From: USTS060@UABDPO.DPO.UAB.EDU (Dave Hall)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
Subject: Re: A slightly altered thread
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:55:52 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
              16 Oct 1992 12:35:12 EDT from <skovitz@MAGNUS.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>

On Fri, 16 Oct 1992 12:35:12 EDT the illustrious Sonia Kovitz sed:
>>
>>      Oddly enough, one of my classes this week focused on Carnival as
>> ritualized blasphemy (there is more here so just hold on).  The relevance
>> of this is that originally carnival was a form of "organized" rebellion,
   etc. and son on.....
>
>Just want to put in right here that Jews do the same thing at Purim--make fun
>of the rabbi, wear weird clothes, make a lot of noise...  (of course Jews
>always make a lot of noise :) and some of us always wear weird clothes too, eh
>Rick?)
     Cool!  I didn't know that (Goy alert! Goy alert!) :-)>
>
>> rebellion is futile and will just become part of that
>> which you wish to change.
>>      Oh God, now I'm depressed.  Can anyone brighten my day?  Prove
>> me wrong!
>>
>
>...BUT I'm not so sure that rebellion is futile.  Look at how much both music
>and
>culture has changed (DESPITE corporatization) in the last 25 years, as a result
>(at least in good measure, if not completely) to MUSICAL rebellions... Elvis,
>Chuck Berry, Alan Freed, Stones, and so on... Maybe the world is not SUCH a
>wonderful place, but still it's a lot better than if we had stayed eternally in
>the year 1954 with our starchy little smiles...  The musical rebellions that
>were part of cracking loose the 50s and all they represented were REAL and not
>organized tempests in teapots...  Just because people eventually get famous and
>may (if they're lucky) make some bucks doesn't UNDO what was done as a real
>deal...
>
>Rather than simply "becoming part of what you wish to change," perhaps to some
>degree they [in infamous they] are getting something from YOU and are also
>changing...
>
>I'm probably terribly naive
     Hardly.
>
>(just ask Carol--BTW, glad you're back--we've been mighty unsalacious lately)
>
>"Rebel Without A Cause"
      I agree with you about the 50's and the origins of rock and roll
(a true rebellion indeed), but what concerns me is that it doesn't hold true
anymore.  Rock and Roll like TV has become a pacifier, an opiate (to borrow
a metaphor) of the masses.  True, good things are accomplished by and
through music but I wonder about their purity.  The music industry generates
incredible amounts of money and with that money comes influence and power.
That alone can make me suspicious (and yes I realize that is a prejudice).
     I don't blame a band for signing with a major label.  Hell, for that
much money I'd do it too.  What I wonder about is once signed, how much control
does the band retain?  Who really determines the final outcome of an album?
How much of yourself and your music have you sold to become a major name?
Would Mojo Noxon still be singing about pirate radio if he was signed to
a major label?
     Does the music industry give us what we want or do we "want" what
the music industry gives us (in this case we refers to us as a nation.
From my standpoint [remember that's B'ham, AL] non-mainstream, blues, jazz
alternative or anything non-top 40 is rare, except where the alternative
meets the mainstream.)?
     After penning that last part I wonder if my major concerns rise only
out of being so far out of the way.  Can any big city dwellers confirm this?

======================================================================
Rev. Dave Hall               |  "We are all born mad. Some remain so."
usts060@uabdpo.dpo.uab.edu   |          -- Samuel Beckett
======================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU