Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 242 posts

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#141

Post by tptacek »

dang wrote: post #110
nzeribe wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true. Afropunk was a response to the question you pose. White people stole the rock from Black kids the way Ancient Greece stole the Hippocratic Oath from African culture. It is almost the same. Today, it's almost impossible to know Bo Diddley, Sister Rosetta Tharpe and other Black pioneers created rock in almost it's complete form. "History is written by the winners", they say, and our cultural memory is…

You're right, of course, although surely anyone who isn't ignorant knows that rock n roll was black music, and in any case Elvis (and countless others all the way—I would say down, but that's mean—to Cliff Richard and Pat Boone) were busy at that before the Beatles. By the way, if anyone is interested in this who doesn't know the incredible story of the Detroit proto-punk band Death, it's sort of a glimpse into a par…

This is so great. "Dad! Why didn't you tell me!"

Of course --- no story about being lost to history, though! --- there's the impact of Bad Brains on punk/hardcore as well.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#142

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

wolverine876 wrote: post #89
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #23

The article makes a very strenuous effort to make a point about something something racism in rock that sounds a bit boring and trite to my ears. After all, Bon Scott said it best years ago: In the beginning Back in nineteen fifty five Man didn't know 'bout a rock 'n' roll show And all that jive The white man had the schmaltz The black man had the blues No one knew what they was gonna do But Tchaikovsky had the news…

I didn't know metal was so big in Athens, Greece. Thanks. > So why didn't the black grasroots ever sprout an analogous new rock scene, instead of turning towards the mainstream, big stage, light show, for-profit music that comes from black artists for the last few decades? For me, that's like asking, 'why didn't Van Gogh ever develop something innovative, like the abstract artists, instead of painting in his popular…

> techno (yes, created by African-Americans in Detroit)

if you define "techno" in a very particular way, that's true.

if you define "techno" in the broader sense in which it is typically used, it was created by Germans in Dusseldorf, whose music is acknowledged by the Detroit scene makers as pivotal in their own evolution.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#143

Post by z3ncyberpunk »

tarsinge wrote: post #84
stuart78 wrote: post #41

I think that the narrative of last twenty years has been a re-blending of genre in a way that is not fully appreciated. While you can certainly find plenty of music that fits the mold established in the 60s, 80s or 90s around you also find much more at the top of the charts that challenges those categories. Right now the top 10 Billboard chart includes Lil Nas X and The Weeknd, neither of whom fits comfortably in the…

That's my take too. Also for The Weeknd it's especially true with early releases, like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPp5Ty9EE6k . On the hip hop side Lil Peep (RIP at 22 unfortunately) is also typical of that blend, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAMgQQMZ9Lk or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOujzvtwZ6M , with a huge 90's alt rock vibe.

Trust me, the loss of Lil Peep is no great tragedy upon our society

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#144

Post by aerovistae »

dang wrote: post #110
nzeribe wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not true. Afropunk was a response to the question you pose. White people stole the rock from Black kids the way Ancient Greece stole the Hippocratic Oath from African culture. It is almost the same. Today, it's almost impossible to know Bo Diddley, Sister Rosetta Tharpe and other Black pioneers created rock in almost it's complete form. "History is written by the winners", they say, and our cultural memory is…

You're right, of course, although surely anyone who isn't ignorant knows that rock n roll was black music, and in any case Elvis (and countless others all the way—I would say down, but that's mean—to Cliff Richard and Pat Boone) were busy at that before the Beatles. By the way, if anyone is interested in this who doesn't know the incredible story of the Detroit proto-punk band Death, it's sort of a glimpse into a par…

To be honest it seems very unlike you (going off your usual comments) to say that someone would have to be 100% ignorant to not know the history of rock and roll. I didn't know this, and I'd like to think I'm not "100% ignorant."

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#145

Post by nmfisher »

dijksterhuis wrote: post #67
ehnto wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm I don't quite agree but it could be that the scenes are different in different places. It could also be that our definitions of EDM differ. I might also be missing something so take my comment as just my perspective from where I stand. I think there is a split between commercialized EDM and "real" EDM. The true culture and heritage of house and techno definitely live on in the greater electronic music scene in gen…

> I think there is a split between commercialized EDM and "real" EDM. This could be a locale thing, but in the UK what you call "real" EDM is often known as the underground electronic music scene (at least in my circles). I.e. the long tail of folks pissing about with machines in their bedroom. Note the lack of "dance" as not all underground electronic music needs to be danced to. Autechre is a good example of this.…

I've always seen "EDM" as the bastardization of electronic music by the American festival scene in the late 2000s.

That's not a knock on the USA as a whole (a lot of garage/acid can be traced back to Detroit house and techno), but it is mostly an American genre.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#146

Post by nmfisher »

wayneftw wrote: post #21
bumbada wrote: post #20

What killed rock n roll is the same thing that "killed" every other music genre before: Demographics. People get older and young people want to differentiate themselves from older people, so they just do different things, including listening to different music. This even happened with what we consider classical music, from Beethoven Eroica to Stravinski Rite of Spring and specially Operas. Old people will consider a…

Why hasn't rap died? It's been popular for multiple generations now.

