Drained of meaning
September 6, 2016 11:27 AM Subscribe
The premise of Jack Hamilton’s deep new study Just Around Midnight: Rock and Roll and the Racial Imagination seems like something that’s been on rock history’s tongue for a long time without ever quite leaving it. Chuck Berry, a black man with a guitar, had been a rock and roll archetype in 1960, but by the end of the decade Jimi Hendrix would be seen as rock’s odd man out for being... a black man with a guitar. How did that occur? "Tracing the Rock and Roll Race Problem" an interview in Pitchfork.
I remember when Living Colour came out with their first record what a huge deal it was to have a black hard rock/metal band. It's still unusual.
posted by wabbittwax at 12:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by wabbittwax at 12:14 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
Thank you this thread is now about Living Colour. Favourite album go.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 12:19 PM on September 6, 2016
posted by Potomac Avenue at 12:19 PM on September 6, 2016
One thing that came up a lot while I was writing the book was that notion of selling out, whether or not a black musician is making music that’s “black” enough. No one’s ever said that Dylan or the Beatles aren’t white enough.
I think much of the reason for that is because the charge that a black musician wasn't making music that's "black" enough is rooted in the suspicion that they were courting white audiences for financial or cultural rather than artistic reasons. Given that white musicians already had access to the bigger commercial market and the white-dominated cultural institutions, it wouldn't make sense for them to "sell out" by trying to make music that wasn't white enough.
But it's obviously true that white rockers who were perceived as chasing pop audiences were subject to the same criticism of "selling out" their art for commercial considerations that black artists accused of trying to chase "crossover" success received.
Also, I think a lot of how these terms were used varies greatly. I would much more identify soul music as related to rock than rock and roll. I think of rock and roll as a genre pretty much chronologically related to the period before Elvis was drafted and rock as exclusively stuff that came later. (I think that's the result of something I read by Nick Tosches more than 30 years ago, though that recollection may not be correct.) But I think if you asked 10 people to draw a distinction between "rock" and "rock and roll," you might get 10 different answers.
posted by layceepee at 12:45 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
I think much of the reason for that is because the charge that a black musician wasn't making music that's "black" enough is rooted in the suspicion that they were courting white audiences for financial or cultural rather than artistic reasons. Given that white musicians already had access to the bigger commercial market and the white-dominated cultural institutions, it wouldn't make sense for them to "sell out" by trying to make music that wasn't white enough.
But it's obviously true that white rockers who were perceived as chasing pop audiences were subject to the same criticism of "selling out" their art for commercial considerations that black artists accused of trying to chase "crossover" success received.
Also, I think a lot of how these terms were used varies greatly. I would much more identify soul music as related to rock than rock and roll. I think of rock and roll as a genre pretty much chronologically related to the period before Elvis was drafted and rock as exclusively stuff that came later. (I think that's the result of something I read by Nick Tosches more than 30 years ago, though that recollection may not be correct.) But I think if you asked 10 people to draw a distinction between "rock" and "rock and roll," you might get 10 different answers.
posted by layceepee at 12:45 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
Thank you this thread is now about Living Colour.
This thread is about Tosin Abasi. Thank you.
posted by sukeban at 12:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
This thread is about Tosin Abasi. Thank you.
posted by sukeban at 12:53 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
This quote from the article now sticks out at me actually after rereading:
"What’s odd to me—no, it’s not odd, it’s depressing—is the way that rock music, particularly rock music of the 1960s and ’70s, has become the soundtrack to the reactionary right, the way it’s become the white-male right-wing revanchist soundtrack. Yeah, the way this music gets appropriated by that side of things; it kind of boggles the mind. But at the same time, it speaks to the extent to which a lot of that music has been really drained of its context, and drained of understandings of the contexts that produced it, understandings of the various political and cultural commitments of the artists that produced it."
I love rock and roll don't get me wrong.
But...
It hasn't BECOME reactionary, it always has been reactionary. Moreover in some ways, looked at from this vantage point, the "good" white rock and roll of the 60s and 70s (the bluesy/psych/acid/hard rock/metal/protopunk kind) is implicitly kind of fascist. The Ramones waved eagles and dressed like Hells Angels. Led Zeppelin literally took Wagnerian viking mythos and replaced African culture in the blues with Valkyries. Garage rock lyrics now sound like they were all penned by Twitter trolls.
