The World According to David Brooks

eccentric man

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Posts
534
Reaction score
2
Location
canada
i totally agree that music should be back in schools.

that's about the only thing i agree with in that article. i really think technology plays a MUCH larger role in the fragmentation of music than that article affords it. at the same time technology allows more people to find their own music. they don't have to rely on the radio to tell them who is the 'best' band out there. people don't need to buy full albums to get legitimate copies of the singles they like. it's a double edged sword but it seems to me that both ends are pointing at the idea of the traditional 'rockstar'.
 

Reverend Rock

cool music and hot coffee
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Posts
877
Reaction score
1
Location
the hills of Tennessee
He'***** the nail on the head, not just about music, but about pretty much all the ills of our world. That's one of the greatest heartbreaks of my life. I grew up when it looked like, for a brief, shining moment, that "Get Together" was going to be not just a pop song, but a universal ethos for bringing peace and justice to this planet. The segmentation that has destroyed music has destroyed just about everything else good and wholesome that should have blossomed in my lifetime.

But I'm not giving up yet...
 

Music Wench

Rock and Roll Grandma
Joined
Oct 18, 2005
Posts
2,966
Reaction score
5
Location
Michigan
I think I'm in the same camp as Jon Fine. I love being able to go online and find some interesting music I like and not be spoon fed the same thing over and over again on traditional broadcast media. Sure it was fun back in the day but I'll take the discoveries I can make on my own on the internet any day.

I think there's a lot more great music available to me now than there used to be and I like it the way it is now, thank you.
 

eccentric man

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Posts
534
Reaction score
2
Location
canada
i think both columns have valid points but i'm way more on the jon fine side of things. then again i'm also a solid notch younger than most who post here :tongue:

i really do think music education should be back in our schools with an improved curriculum. then again i've also been saying that media studies should be part of the public education system starting in elementary for a few years now too.

on the other hand i really think the fact that the net has allowed for things like these sites and media sharing to become commonplace isn't necessarily a bad thing either.

as for the actual article the fact that fine relys on bashing brooks for most of it is kind of lame. it makes him seem like the kind of pretentious indie hipster you just want to 'accidentally' knee in the junk everytime you see him hahaha.
 

Reverend Rock

cool music and hot coffee
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Posts
877
Reaction score
1
Location
the hills of Tennessee
The technology isn't the problem. In fact, it may become part of the solution. On the other hand, there is something greatly missing in most of even the best independent music I'm hearing these days. Sometimes I can put my finger on it and sometimes I can't.

But at least I have found one singer/songwriter and one band I really enjoy this decade: Sufjan Stevens and Akron/Family.
 

Spike

Rock & Soul Archaelogist
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Posts
946
Reaction score
0
Location
At the dark end of the street
The Brooks piece struck a chord with me because of what it said about the fragmentation of the music marketplace, not because of criticism of today's music. It's not so much that I disagree with Fine, it's that I interpreted the Brooks piece so differently that we could be in parallel universes. But I will readily admit that my personal opinions on this topic are also inseparable from my personal experience, meaning that nostalgia is a major factor in how I see this topic.

Unlike Brooks, I think the fragmentation began much earlier; sometime during 1967. Before this time, I was a loyal listener of CKLW-AM in Windsor. In any given hour you could hear the Beatles, the Temptations, Petula Clark, the Beach Boys, James Brown and Dionne Warwick. It wasn't unusual to hear rock, pop, soul and even the occasional country tune in the same set.

Sometime in 1967, albums began to eclipse singles, with the release of The Doors, Sgt. Pepper, Surrealistic Pillow, Are You Experienced? and Disraeli Gears. At the same time, there was a ruling by the FCC -- details of which I don't recall -- that required radio stations to program different material on their AM and FM bands. As a result, "underground" stations started to spring up on the FM dial that focused on album-oriented rock. Around this time, I stopped listening to CKLW and switched to WKNR-FM in Detroit. Uncle Russ Gibb, my favorite DJ on Keener-FM -- would introduce whole side of albums with low-keyed hipness, without the manic silliness of AM radio.

I loved the new album-oriented format because it was a rebellion against the crass commercialism of Top40 radio. But in retrospect, the tragic part of this new trend is that playlists became quite segregated by race. The FM stations would play Hendrix and Sly Stone but never Motown or Stax. You had to turn to the AM dial to hear the latest soul releases. This was the beginning of a long-term trend from broadcasting to narrowcasting, with new formats targeting a smaller and smaller sliver of the audience.

But what bothers me is the cumulative impact of this fragmentation over time. Not only is there little connection among various audiences in the present, but these disconnects become more and more pronounced over time. Ultimately, there is little common culture that connects us together as a people. To me, it's a shame that America enjoys such an incredibly rich musical heritage but nobody knows about. We suffer from cultural amnesia. That's why I find it interesting that Miami Steve mentions the need for a curicullum in the schools to pass along America's musical heritage. I've been trying to write that book since about 1995.

Finally, for me, none of this implies that the music of the past is superior to the music of the present. But the music of today might be even better if it weren't so disconnected from the past.
 

eccentric man

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Posts
534
Reaction score
2
Location
canada
wouldn't '67 have been just around the time that pop music finally really started getting marketed to teenagers as opposed to their parents? fits a lot easier on shelves once it's all fragmented no?

it's funny you mention the diversity of AM radio back in the day spike, that's how most of my friends felt about muchmusic (canada's answer to MTV) in the mid 90s. we could go from soundgarden to portishead to air to the chemical brothers then to the beastie boys.

as much as i like the idea of a musical history course i have a hard time believing it will fly with most kids unless you catch them early enough. unless of course you raise them to see the media for what it is so that they'll be able to afford new ideas the attention they deserve as opposed to having their views predetermined by the big plastic box that raises so many.

spot on about the idea that today's music would probably be better if it weren't so disconnected from the past as well. i think the real question is, do people really want new music?
 

Spike

Rock & Soul Archaelogist
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Posts
946
Reaction score
0
Location
At the dark end of the street
wouldn't '67 have been just around the time that pop music finally really started getting marketed to teenagers as opposed to their parents? fits a lot easier on shelves once it's all fragmented no?

it's funny you mention the diversity of AM radio back in the day spike, that's how most of my friends felt about muchmusic (canada's answer to MTV) in the mid 90s. we could go from soundgarden to portishead to air to the chemical brothers then to the beastie boys.

as much as i like the idea of a musical history course i have a hard time believing it will fly with most kids unless you catch them early enough. unless of course you raise them to see the media for what it is so that they'll be able to afford new ideas the attention they deserve as opposed to having their views predetermined by the big plastic box that raises so many.

spot on about the idea that today's music would probably be better if it weren't so disconnected from the past as well. i think the real question is, do people really want new music?

1. I assume that rock and roll music was directly marketed to teenagers in the 50s during the first golden era. When I started buying singles in 1962 my mother was only 32 and liked a lot of the music that I bought. But that was a pretty tame period in rock history. That began to change with the Beatles and the British invasion. My mother couldn't get into the Stones or the Yardbirds and that was just fine with me. And music marketers understood that.

2. Is the diversity of the music you refer to in the 90s really that diverse?

3. Any musical history course would have to be web-based and multi-media. I don't see anything of value coming out of a public school setting. Hell, it's hard to even teach evolution these days without creating controversy. I can't imagine the right wing blow back if we tried to put James Brown on his rightful place on Mount Rushmore. Unless, of course, Jack Black becomes superintendent of schools.

4. I think young people always want new music.
 

Find member

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
30,715
Posts
1,068,624
Members
6,368
Latest member
allmylife11
Top