It kind of has, at least as a mainstream music genre.

What passes for rap (or hip hop) in 2020 is far removed from the golden era of the 80s and 90s.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#147

Post by betwixthewires »

krapp wrote: post #121
betwixthewires wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been thinking on this heavily, and the social implications of it, I do believe the internet killed the common cultural thread Americans had, for better or worse.

It may have killed the common pop cultural thread by virtue of fragmenting publishing and consumption, but Americans never had a common culture to begin with.

The vast majority of Americans worked during the daytime business hours, drove home listening to a handful radio stations with a relatively limited number of songs, sat on the couch and turned on the TV where what was on depended on the time of day, drank one of 5 beers available at the store, then at some point they turned it off and took off their blue jeans and went to sleep, for several decades. Before that the difference was TV, before that a car, before that radio.

People who say that America doesn't have a unifying culture have never experienced another culture first hand beyond maybe as a novelty, like going to the zoo. All cultures have subcultures. That doesn't negate a unifying culture. If you can't see it it is because it has been a constant for you your entire life, just like a fish that can't see water.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#148

Post by vagrantJin »

pmoriarty wrote: post #113
TomSwirly wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To compare this to the 1950s is... very strange. For listeners, the broadening of access to the full diversity of music between 1950 and 1990 was unprecedented in history and will never happen again, simply due to the rise of technology, and the sudden access to all the traditions of the world within a single generation. > Lil Nas X and The Weeknd, neither of whom fits comfortably in the genre they are assigned to by…

I love Reich's early tape loops.. they were so ahead of their time. When I first hear them, I was stunned at how modern-sounding parts of them are. But I completely and utterly disagree with his view that "the purpose of music was for humans to play and sing together as a group activity" Music, and any other complex human activity (like visual art, or literature) is just way too rich and varied to have any one or def…

> Music, and any other complex human activity (like visual art, or literature) is just way too rich and varied to have any one or definitive purpose.

This statement looks intelligent and interest but upon reading carefully says absolutely nothing. I don't even get what you are trying to say. Music is a group activity. Mozart played with orchestras, beyonce has scores of musicians to bounce off ideas of, Fela Kuti played with many bands - what does making music alone mean?

Reich's view was at the very least based on an observation, a learned and studied observation as a practioner and scholar.

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#149

Post by mixmastamyk »

Digit-Al wrote: post #101
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #23

The article makes a very strenuous effort to make a point about something something racism in rock that sounds a bit boring and trite to my ears. After all, Bon Scott said it best years ago: In the beginning Back in nineteen fifty five Man didn't know 'bout a rock 'n' roll show And all that jive The white man had the schmaltz The black man had the blues No one knew what they was gonna do But Tchaikovsky had the news…

As a black English man who enjoys a bit of rock and metal myself I have wondered this myself. I have some theories, which I fully admit are half baked and quite possibly incorrect. However, I think that a lot of the culture around rock and metal is off-putting to a lot of black people. If you look at something like black metal and it's sub-genres, a lot of the culture and imagery revolves around satanism and European…

Might be the “representation matters” idea. If you’ve not seen a rocker that looks like you in many decades, there might not be any motivation.

The glam rock died by the 90s, no?

Re: Bob Dylan lays down what killed rock n roll (2016)

#150

Post by dang »

aerovistae wrote: post #144
dang wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, of course, although surely anyone who isn't ignorant knows that rock n roll was black music, and in any case Elvis (and countless others all the way—I would say down, but that's mean—to Cliff Richard and Pat Boone) were busy at that before the Beatles. By the way, if anyone is interested in this who doesn't know the incredible story of the Detroit proto-punk band Death, it's sort of a glimpse into a par…

To be honest it seems very unlike you (going off your usual comments) to say that someone would have to be 100% ignorant to not know the history of rock and roll. I didn't know this, and I'd like to think I'm not "100% ignorant."

I'd have thought that everyone who knew anything about rock and roll would know that it started as black music, but ok - the world is a big place with a lot of variance. I've taken "100%" out of my comment above.

The nice thing is that you have unbelievable amounts of incredible music to discover.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=764iHBRjAVw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_6gptd01mY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MouM59AbnE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McOmcNwqprA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJKe2j9Wjh4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQXqkiKXiHc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IlSP9vVpMQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k68Fob0QA_k

Those are all songs that were done later by white artists who had big hits with them. How much money the original performers got is an exercise for the reader. I could give you dozens of other examples but, alas, HN has shot my memory.

It's important to know that in most of these cases the white artists adored the black artists and were playing their songs because they loved them—as musicians do. But it doesn't change who got the raw deal.

Post reply on HN