Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
I don't think so. You can find great music in the last twenty years just as much as before. Sufjan Stevens, Silver Jews, Radiohead, Joanna Newsom, Rage Against the Machine, Audioslave, PJ Harvey, Jeff Buckley, Tori Amos, Elliott Smith, Tool, Grandaddy, Godspeed You Black Emperor, ...
No, but she's better than "The Monkees". Obviously, comparing shitty pop of the present with classics of the past, the past wins. How about if I compared Modest Mouse to, say, The Archies? All of a sudden, the present doesn't sound quite so bad.
There are some terrific present-day artists/stars. But IMO, the entertainment industry has become -- more than ever -- an assembly-line marketing, $$$centric machine catering to the inflated notion that everyone can be a star (indeed, it's everyone's 'right' to be celebrated). As such, there is a larger percentage of garbage that hits the airwaves.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
You see I would dispute she is better than the Monkees. I also doubt people will play her as much in the future as they still will play the Monkees.
Ahh, Marius, most of those you mention are not really 'popular' music, they are 'niche' artists. They may be extremely successful 'niche' artists. Janis and the Clash were 'popular mainstream', rather than alternative artists, no matter how successful, they may be.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
I'm not sure how well either of those artists sell, and I don't know how much airtime they get and got as I don't listen to Music Radio.
So lets say I only replied to the "Are modern performers as good as those from the past?" with a "yes" and to "Has popular culture declined?" with an "I don't know"
I think as Phil Spector said Marius there is some truth in this. I would dispute though that modern performers are as great as those from the past, certainly in terms of originality and innovation, however, it must be harder to be innovative. I repackaged rock and roll in the 70's and made it far more accessible for people to make there own music. I also through my shop 'Sex' changed fashion far more than someone like Lady Gaga, who wishes she could be as talented as me.
I think we can also say, pop musicians are far less likely to buck against the establishment. As Mindship said it's all about corporate pop/rock and the bottom line. I was very mercenary and created, the great rock and roll swindle by repackaging three chords and 50's 'stylee'.
I agree ADarksideJedi, the lyrics to 'Rhinestone Cowboy' are far superior to anything by the Vengaboys.
No pop peaked with bands like Cream and artisits like Jimi Hendrix. When they were top of the charts rather than bands like the cast of Glee and some no name from Pop Idol [insert country]
Re: Re: Are modern performers as good as those from the past?
The point you have to look harder is the point it's not popular culture.
I take exception to these comments, nothing I do has not been done before with things like the Partridge Family. It is just the scale of my atrocities are so much greater. I am the ultimate expression of Warhol, everyone will be famous for fifteen minutes. In fact I have made it the average persons aspiration and entitlement.
Re: Re: Re: Are modern performers as good as those from the past?
Is this good music mainstream and generally popular?
Mr. Cowell, whilst you may be in many ways my most enduring legacy. At least some of the overhyped atrocities I served up were art. In your case, I find very little art, however, perhaps it is high art as Warhol said you can only measure success through money (paraphrased).
KMC Community Forums
Jun 10th, 2011 12:27 AM
Be my, be my little baby!