Trump isn't appropriating. Classic rock, especially the kind built for arenas, was always playing footsie with what Ray Manzerek called "the madness of crowds". Chuck Berry, or even Howlin Wolf, makes deceptively simple music that is actually quite sophisticated and moving, singing about fun, hard times, love, regular human shit. The Stones (et al) hear that and think its about the Devil. All the reinterpretations of black music by white people in that era seem retrospectively driven by this conception of it as primitive, primal, cynical, anarchic, evil, and nobly savage.
That makes it the perfect soundtrack to the alt-right not its antithesis, and certainly not the antidote.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 1:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]
"What’s odd to me—no, it’s not odd, it’s depressing—is the way that rock music, particularly rock music of the 1960s and ’70s, has become the soundtrack to the reactionary right, the way it’s become the white-male right-wing revanchist soundtrack. Yeah, the way this music gets appropriated by that side of things; it kind of boggles the mind. But at the same time, it speaks to the extent to which a lot of that music has been really drained of its context, and drained of understandings of the contexts that produced it, understandings of the various political and cultural commitments of the artists that produced it."
I love rock and roll don't get me wrong.
But...
It hasn't BECOME reactionary, it always has been reactionary. Moreover in some ways, looked at from this vantage point, the "good" white rock and roll of the 60s and 70s (the bluesy/psych/acid/hard rock/metal/protopunk kind) is implicitly kind of fascist. The Ramones waved eagles and dressed like Hells Angels. Led Zeppelin literally took Wagnerian viking mythos and replaced African culture in the blues with Valkyries. Garage rock lyrics now sound like they were all penned by Twitter trolls.
Trump isn't appropriating. Classic rock, especially the kind built for arenas, was always playing footsie with what Ray Manzerek called "the madness of crowds". Chuck Berry, or even Howlin Wolf, makes deceptively simple music that is actually quite sophisticated and moving, singing about fun, hard times, love, regular human shit. The Stones (et al) hear that and think its about the Devil. All the reinterpretations of black music by white people in that era seem retrospectively driven by this conception of it as primitive, primal, cynical, anarchic, evil, and nobly savage.
That makes it the perfect soundtrack to the alt-right not its antithesis, and certainly not the antidote.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 1:09 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]
♪ I said, Elvis Presley ain't got no soul
Chuck Berry is rock and roll
You may dig on the Rolling Stones
But they ain't come up with that style on they own ♪
posted by bjrn at 1:37 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]
Chuck Berry is rock and roll
You may dig on the Rolling Stones
But they ain't come up with that style on they own ♪
posted by bjrn at 1:37 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]
Countless roots, numberless branches. Revolutionary or reactionary, dangerous when done right. Bean counters and carpetbaggers hop on board.
Rock on.
posted by mule98J at 2:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]
Rock on.
posted by mule98J at 2:04 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]
The thing about Trump and other conservatives co-opting Classic Rock is that they do it to seem hip and utterly fail. Trump's attempt at capturing the youthful zeitgeist is a 47 year-old cliche that doesn't even mean what he thinks it means.
For the (Living Colour) record: "Stain."
posted by wabbittwax at 2:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
For the (Living Colour) record: "Stain."
posted by wabbittwax at 2:16 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
Elvis was a hero to most
But he never meant shit to me you see
Straight up racist that sucker was
Simple and plain
Mother fuck him and John Wayne
-NWA
posted by doctor_negative at 2:26 PM on September 6, 2016
But he never meant shit to me you see
Straight up racist that sucker was
Simple and plain
Mother fuck him and John Wayne
-NWA
posted by doctor_negative at 2:26 PM on September 6, 2016
Public Enemy
posted by rocket88 at 2:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by rocket88 at 2:29 PM on September 6, 2016 [7 favorites]
It hasn't BECOME reactionary, it always has been reactionary.
