Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 07:54:54 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Who the F*ck is Pete Doherty?

Started by 23 Daves, August 28, 2005, 10:49:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Maximash

Rock'n'roll is a washed-up old genre that has been taken everywhere it needs to go. End of the line, people. Listen to something else.

half-serious

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

I don't think that's true of rock 'n' roll as a concept/attitude/state of mind. But it's arguably true about rock 'n' roll which directly resembles late-70s punk (or any era-specific genre) without bringing anything new to the mix.

Maximash

That what bothers me. Some people are content to listen to (and make) the same old shit, and that's fine, but it drives me up the wall. There is nothing new about Pete Doherty or his music. I'm no rock music (well, THIS kind of rock) expert but if I were to dive headfirst into the genre I'd go wayyy back, and stop there. It's been played out.

El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: "Maximash"Rock'n'roll is a washed-up old genre that has been taken everywhere it needs to go. End of the line, people. Listen to something else.

half-serious

They said that back in 1962 when The Beatles were trying to get a record deal.

It may be hard for rock n roll bands to create something truly new and inventive, but you can't beat a bunch of guys on stage with guitars, people are always going to love that. Besides, it's the songs that matter, regardless of whether it's rock n roll/dance/pop, whatever. I mean, are you expecting people to throw away all their old rock n roll records now, since it's the "end of the line"?

LadyDay

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"I don't think that's true of rock 'n' roll as a concept/attitude/state of mind. But it's arguably true about rock 'n' roll which directly resembles late-70s punk (or any era-specific genre) without bringing anything new to the mix.

What did the Stones bring to the mix that was new? That argument is brought out every 5 years on average.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: "Maximash"Rock'n'roll is a washed-up old genre that has been taken everywhere it needs to go. End of the line, people. Listen to something else.

half-serious

When did it reach the end of the line?

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

In the 60s, The Rolling Stones sounded unlike anything else people had hitherto heard on the radio. They were influenced by blues and 50s black music and all sorts of other things, but they didn't do an exact copy of those styles. The dirty swagger of the Stones was original at the time.

Whereas, no matter how good The Libertines' songs are, they do sound like a direct pastiche of punk rather than something fresh. Take 'Mayday' on Mayer's list - it's a brilliant burst of music, but it sounds like a song written for a fictional punk band in a film. Doherty may have his heart in it, but that's what it sounds like to me.

Is there any reason why rock 'n' roll should be immortal, by the way? Any reason why it shouldn't be a 50 year story with a beginning, middle and end?

Frinky


mayer

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"Is there any reason why rock 'n' roll should be immortal, by the way?

Cos Neil Young said so!

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

We all like it, but is there any reason why fans of (for example) 70s punk shouldn't be like fans of 14th century madrigal - ie, they might enjoy new interpretations, but they essentially accept that the era itself is closed.

Mayer's going to be annoyed with me again, so I'll keep this on-topic. In fact, I'll just ask a question: in what way are The Libertines different from Shakin' Stevens? Both acts specialised in facsimiles of music which was 25 years old at the time it was created - with Shaky it was 50s rock 'n' roll, with Doherty and co it was old-school punk. So what is the difference, if there is one?

mayer

Well, the Sex Pistols never did songs like "Radio America", "Breck Road Lover", "Stix And Stones" or "Cyclops". They just didn't have it in them to be able to. I think that The 'tines have a much wider ouvre than you're giving them credit for.

There's a lot of Suede/Strokes/Britpop/etc in The 'tines sound. Not everything of theirs sounds like Mayday/Up The Bracket. Whilst Shaky did a passable pastiche of 50s stuff, Doherty/Barat/Powell/Hassel do 70s Punk and a load of other stuff into the mix.

LadyDay

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"In the 60s, The Rolling Stones sounded unlike anything else people had hitherto heard on the radio. They were influenced by blues and 50s black music and all sorts of other things, but they didn't do an exact copy of those styles. The dirty swagger of the Stones was original at the time.

Whereas, no matter how good The Libertines' songs are, they do sound like a direct pastiche of punk rather than something fresh. Take 'Mayday' on Mayer's list - it's a brilliant burst of music, but it sounds like a song written for a fictional punk band in a film. Doherty may have his heart in it, but that's what it sounds like to me.

Is there any reason why rock 'n' roll should be immortal, by the way? Any reason why it shouldn't be a 50 year story with a beginning, middle and end?

The Stones were nothing more than Big Joe Turner with a nicer arse. There was nothing original about it as Keef has freely admitted.

