|
Post by daveythefatboy on Feb 20, 2021 6:31:44 GMT
No negative judgement about any of it. Christ no! Nobody would ever accuse you of such an awful thing! Of course not. People LOVE me!
|
|
wobblie
god
Just a prick out to make a name for himself.
Posts: 1,230
|
Post by wobblie on Feb 20, 2021 6:35:30 GMT
I LOVE this.
|
|
|
Post by fonz on Feb 20, 2021 7:59:02 GMT
They look like stars, even then, reheating America’s own music, and serving it back to them. There’s a nonchalance which is compelling. There’s a weird undercurrent of entitlement to rock’s second wave. The first wave was built of artists who made their name to n the clubs. The Black ffirst-wavers (Chuck, Richard, Fats, Bo, James, Sam, etc) were all pretty mean ch hardened road warriors. The white first wavers (Elvis, Jerry Lee, Buddy, Eddie, Johnny, etc) mostly managed a slightly shorter trajectory from road-warrior to recording sensation, but still put in their time. Maybe The Everly’s and Bill Haley’s trajectories looked a bit more like the Black guys. But in pretty much all cases, these folks had to have created themselves before they truly knew there was much of a marker for what they were becoming. At least, not a worldwide one. But The Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Beach Boys, Kinks, Who, most of the Motown artists - there was an element of appropriation and cosplay to the whole thing. They hopped on a freight-train already in motion. Not really that different than Pat Boone and his ilk were doing, but instead of a cynical record company cashing in, they just jumped on in and grabbed market-share on their own terms. No negative judgement about any of it. But that’s what that nonchalance makes me think about. You seem to be implying that they didn’t earn their right to be on a stage; that they didn’t pay their dues?
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Feb 20, 2021 8:42:32 GMT
There’s a weird undercurrent of entitlement to rock’s second wave. The first wave was built of artists who made their name to n the clubs. The Black ffirst-wavers (Chuck, Richard, Fats, Bo, James, Sam, etc) were all pretty mean ch hardened road warriors. The white first wavers (Elvis, Jerry Lee, Buddy, Eddie, Johnny, etc) mostly managed a slightly shorter trajectory from road-warrior to recording sensation, but still put in their time. Maybe The Everly’s and Bill Haley’s trajectories looked a bit more like the Black guys. But in pretty much all cases, these folks had to have created themselves before they truly knew there was much of a marker for what they were becoming. At least, not a worldwide one. But The Beatles, Stones, Dylan, Beach Boys, Kinks, Who, most of the Motown artists - there was an element of appropriation and cosplay to the whole thing. They hopped on a freight-train already in motion. Not really that different than Pat Boone and his ilk were doing, but instead of a cynical record company cashing in, they just jumped on in and grabbed market-share on their own terms. No negative judgement about any of it. But that’s what that nonchalance makes me think about. You seem to be implying that they didn’t earn their right to be on a stage; that they didn’t pay their dues? Not really. I’ve been on a lot of stages. You don’t earn the right to be there. You just claim the space. I’m getting at an attitudinal difference. A different set of assumptions about what they were doing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2021 8:53:16 GMT
I don't agree with what Davy is saying. I get where he is coming from but it doesn't change the fact that it was just evolving, often without realising it and with no real expectations. Where do you think you will be in five years time would have been met with a shrug of the shoulders.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Feb 20, 2021 9:20:38 GMT
I don't agree with what Davy is saying. I get where he is coming from but it doesn't change the fact that it was just evolving, often without realising it and with no real expectations. Where do you think you will be in five years time would have been met with a shrug of the shoulders. I don’t actually disagree with that. I think the difference can only really be seen in hindsight. But I think there IS a difference. To give one tangible example: None of the first-wave acts could ever be seen to perform in street clothes until the second-wavers did. There was seemingly more of a feeling among them that it was important to make a showing. So they’d dress sharp - or their version of it. The second-wavers all pretty-much started similarly, but they largely regarded it as costuming and ultimately ditched the pretense. At some level, you only do something like that if you are convinced that you are so intrinsically interesting, you don’t need to make an impression. You just show up and do your thing. Just a different set of assumptions.
|
|
rayge
Administrator
Invisible
Posts: 8,774
|
Post by rayge on Feb 20, 2021 13:35:03 GMT
Never really saw a link with the Doors I gotta say. Gav talking out of his arse again. There's so much about that post that is just wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2021 13:38:47 GMT
I don't agree with what Davy is saying. I get where he is coming from but it doesn't change the fact that it was just evolving, often without realising it and with no real expectations. Where do you think you will be in five years time would have been met with a shrug of the shoulders. I don’t actually disagree with that. I think the difference can only really be seen in hindsight. But I think there IS a difference. To give one tangible example: None of the first-wave acts could ever be seen to perform in street clothes until the second-wavers did. There was seemingly more of a feeling among them that it was important to make a showing. So they’d dress sharp - or their version of it. The second-wavers all pretty-much started similarly, but they largely regarded it as costuming and ultimately ditched the pretense. At some level, you only do something like that if you are convinced that you are so intrinsically interesting, you don’t need to make an impression. You just show up and do your thing. Just a different set of assumptions. Not sure I'd agree with that either. Bands like the Stones dressing like that was a reflection of the art school bohemian background they came from. It was countercultural rather than showbiz, although obviously it became a different kind of showbiz later on.
|
|
|
Post by daveythefatboy on Feb 20, 2021 17:22:47 GMT
I don’t actually disagree with that. I think the difference can only really be seen in hindsight. But I think there IS a difference. To give one tangible example: None of the first-wave acts could ever be seen to perform in street clothes until the second-wavers did. There was seemingly more of a feeling among them that it was important to make a showing. So they’d dress sharp - or their version of it. The second-wavers all pretty-much started similarly, but they largely regarded it as costuming and ultimately ditched the pretense. At some level, you only do something like that if you are convinced that you are so intrinsically interesting, you don’t need to make an impression. You just show up and do your thing. Just a different set of assumptions. Not sure I'd agree with that either. Bands like the Stones dressing like that was a reflection of the art school bohemian background they came from. It was countercultural rather than showbiz, although obviously it became a different kind of showbiz later on. The counterculture happening at all is at least partially influenced by thie new guard of cultural figures coming into vogue. They both led and followed it. The age difference between the first and second wavers was minor. John Lennon was only five years younger than Elvis. But that five years seemed like a million in the summer of love. I keep thinking about that scene in Hard Days Night with George Harrison and the ad agency guy. I think they touched on something key there. The baby boom had focused the world’s attention on youth. They were the biggest market, so you needed to cater to them. The first-wave rockers seemed surprised by the attention they got, but the second-wavers were as self-aware as George in that scene. They KNEW the world was fascinated and they played into it. You hear these stories about the New York folk scene where ‘straights from the suburbs’ would come to coffee houses to watch the ‘beatniks and the freaks’. You think Dylan didn’t get the power of that? Elvis actually needed Ed Sullivan’s defense as a fine young man, but The Beatles knew the drill when it was their turn, and they were ready with cheeky quips for the press about their long hair.
|
|
|
Post by Charlie O. on Sept 15, 2021 7:59:43 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fearlessfreap on Sept 15, 2021 12:23:03 GMT
Surprising how young some of those kids were, but I was the same age when I saw them in 75. Nice to see Charlie smiling.
|
|
Sneelock
god
hey Daddy-O. I don't wanna go.
Posts: 8,509
|
Post by Sneelock on Sept 15, 2021 22:22:54 GMT
"Bill Wyman dressing and reading at the same time."
|
|