I don't disagree, but I also don't think it's quite so broadly applied.
the "good" white rock and roll of the 60s and 70s
is also a limited label with criteria it's worth interrogating. all of the bands you named were fronted by men, for example. & plenty of "good" rock was made by people of color. jimmy cliff? bobby womack? richie havens? so where's that aesthetic judgment come from? (also . . . disco . . . whether or not it was "good," it needs to be part of such an analysis.)
posted by listen, lady at 2:48 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
I don't disagree, but I also don't think it's quite so broadly applied.
the "good" white rock and roll of the 60s and 70s
is also a limited label with criteria it's worth interrogating. all of the bands you named were fronted by men, for example. & plenty of "good" rock was made by people of color. jimmy cliff? bobby womack? richie havens? so where's that aesthetic judgment come from? (also . . . disco . . . whether or not it was "good," it needs to be part of such an analysis.)
posted by listen, lady at 2:48 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
Should have been more clear! With the scare quotes I meant to indicate critically acclaimed (by various criticical outlets) white acts that coopted black music in one way or another. White women I don't think are excluded from this pattern. Even Patti Smiths music buys into this affectation of primitivism redeemed by a cool poet who speaks French. This is all my favorite music you understand, so I'm literally just thinking of this now and am essentially interrogating myself about it.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:08 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Potomac Avenue at 3:08 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
It hasn't BECOME reactionary, it always has been reactionary. Moreover in some ways, looked at from this vantage point, the "good" white rock and roll of the 60s and 70s (the bluesy/psych/acid/hard rock/metal/protopunk kind) is implicitly kind of fascist. The Ramones waved eagles and dressed like Hells Angels. Led Zeppelin literally took Wagnerian viking mythos and replaced African culture in the blues with Valkyries. Garage rock lyrics now sound like they were all penned by Twitter trolls.
I'll think about this more but my first thought is that this is a biiiiit of a reach.
posted by atoxyl at 4:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]
I'll think about this more but my first thought is that this is a biiiiit of a reach.
posted by atoxyl at 4:27 PM on September 6, 2016 [4 favorites]
White rockers didn't put the Devil in the blues, for one thing.
posted by atoxyl at 4:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 4:33 PM on September 6, 2016 [2 favorites]
It was a different devil tho. I've often wondered what race Robert Johnson saw when he saw his devil. Not sure if it's the same dude Mick danced with.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:15 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:15 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
Potomac Avenue,
I get that you say you're just thinking out loud here, but I think you're doing exactly what the part you quoted criticizes:
I find it very hard to maintain the thesis you're putting forth, especially because when you look at the bands of that era they were often "reactionary" against the dominate rightwing culture.
I think you're really missing the mark while the linked piece gets it: the modern reactionary movement embraces and lionizes "classic rock" because they've imbued it with false nostalgia for a mythical white Golden Age of rebellion and freedom before black people came along with their hip hop and rap and polluted the culture, which as the linked piece notes is nonsensical, but so is much of what the modern right thinks.
posted by Sangermaine at 6:49 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]
I get that you say you're just thinking out loud here, but I think you're doing exactly what the part you quoted criticizes:
But at the same time, it speaks to the extent to which a lot of that music has been really drained of its context, and drained of understandings of the contexts that produced it, understandings of the various political and cultural commitments of the artists that produced it.You talk about what the Ramones wore or Led Zeppelin's use of Germanic mythic imagery or the entire garage rock scene and talk about them entirely devoid the context they developed in, or why they were doing what they did.
I find it very hard to maintain the thesis you're putting forth, especially because when you look at the bands of that era they were often "reactionary" against the dominate rightwing culture.
I think you're really missing the mark while the linked piece gets it: the modern reactionary movement embraces and lionizes "classic rock" because they've imbued it with false nostalgia for a mythical white Golden Age of rebellion and freedom before black people came along with their hip hop and rap and polluted the culture, which as the linked piece notes is nonsensical, but so is much of what the modern right thinks.
posted by Sangermaine at 6:49 PM on September 6, 2016 [5 favorites]
I get that you say you're just thinking out loud here, but I think you're doing exactly what the part you quoted criticizes
I think it's also worth remembering, Potomac Avenue, that you are talking about real people here. The Ramones aren't just a blank canvas for you to use in interrogating yourself. Before you say publicly that their music was "implicitly kind of fascist," you should develop a coherent argument to support that really hateful allegation.
posted by layceepee at 7:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think it's also worth remembering, Potomac Avenue, that you are talking about real people here. The Ramones aren't just a blank canvas for you to use in interrogating yourself. Before you say publicly that their music was "implicitly kind of fascist," you should develop a coherent argument to support that really hateful allegation.
