smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | synthhtnys@comcast.net |
| Subject | Re: Caution, May Induce Vomiting. |
| Date | Thu, 25 Dec 2008 03:57:58 +0000 |
[Part 1 text/plain (3.3 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
There may have been only one "Renaissance" in painting if you tie the word to that specific era, but
there have been several renaissances, several "concentrated artistic fervors" and there are more to come.
You could say that there was only one "Renaissance" in music if we're going to play that game and it wasn't 1964-1974 either... it was from the 14th to the 17th centuries... I'd be willing to bet there were ebb and flows in that period too... of generally agreed on superior and less brilliant years / decades....
... but none of this is going to make a Boomer love himself and his time frame any less is it?
I'd agree with him if he's asserting that the lay of the land in the music industry in that time period allowed for a sort of rugged individualism and that everything has changed from that model by now, but the whole "There is only one good time in popular music and that "64 - 74"
idea which is frankly what he seems to be saying is complete dog squat and really shouldn't be asserted anywhere outside a vomitorium.
-------------- Original message --------------
From: John Micek <jlmicek@verizon.net>
> From Lefsetz's latest screed.
>
> And, tonight, ladies and gentlemen, we have reached the absolute
> apogee of Boomer self-involvement:
>
>
> "The decade from 1964-1974 represents the musical . There
> was only one Renaissance in painting. It's not like artists dropped
> their brushes and drills thereafter, it's just that never again was
> there such concentrated artistic fervor, never again was art at the
> center of public focus to such a degree. People have been making
> records for decades since the sixties, but they just don't stick in
> the same way. "Thriller" may be the second best selling record of
> all time, but it has none of the raw energy, it lacks the cultural
> impact of "Meet The Beatles". "I Still Haven't Found What I'm
> Looking For" is a great track, but it pales in comparison to
> "Satisfaction". In the sixties and early seventies music drove the
> culture. If you wanted to know which way the wind blew, you turned
> on the radio. The radio was an Internet built solely for us, the
> baby boomers. It featured not only music, but hip news too. The
> deejays were not beholden to corporate masters, we felt they
> truly belonged to us. If you wanted to make a statement in the
> fifties you wrote a book, if you had something to say in the sixties
> and seventies, you cut a record. Which the audience waited in rapt
> attention for. We truly believed what was contained in the grooves
> was the essence of life. We needed to get closer. To not only the
> Top Forty gems, but records that were the beneficiary of no airplay
> at all. We had an underground railroad, passing these gems along.
> They still make music today, but it's not the same. Hell, before the
> Beatles no one knew you could make this much money, no one bothered
> to cut album length opuses, we invented it as we went along, which is
> why we can't relate to Live Nation and the rest of the corporations
> serving product up to us. We thought music was best presented by
> Bill Graham, at his vaunted Fillmores East and West."
>
>
>
> Well, we might as well stop making music, art or literature. It's all
> been done before and those pesky Boomers did it better.
> Good Lord ...
>
> john micek
>
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.