time, but right now I gotta go look for some place to live.
Daniel Alper, Author of the critically acclaimed "Mental Swordfighting", voted "Best Dang Blog of 2005" by all of its readers says - "The reason my generation is so seemingly bored and disaffected by anything and everything is that everything has already been done, and there is nothing new or original to excite or interest us"
Henry Ellsworth, Commissioner of Patents, 1843 said - "The advancement of the arts, from year to year, taxes our credulity, and seems to presage the arrival of that period when human improvement must end."
I guess it's true! So if culture is becoming stagnant and globalization is quickly redicing the amount of minorities we have left to steal music from, I say we all take hallucinogenics and "get creative". For example I was at this gay bar last night, and there was this stripper air humping the bar and flapping his genitals around, and I was like, "Been there, done that, how many muscular men in thongs can I guy take?". Then I became captivated by these large plasma screens playing psychedelic videos that were way cool. I realized that sometimes humans can make extreme efforts in tiny underpants to be exciting and creative while creativity may be an automatic process that can't be forced. So if we stop trying so damn hard to be different, and stop focusing on how hard it is, we'll probably just stumble across our creativity. That's my 2 cents. Shnooogens.
Your dad is a wise man. And I'm enjoying my CD, even if everything has already been done before.
Post a Comment
<< Home