posted by layceepee at 7:13 PM on September 6, 2016 [3 favorites]
Well I think you can say "[xxx] draws on fascist imagery/ideas" without implicating its creator as an actual blackshirt. I just don't think it's particularly accurate here or at best oversimplified. For example "The Ramones" are the sum of the interests of a guy who was actually right-wing, a guy who was fairly left-wing, and a guy with, uh, junkie politics.
posted by atoxyl at 7:37 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by atoxyl at 7:37 PM on September 6, 2016 [1 favorite]
While it's true that rock and roll has its earliest roots in blues and R&B, in America it quickly became (white) country with an R&B backbeat. Just look at Elvis, Bill Hailey, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, Roy Orbison, etc. They were just good ol' country singers with attitude and a rockin' beat behind them.
It was British rock and roll that embraced the blues and kept it in the music. The "British Invasion" bands (except, notably, the Beatles) were all started by kids who collected and traded Blues records and worshipped them and learned the songs note for note. They wanted to be pure blues musicians until fame and record deals steered them into pop and psychedelia.
I would argue that the American version was more guilty of appropriation and coopting than the British. Those guys were fans and appreciated the music and, for the most part, credited and revered the originators.
posted by rocket88 at 7:44 PM on September 6, 2016
It was British rock and roll that embraced the blues and kept it in the music. The "British Invasion" bands (except, notably, the Beatles) were all started by kids who collected and traded Blues records and worshipped them and learned the songs note for note. They wanted to be pure blues musicians until fame and record deals steered them into pop and psychedelia.
I would argue that the American version was more guilty of appropriation and coopting than the British. Those guys were fans and appreciated the music and, for the most part, credited and revered the originators.
posted by rocket88 at 7:44 PM on September 6, 2016
... in 1960, but by the end of the decade Jimi Hendrix would be seen as rock’s odd man out for being... a black man with a guitar.
Ah yes, but please leave us not forget Eddie Hazel.
posted by On the Corner at 3:26 AM on September 7, 2016
Ah yes, but please leave us not forget Eddie Hazel.
posted by On the Corner at 3:26 AM on September 7, 2016
I've often wondered what race Robert Johnson saw when he saw his devil
I've got my eye on Charlie Parker, devil-dealing wise. Mediocre young teenage sax player becomes generation-defining genius? Dies before age 40? Can converse with anyone, discoursing like a professor on demand?
posted by thelonius at 3:59 AM on September 7, 2016
I've got my eye on Charlie Parker, devil-dealing wise. Mediocre young teenage sax player becomes generation-defining genius? Dies before age 40? Can converse with anyone, discoursing like a professor on demand?
posted by thelonius at 3:59 AM on September 7, 2016
-NWA
Tell me you didn't just do that, so I don't have to reach for a "they all look the same to me" joke which will surely and correctly be deleted.
posted by rocket88
Eponyetc.
implicitly kind of fascist
If you take lyrics like "Well I'm a Nazi schatze, I'm a Nazi, yes I am" at face value, that's on you
I've got my eye on Charlie Parker...posted by thelonius
Eponysterical redux!
posted by adamgreenfield at 6:11 AM on September 7, 2016
Tell me you didn't just do that, so I don't have to reach for a "they all look the same to me" joke which will surely and correctly be deleted.
posted by rocket88
Eponyetc.
implicitly kind of fascist
If you take lyrics like "Well I'm a Nazi schatze, I'm a Nazi, yes I am" at face value, that's on you
I've got my eye on Charlie Parker...posted by thelonius
Eponysterical redux!
posted by adamgreenfield at 6:11 AM on September 7, 2016
I'm named after a Stevie Wonder song as recorded by Jeff Beck. It was either this, or ConstipatedDuck.
posted by thelonius at 5:55 PM on September 8, 2016
posted by thelonius at 5:55 PM on September 8, 2016
I think Thelonius is also the name of a devout religious order.
posted by wabbittwax at 9:11 PM on September 12, 2016
posted by wabbittwax at 9:11 PM on September 12, 2016
« Older lol @ theranos | Pocket Devils Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Frowner at 12:11 PM on September 6, 2016