smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Scotthomewood@cs.com |
| Subject | Re: Caution, May Induce Vomiting. |
| Date | Wed, 24 Dec 2008 23:44:11 EST |
[Part 1 text/plain US-ASCII (4.5 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Everyone thinks "their time" is the best time. This is obviously the time
Lefsetz grew up and the time he knows best. I tend to keep going back to that
time period myself and "re-discovering" gems (I say "re-discover" but I am
usually hearing these things for the first time) - from the jazz to the soul/funk to
the country music to the rock/psych music recorded during that period. I am a
little too young to actually have enjoyed the music as it happened, so to
speak, but if I were to be honest, most of my music collection derives from that
time period and if I were to just "off-the-top-of-my-head" pick a ten year
span that has provided me with most of the music I enjoy (I won't say that the
music is the "best" because I think that's the wrong word to use and why Lefsetz
seems like a tool) it would be those ten years right there. So, I kind of see
what he says even though I really don't like the way he says it.
Scott Homewood
In a message dated 12/24/2008 11:01:06 PM Eastern Standard Time,
synthhtnys@comcast.net writes:
> 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.