Not all messages are displayed:
show all messages (64 of them)
Can't argue with you being bored by Sam Cooke, but surely there are
people who like him who aren't a) being fooled by jean peddlers or b)
attaching themselves nostalgically to an idea of soul-as-authenticity
to fend off the future. I mean... people loved his music before jeans
and nostalgia entered the picture, y'know. People loved him when he
was alive. Saying "this music bores me because I'm into this other
thing that's more exciting and more relevant to where I'm at now" is
one thing - why does it have to lead to "this music sucks, it has no
intrinsic interest except for nostalgic bores" ?
― Patrick, Monday, 28 May 2001 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
Well Patrick, that's why i was clever enough to pepper my argument
with lotsa "personally"'s and "i think"'s ;) It's obvious people were
once moved by Sam Cooke's soul...hell, that might even happen today
although I rather listen to my washing machine finish its longest
program.
----
"this music sucks, it has no intrinsic interest except for nostalgic
bores" ?
----
now I haven't said anything like this? I like nostalgia :)
― Omar, Monday, 28 May 2001 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
Omar - Gotcha. I need to stop over-reacting about this kind of thing.
I'm becoming like Robin is with perceived attacks on the English
countryside ;).
― Patrick, Monday, 28 May 2001 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
OK, multiple definitions of soul, which means the word stretches a
bit, hence arguments between eg me and Fred.
i. a specific moment in black pop music between (approx)mid-50s and
mid-70s. Multiple stylistic offshoots, some of which (funk, perhaps)
shouldn't be included.
ii. music derivative of that moment, the stylistic conventions
arising from that moment. still trace elements in most musical styles
today.
iii. that moment reconfigured as something attitudinal rather than
musical. So ideas of struggle, authenticity, freedom, emotion,
rawness, organicness, liveness, pain...a lot of this stuff is very
very bound up with interpretations of blackness. The 80s
interpretation of soul as in jeans ads, literally adding colour to
the yuppie lifestyle, comes into play here.
iv. 'soul' as a totally abstract concept - the rowland/t&f stuff
quoted above. Basically a way of saying "this is good" possibly - but
not neccessarily - with some ideas from i., ii. and iii. above mixed
in. This version of 'soul' is a discussion-killer, and is also quite
close to how I use 'pop', as some abstracted force driving most good
music. The choice of 'it has soul'/'it rocks'/'it is pop' can be a
way of allying yourself with other discource currents or it can be
just personal preference.
(Interesting perhaps to analyse the sentences above - soul is
something external, rock is a doing word, pop is something music is
or isnt.....)
― Tom, Tuesday, 29 May 2001 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
Tom's taxonomy is as super-useful as ever. I think that "pop" and "rock" are in fact more specific than the fourth definition of "soul". But, more importantly, perhaps we can view all three words as in fact invoking a different 'aspect' of the same musical act. Seen from the pov of the listener (i.e. awed by the mysterious "soul") the pov of the musician (gap between audience and artist is narrowed by the act of "rocking out" -- c.f. Lester Bangs on The Stooges) and the 'impartial' pov of the media (If something
is 'pop' then that's just another way for saying it is a pure commodity, and thus it is judged on the terms in which society judges commodities -- it is not an act but a recognition of social "popularity").
― Sterling Clover, Tuesday, 29 May 2001 00:00 (twenty-two years ago) link
one year passes...
one year passes...
nine years pass...