Rock'n'roll is immortal just as every other genre of music is immortal.

You're such a doom merchant, if you'd lived 100 years ago you'd have been one of those people who used to warn that if man went faster than 30 mph he'd explode.

Maximash

Quote from: "Johnny Yesno"
Quote from: "Maximash"Rock'n'roll is a washed-up old genre that has been taken everywhere it needs to go. End of the line, people. Listen to something else.

half-serious

When did it reach the end of the line?

Read the italic part.

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

Quote from: "mayer"Suede/Strokes/Britpop/etc

But those too are derivative and ersatz genres/bands. So don't you just end up with derivative bands copying previous derivative bands?

Which inevitably leads you onto the 'Ah, but was there ever anything in pop history which sounded genuinely original at the time?' line of thought. I can't say for sure, but I suspect certain acts must surely have had the 'What the fuck?' factor in a way that's difficult to imagine now. I can't believe many people heard Kraftwerk in the 70s and worldwearily thought 'Oh right, that kind of music, very good...'

So it's a fair question, and one I'm obsessed by as you know: is there anywhere left for music to go? It's not even something I believe, it's just something that fascinates me. But it's a question that gets people's backs up.

John Peel talked about how it's imposssible to describe how exciting Little Richard's Tutti Frutti sounded to him in 1955. And that's true, isn't it, whether we like it or not? Once certain moulds have been broken, there's no going back.

LadyDay

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"
Quote from: "mayer"Suede/Strokes/Britpop/etc

But those too are derivative and ersatz genres/bands. So don't you just end up with derivative bands copying previous derivative bands?

Which inevitably leads you onto the 'Ah, but was there ever anything in pop history which sounded genuinely original at the time?' line of thought. I can't say for sure, but I suspect certain acts must surely have had the 'What the fuck?' factor in a way that's difficult to imagine now. I can't believe many people heard Kraftwerk in the 70s and worldwearily thought 'Oh right, that kind of music, very good...'

So it's a fair question, and one I'm obsessed by as you know: is there anywhere left for music to go? It's not even something I believe, it's just something that fascinates me. But it's a question that gets people's backs up.

John Peel talked about how it's imposssible to describe how exciting Little Richard's Tutti Frutti sounded to him in 1955. And that's true, isn't it, whether we like it or not? Once certain moulds have been broken, there's no going back.

Little Richard was merely copying the style he'd heard at the fairs.  Music evolves, it doesn't just appear from nowhere. Peely also felt the same about the Undertones. Many people of a certain age, just getting into pop music felt the same about the Pistols. Of course later they listened to the New York Dolls and the Ramones and thought ahhh that's where it came from.

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

Quote from: "LadyDay"

Rock'n'roll is immortal just as every other genre of music is immortal.

You're such a doom merchant, if you'd lived 100 years ago you'd have been one of those people who used to warn that if man went faster than 30 mph he'd explode.

That doesn't address the question though, does it? As I said, it's not something I necessarily believe, just something I'm interested in. People say 'Pop will always evolve, no question, there'll always be great music' etc and everyone nods, but there's no reason why that has to be true. Rock 'n' roll may well have reached the end of the line, just like madrigal did.

Peking O

Quote from: "mayer""There are fewer more distressing sights than that
Of an Englishman in a baseball cap"

Let's break it down. The word "distressing" is misplaced - it's hardly "distressing" to see an Englishman in a baseball cap. And there are many more things that are distressing: famine, war, floods in New Orleans, 1,000 people trampled to death in Iraq. There's a few. So "fewer more distressing sights" is wildly inaccurate.

A baseball cap can be quite functional. It keeps the sun out of the eyes. Goalkeepers sometimes wear them for this purpose, making their goalkeeping more effective. If Paul Robinson wore one in an England game and later attributed a match-winning save to the fact that the baseball cap he was wearing kept the sun out, we would not feel distressed. Nor would we feel there were fewer sights than his wearing of said cap that were more distressing.

A baseball cap can also keep your head from being sunburnt. While on holiday this summer I swathed my skin in lashings of factor 98 sunblock, only to discover to my horror that, come evening time, the parting in my hair was a violent shade of puce. In this case, distress was in fact caused by the lack of a baseball cap.

But really, only one minor change needs to be made.

QuoteThere are fewer more distressing sights than that
Of an Englishman in a pork pie hat"

El Unicornio, mang

Bit of a bad analogy, but I'm not going to stop eating watermelon just because it doesn't taste "as good as the first time", or stop drinking alcohol because I can't get the same buzz I got when I was 16.

I don't expect anything from music other than something I can enjoy listening to, and I don't think any artists from the 50s or before were trying to be all "out there", they just played what they liked and because it inherently had their own personality imprinted on it, it was different. It wasn't really until the late 60s that bands started going "oh, we need to make something different", which to me is the kiss of death, when you try to force originality

mayer

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"But those too are derivative and ersatz genres/bands.

What does Dog Man Star sound like, in your opinion?

mayer

Quote from: "Peking O"But really, only one minor change needs to be made.

Quote from: "mayer""There are fewer more distressing sights than that
Of an Englishman in a pork pie hat"

Surely

"There are fewer more distressing sights than that
Of an Indie-kid in a trilby hat"?

mayer

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"Rock 'n' roll may well have reached the end of the line, just like madrigal did.

And televisual comedy too. End of the line sweetie.

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

Quote from: "mayer"

What does Dog Man Star sound like, in your opinion?

Bowie.

mayer

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"
Quote from: "mayer"

What does Dog Man Star sound like, in your opinion?

Bowie.

Bowie has ONLY ever sounded like other people. He doesn't have an original bone in his body. I'm guessing you mean Bolan-knock-off Bowie? Rather than any of his other knockoffs.

mayer

"All You Need Is Love" "Satan Rejected My Soul" "Drive It All Over Me"

Quote from: "Peking O"Let's break it down.

Let's er. not?  :-)

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

Suede always seemed to be a direct/blatant pastiche of Bowie to my ears, though, like someone doing a Stars In Their Eyes impression of him. Whereas Bowie had a sound which, despite all his genre tourism, always sounded uniquely Bowie-ish.

El Unicornio, mang

They don't sound anything like Bowie though, no more than Oasis sound like The Beatles

Emergency Lalla Ward Ten

Quote from: "mayer"

And televisual comedy too. End of the line sweetie.

You joke, but there's no reason why that shouldn't be true either.

Thing is, I know that the milestone dates in pop history (1956 rock 'n' roll, 1967 psychedelia, 1977 punk, 1988 acid house) are a simplified/artificial/arbitrary construct, put in place in retrospect. And I know that, if you look into it all, you find the connections and influences are ridiculously complex. I accept all that.

I just wonder why I struggle to think of a distinct genre that 'happened' in the 90s and 00s. Apart from Britpop, which seemed to be a mishmash of all sorts of things. Or Drum & Bass, which sounded like an offshoot from house/rave rather than something totally different. Now, do you reckon I only think this way because of the age I am? In other words, do I find the genres nebulous because I lived through them as a cynical twentysomething rather than as a wide-eyed kid? Is that all it is? Or is there some truth in the idea that all the good stuff has already been 'done'?

mayer

How is Punk not a really simple offshoot of Rock and Roll?

You had Sex Pistols playing Eddie Cochran, note for note, and it sounding like their own songs being done in the same way.

Do you honestly think that the Never Mind The Bollocks sounds less like 50s rock and roll than dubnobasswithmyheadman sounds like anything before it?

Oh. and a very 90s/00s genre off the top of my head that sounds nothing like anything that came before it to my ears.

http://www.digitalhardcore.com/news.asp

mayer

Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"You joke, but there's no reason why that shouldn't be true either.

Well, in that case let the Lawsons and Grahams get on with their fake-scenes then. You've still got your videos and DVDs and tapes, and what they talk about doesn't affect you. Let it go. *repeat once a month in CC in a thread about any new comedy*.

?


Quote from: "Emergency Lalla Ward Ten"Now, do you reckon I only think this way because of the age I am? In other words, do I find the genres nebulous because I lived through them as a cynical twentysomething rather than as a wide-eyed kid? Is that all it is? Or is there some truth in the idea that all the good stuff has already been 'done'?

Third opition. It's just the way you are/think. It's not your age, and it's not a brute fact about pop music. It's a brute fact about ELW10?

Mediocre Rich

Ah, but hardcore came from the acid house scene which came from the house scene which came from Detroit which came from the disco scene etc etc etc.

You can't really put a time frame on music either can you?  It doesn't stop really, it's just what fashionable that changes.  You can still go and listen to hardcore at raves if you look in the right places, just as you can listen to rock, jazz, soul, punk etc.

There's never anything truly original is there?  Never has been.

Moaning about current trends in music is no different or more relevant than my Dad moaning at me listening to that racket when I was a kid, or his Mum moaning at him for that matter.